289 réponses à ce sujet

[Its_a_Catdemon]

1: Definitely agree, a more believable balance, and I'd prefer fewer, but stronger enemies, instead of DA2's waves.

2: The way it was in DA2 felt responsive, although it would be nice to slow down the moves and show the animation clearer, so we'll feel more weight behind each attack, and can admire the fighting style of our character. Probably similar to 2, but slowed down. It can still be tactical when fast, there are other reasons why 2 could have been more tactical.

3. Agreed, make different weapon types different, but less all over the place in their differences like Origins.

4. I'm unsure, bosses should feel different and require unique strategies mid battle, so some of the way it was in 2 could be nice, but I have to agree with PsychoBlonde's point, as long as abilities and challenges are added in other ways.

5. Disagree, never liked traps in general, they already play too big a part by hiding experience.

[TEWR]

I am too exhausted to actually give my thoughts on how combat should be for future DA games -- in full form -- so I am just going to say....

Give me about 9 more hours and I'll make a fairly big post on the subject.

[wsandista]

Just thought I should add a few more things.

• Poison and Disease. These status effects are two of my favorite things from D&D, and I missed them quite a bit in DA. Poison and Disease should function similarly to how they do in 3rd edition D&D, where instead of dealing damage over time, they cause a negative status effect that worsens overtime.
• Fatigue. DA should have a rest mechanic, if you don't rest you become fatigued, which would have detrimental effects on the party.
• No natural Health Regeneration during combat. The only way a characters health should regenerate in combat is if they have a special ability or an item that grants regeneration. EDIT: Natural Regeneration should only happen during resting periods
• More status effects having resistance checks. Combatants should have a resistance check for every status effect, so certain effects from abilities can be resisted even if the victim is hit by the ability.
• Environmental Hazards. I miss the "Rocks Fall, Everyone Dies" scenario. On a serious note, if there is extreme weather or difficult terrain, there should be some effects on combat.

Modifié par wsandista, 26 mai 2012 - 04:18 .

[Dakota Strider]

wsandista wrote...


[*]
[*]No natural Health Regeneration during combat. The only way a characters health should regenerate in combat is if they have a special ability or an item that grants regeneration.
[*]

[*]I would add, that there should be no health regeneration while travelling, exploring, or any other activity besides resting.  DA2 was a joke, in that even when wounded, I rarely needed to have a healer, or even drink health potions.  It seems like they went too far out of their way to make the game easy for the casual gamer, and remove all challenge for everyone else. 

[wsandista]

Dakota Strider wrote...

wsandista wrote...


[*]
[*]No natural Health Regeneration during combat. The only way a characters health should regenerate in combat is if they have a special ability or an item that grants regeneration.
[*]

[*]I would add, that there should be no health regeneration while travelling, exploring, or any other activity besides resting.  DA2 was a joke, in that even when wounded, I rarely needed to have a healer, or even drink health potions.  It seems like they went too far out of their way to make the game easy for the casual gamer, and remove all challenge for everyone else. 

I agree, but I was focusing solely on combat mechanics. Just fixed that.

Modifié par wsandista, 26 mai 2012 - 04:18 .

[MichaelStuart]

1: Sounds interesting.

2: Depends on how its done.

3: Agree about combat, disagree on only healing during rest.

4: Agree

5: No to rock falls (having to reload just because you set off a trap would annoy a lot of people), yes to environmental effects.

[Wulfram]

Fatigue is pointless and annoying
Only healing on rest tends to only add to tedium, usually. Unless you're very restrictive on when you can rest it's functionally identical to full healing after every battle.

Modifié par Wulfram, 26 mai 2012 - 12:44 .

[AkiKishi]

Dakota Strider wrote...

wsandista wrote...



[*]

[*]No natural Health Regeneration during combat. The only way a characters health should regenerate in combat is if they have a special ability or an item that grants regeneration.

[*]

I would add, that there should be no health regeneration while travelling, exploring, or any other activity besides resting.  DA2 was a joke, in that even when wounded, I rarely needed to have a healer, or even drink health potions.  It seems like they went too far out of their way to make the game easy for the casual gamer, and remove all challenge for everyone else. 

Easier to balance when you know that the party is at 100% at the start of each encounter. Very rarely if ever does it make any difference since mana regenerates even if hps do not. It's then just a case of having to wait and "fix" the party after every encounter which adds nothing besides being a time sink.

In order for it to have any meaning, you need a system like Final Fantasy (pick a number) with fixed magic points or spell allocations which can only be restored on resting. Then climbing a 99 floor tower has meaning. Otherwise you are just adding tedium under pretence of difficulty.

[Dakota Strider]

That brings up another issue, which while not strictly combat, is related. RANDOM ENCOUNTERS. If you are just loitering around in a dangerous area, waiting for mana/stamina/health to regenerate, there should be chances for attacks.

I am not a big fan of the whole mana/stamina/health regen system at all. The biggest reason, is it takes away any tactical or strategic importance of marshalling your resources. In other games, where you only get a certain allotted amount of spells between rests, you have to preserve your healing, AND your combat spells. In DAO and DA2 you are able to throw everything you have, at any band of lowly creatures you encounter, knowing you will be fully restored within minutes of the combat being over.

It would be a far more exciting game, if you had to try to preserve your best "weapons" (spell attacks and healing), for combats when they were truly needed. If you attempt to rest frequently, so that you can use all spells in every combat, you should get interupted frequently, if you are in a hostile area. Being able to go through a dungeon or any other equivelant adventure, and be fully charged for each and every encounter is not realistic, and far too easy.

Modifié par Dakota Strider, 26 mai 2012 - 03:03 .

[wsandista]

Dakota Strider wrote...

I am not a big fan of the whole mana/stamina/health regen system at all. The biggest reason, is it takes away any tactical or strategic importance of marshalling your resources. In other games, where you only get a certain allotted amount of spells between rests, you have to preserve your healing, AND your combat spells. In DAO and DA2 you are able to throw everything you have, at any band of lowly creatures you encounter, knowing you will be fully restored within minutes of the combat being over.

I prefer spells-per-day as well, however I can see the purpose of having the regen system to avoid rest spamming.

If you have had pleasure of playing NWN2(particularly MotB), then you have probably experienced horrible companion AI throwing their strongest spells at easy encounters. Mana instead of spells per day can circumvent this, as well as a possible lawsuit from a certain wizard who resides on the coast.

[AkiKishi]

Dakota Strider wrote...

That brings up another issue, which while not strictly combat, is related. RANDOM ENCOUNTERS. If you are just loitering around in a dangerous area, waiting for mana/stamina/health to regenerate, there should be chances for attacks.

I am not a big fan of the whole mana/stamina/health regen system at all. The biggest reason, is it takes away any tactical or strategic importance of marshalling your resources. In other games, where you only get a certain allotted amount of spells between rests, you have to preserve your healing, AND your combat spells. In DAO and DA2 you are able to throw everything you have, at any band of lowly creatures you encounter, knowing you will be fully restored within minutes of the combat being over.

It would be a far more exciting game, if you had to try to preserve your best "weapons" (spell attacks and healing), for combats when they were truly needed. If you attempt to rest frequently, so that you can use all spells in every combat, you should get interupted frequently, if you are in a hostile area. Being able to go through a dungeon or any other equivelant adventure, and be fully charged for each and every encounter is not realistic, and far too easy.

Completely different design. Quite the radical redirect after 2 games, and there is no great call for it either.

To a point although it's only ever been a factor in certain areas. The spells are also far more powerful than anything in DA. Mana based systems tend not to have the same overkill,spells are more in line with what weapons are capable of doing.

One of my bad habbits, hoarding for the encounter that never happens . Makes for an easy boss fight when you can throw a games worth of consumables at them at least.

[AkiKishi]

wsandista wrote...

I prefer spells-per-day as well, however I can see the purpose of having the regen system to avoid rest spamming.

If you have had pleasure of playing NWN2(particularly MotB), then you have probably experienced horrible companion AI throwing their strongest spells at easy encounters. Mana instead of spells per day can circumvent this, as well as a possible lawsuit from a certain wizard who resides on the coast.

When it's a case of save-rest-reload if you get jumped it becomes pointless.It also breaks the balance from the PnP version.

Spells per day is not something owned by WoC, it's just that mana/magic point systems are more game friendly.

[wsandista]

BobSmith101 wrote...

wsandista wrote...

I prefer spells-per-day as well, however I can see the purpose of having the regen system to avoid rest spamming.

If you have had pleasure of playing NWN2(particularly MotB), then you have probably experienced horrible companion AI throwing their strongest spells at easy encounters. Mana instead of spells per day can circumvent this, as well as a possible lawsuit from a certain wizard who resides on the coast.

When it's a case of save-rest-reload if you get jumped it becomes pointless.It also breaks the balance from the PnP version.

Spells per day is not something owned by WoC, it's just that mana/magic point systems are more game friendly.

WoC would sue over ANYTHING that they see as the slightest resemblance to D&D mechanics or the d20 system(used without permission of course).

I know Mana is more game friendly, I believe the first sentence addressed that point.

[robertthebard]

Yeah, it would be so sweet to have the Arishok Backstabbing you every time it came off CD. Hope he didn't take the Assassin tree, because I know Backstab followed up by Assassinate left enemy boss mages wondering why they showed up.

Whatever happened to the ability to lay my own traps anyway? Talking about tactical advantages, there's the one I missed. However, as somebody else mentioned, if they aren't tracking how many times you got caught in a trap, no real need to beef them up.

Um, if you're going to play a ranged character, why shouldn't kiting be viable? Isn't the idea of ranged to be, I don't know, ranged? The infighting has already been modified to where you pull your murder knife for hand to hand if you get caught up in it, but the whole idea of playing an archer is to use a bow. Otherwise, we might as well all be Tank spec'd warriors. I can just see it now, though, the amazing tanking mage, standing there in their pajamas, wondering why they needed a warrior in the party anyway.

Maybe they should just take bosses out? I mean, come on, what's the point of bosses anyway, other than they drop better loot, sometimes, than their lackeys.

[AkiKishi]

robertthebard wrote...

Um, if you're going to play a ranged character, why shouldn't kiting be viable? Isn't the idea of ranged to be, I don't know, ranged? The infighting has already been modified to where you pull your murder knife for hand to hand if you get caught up in it, but the whole idea of playing an archer is to use a bow. Otherwise, we might as well all be Tank spec'd warriors. I can just see it now, though, the amazing tanking mage, standing there in their pajamas, wondering why they needed a warrior in the party anyway.

Maybe they should just take bosses out? I mean, come on, what's the point of bosses anyway, other than they drop better loot, sometimes, than their lackeys.

Kiting should be viable if the circumstances for it are good. It's hard enough firing a modern weapon while moving never mind trying to stabalise a bow. Done something like EverQuest where you enhance your speed and slow theres , in a large enviroment works. Otherwise it's just a bit silly. Tanking is for situations where that is not possible. Running in circles in an enclosed space is just exploiting the system.

Bosses are there for story purposes too. Strongest is the boss of any particular group. At least until you get involved in politics.Quite whether they need to be DA2 type hp sponges is another matter.

[robertthebard]

BobSmith101 wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

Um, if you're going to play a ranged character, why shouldn't kiting be viable? Isn't the idea of ranged to be, I don't know, ranged? The infighting has already been modified to where you pull your murder knife for hand to hand if you get caught up in it, but the whole idea of playing an archer is to use a bow. Otherwise, we might as well all be Tank spec'd warriors. I can just see it now, though, the amazing tanking mage, standing there in their pajamas, wondering why they needed a warrior in the party anyway.

Maybe they should just take bosses out? I mean, come on, what's the point of bosses anyway, other than they drop better loot, sometimes, than their lackeys.

Kiting should be viable if the circumstances for it are good. It's hard enough firing a modern weapon while moving never mind trying to stabalise a bow. Done something like EverQuest where you enhance your speed and slow theres , in a large enviroment works. Otherwise it's just a bit silly. Tanking is for situations where that is not possible. Running in circles in an enclosed space is just exploiting the system.

Bosses are there for story purposes too. Strongest is the boss of any particular group. At least until you get involved in politics.Quite whether they need to be DA2 type hp sponges is another matter.

Other than the kiting comments, which I sincerely believe, the rest of the post is more of a "be careful what you wish for" than accepting that these are great ideas.

[Dakota Strider]

An example of real life "kiting". Find an old clip of the young Mohamed Ali, when he was boxing someone considered to a larger and more powerful slugger. He would dance around the ring, just out of reach of his opponent, jabbing him consistantly with nuisance attacks. Ali would find his spots for his big blows, and let his slower opponent tire himself out chasing him.

If a boxer can kite in a 20 foot by 20 foot "ring", a skilled combatant should be justified in using the tactic in a similiarly comfined space. My experiences with the Arishok were part Kite, and part Hide and Seek, behind the columns. Seriously, if your character is allowed to live after being impaled even once on that sharpened jet wing they called a sword, than you should be able to Kite with a clear conscience.

Modifié par Dakota Strider, 26 mai 2012 - 05:10 .

[Celtic Latino]

wsandista wrote...

I believe that DA3 should meet these criteria in terms of combat

• Enemies should follow the same rules as the party. Foes should use the same ruleset as the party, instead of behaving like Final Fantasy monsters with huge globs of health but low damage output. All opponents need to attack at the same speed as party members, use the same attack/defense mechanics as the party, draw from the ame Talent/Spell trees as the party, and damage like a party member of the same class.(The only exception are monsters, which have no class)
• Combat speed should be closer to the speed in DAO. While I thought that combat in DAO could get a little slow(particularly with a Two-Handed Warrior), DA2 was much too fast for my liking. I think using the DAO combat speeds as a base, then multiplying basic attack speeds by a factor of .8 would be a sufficient pace for combat.
• Multipliers for weapons need to be more diverse than in DA2, but more uniform than in DAO. Attribute multipliers should depend on the weapon style like in DAO, while unlike DAO, most weapons shouldn't have speed or attribute modifiers(the speed modifier on maces made them unusable)
• Bosses should just be extremely powerful enemies with high resistances(or immunities), not actiony fights that require the PC to move around into awkward positions while some attack is charging. Many of the boss fights in DA2 seems like they would fit in more in a Zelda game than an RPG.
• Traps should have much more of an impact. In both DAO and DA2, traps were more of an annoyance than a danger, I believe this should change. Traps need to have disastrous effects when triggered that can result in characters getting killed.

[*]
[*]Agreed. Would definitely make the combat more tactical for sure...and probably a lot harder. [*]NO. (Respectfully disagree). Origin's combat was slow and boring. I rather liked the pace of DA2's combat. [*]I think they should just have the weapon policy from Skyrim implemented, where swords are more likely to critical, maces ignore armor, and axes inflict bleeding damage. Possibly have skill trees where one can specialize in one or two such weapons, those who specialize in maces have a higher probability to stun, axes have a higher bleed/critical range, and swords faster[*]That I can agree on. Although some Bosses in DA:O were just as ridiculous (the Stone statue in Orzammar, the Archdemon). [*]YES! And I'd like there to be a trap specialization for rogues again. [*]Adding my own two cents: I think each class should have an additional weapon tree, such as Polearms for Warriors, Unarmed or Duelist (Single Weapon) for Rogues, and Sword-Staves (it's own tree) for Mages

[AkiKishi]

Dakota Strider wrote...

An example of real life "kiting". Find an old clip of the young Mohamed Ali, when he was boxing someone considered to a larger and more powerful slugger. He would dance around the ring, just out of reach of his opponent, jabbing him consistantly with nuisance attacks. Ali would find his spots for his big blows, and let his slower opponent tire himself out chasing him.

If a boxer can kite in a 20 foot by 20 foot "ring", a skilled combatant should be justified in using the tactic in a similiarly comfined space. My experiences with the Arishok were part Kite, and part Hide and Seek, behind the columns. Seriously, if your character is allowed to live after being impaled even once on that sharpened jet wing they called a sword, than you should be able to Kite with a clear conscience.

Boxing has limited reach which is why it is possible. Give the other guy a  three foot piece of sharpened steel and it's not quite as easy.

[BioFan (Official)]

wsandista wrote...

I believe that DA3 should meet these criteria in terms of combat

• Enemies should follow the same rules as the party. Foes should use the same ruleset as the party, instead of behaving like Final Fantasy monsters with huge globs of health but low damage output. All opponents need to attack at the same speed as party members, use the same attack/defense mechanics as the party, draw from the ame Talent/Spell trees as the party, and damage like a party member of the same class.(The only exception are monsters, which have no class)
• Combat speed should be closer to the speed in DAO. While I thought that combat in DAO could get a little slow(particularly with a Two-Handed Warrior), DA2 was much too fast for my liking. I think using the DAO combat speeds as a base, then multiplying basic attack speeds by a factor of .8 would be a sufficient pace for combat.
• Multipliers for weapons need to be more diverse than in DA2, but more uniform than in DAO. Attribute multipliers should depend on the weapon style like in DAO, while unlike DAO, most weapons shouldn't have speed or attribute modifiers(the speed modifier on maces made them unusable)
• Bosses should just be extremely powerful enemies with high resistances(or immunities), not actiony fights that require the PC to move around into awkward positions while some attack is charging. Many of the boss fights in DA2 seems like they would fit in more in a Zelda game than an RPG.
• Traps should have much more of an impact. In both DAO and DA2, traps were more of an annoyance than a danger, I believe this should change. Traps need to have disastrous effects when triggered that can result in characters getting killed.

I perfer the fast attacking, emenmies die faster. 

BUT I WANT BIGGER SPELLS. The biggest spells in DA2 were NOTHING compaired to DA:O 

[Realmzmaster]

A lot of what I am hearing here is that you want D & D mechanics in a DA game. The problem is the more DA looks like D & D the more potential for a lawsuit unless Bioware/EA decides to license the D20 system.

The reason that Bioware developed its own IP was not to rely on the D & D IP owned by Hasbro. WoTC is a division of Hasbro. Hasbro being one of the biggest toy companies in the world. The license for D & D computer games at the moment is held by Atari. If you notice Overhaul games who is doing the remake of BG1 & BG2 had to get permission from both WOTC and Atari (which is why both logos must appear on their website for BG1 and BG2 remake).

Poison and disease are only useful if you do not have instant regeneration of health and limit the amount of injury kits. Since in DA you can craft healing and injury kits there is no real effect.

Unless traps are lethal (I mean render a companion unconscious) there is no real use for them expect as an annoyance. Traps may be useful during set encounters or for use in ambushing. The traps should be neutral which means once set traps have no side.

The spells per day in my opinion is one D & D mechanic that should be left with D & D. If I have mana left it makes no sense that I cannot cast a particular spell. The point behind resting in D & D for spellcasters was to regenerate mana and re-memorize or pray for spells. The premise behind the system (IMHO) makes little sense. I can understand running out of mana and being unable to cast a spell, but not forgetting the spell. It was simply a limitation with no purpose. Since DA has no cleric class there is no praying for spells.

Wizardry did not adhere to the D & D system in this regard. In Wizardry you could cast any spell that you knew. You would select the spell and the potency of the spell. If you had the mana off the spell would go. The spellscasting in Wizardry did have drawbacks. The spell could fizzle or backfire.

The other purpose of resting was that at the same time the party also ate and drink along with sleep. In DA2 it would serve no purpose because everyone had a home. It was assumed if Hawke went home everyone rested. The same with the warden, if he/she went to camp everyone rested.

What would be the purpose of a resting system in DA? If you could only save at certain places like an inn then resting in the outdoors would make sense and be dangerous. Certain areas maybe too dangerous to rest in. This relies on random encounters to make the resting hazardous. With the ability to save anywhere at anytime it becomes an annoyance. I can just keep reloading until I finally succeed in resting my party or camp in an area with low level random encounters and simply grind to higher levels.

As far as marshaling resources the developer has to limit the crafting and/or buying of potions in an arbitrary manner. The same way some action-rpgs limit how much resistance you can have to a particular element for no real reason other than game balance. DAO and DA2 allowed you to have 100 health potions and injury kits at one time. Even in other Bioware games if you had enough money you could do the same thing.

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 26 mai 2012 - 06:36 .

[Kehrsyn]

Dragon Age 3? When did they announce that?

[wsandista]

Realmzmaster wrote...

A lot of what I am hearing here is that you want D & D mechanics in a DA game. The problem is the more DA looks like D & D the more potential for a lawsuit unless Bioware/EA decides to license the D20 system.

Similar yes, but different enough to avoid lawsuits for copyright infringement.

The reason that Bioware developed its own IP was not to rely on the D & D IP owned by Hasbro. WoTC is a division of Hasbro. Hasbro being one of the biggest toy companies in the world. The license for D & D computer games at the moment is held by Atari. If you notice Overhaul games who is doing the remake of BG1 & BG2 had to get permission from both WOTC and Atari (which is why both logos must appear on their website for BG1 and BG2 remake).

Thank you for the general copyright/IP lesson.

Poison and disease are only useful if you do not have instant regeneration of health and limit the amount of injury kits. Since in DA you can craft healing and injury kits there is no real effect.

I've said I don't like natural regeneration, and unless the party can pull unlimited "cure poison/disease" items out of their collective ass, than it would be limited.

Unless traps are lethal (I mean render a companion unconscious) there is no real use for them expect as an annoyance. Traps may be useful during set encounters or for use in ambushing. The traps should be neutral which means once set traps have no side.

Agree with the neutral part(kind of like friendly-fire for spells), but when several traps can inflict status effects, then they can become quite deadly for the party. Ever encountered poison gas traps?

The spells per day in my opinion is one D & D mechanic that should be left with D & D. If I have mana left it makes no sense that I cannot cast a particular spell. The point behind resting in D & D for spellcasters was to regenerate mana and re-memorize or pray for spells. The premise behind the system (IMHO) makes little sense. I can understand running out of mana and being unable to cast a spell, but not forgetting the spell. It was simply a limitation with no purpose. Since DA has no cleric class there is no praying for spells.

Mana is more video game friendly than the per-day system, which is why I accept it for cRPG. When I play PnP, I always play games with per-day spells.

The other purpose of resting was that at the same time the party also ate and drink along with sleep. In DA2 it would serve no purpose because everyone had a home. It was assumed if Hawke went home everyone rested. The same with the warden, if he/she went to camp everyone rested.

What would be the purpose of a resting system in DA? If you could only save at certain places like an inn then resting in the outdoors would make sense and be dangerous. Certain areas maybe too dangerous to rest in. This relies on random encounters to make the resting hazardous. With the ability to save anywhere at anytime it becomes an annoyance. I can just keep reloading until I finally succeed in resting my party or camp in an area with low level random encounters and simply grind to higher levels.

I hope for something like NWN2:SoZ, which was had a great exploration and rest system(although it was buggy as hell). If DA3 is modeled after that,then resting makes perfect sense.

As far as marshaling resources the developer has to limit the crafting and/or buying of potions in an arbitrary manner. The same way some action-rpgs limit how much resistance you can have to a particular element for no real reason other than game balance. DAO and DA2 allowed you to have 100 health potions and injury kits at one time. Even in other Bioware games if you had enough money you could do the same thing.

I think the only limiting factor should be weight(or carry) capacity, can't speak for others.

Modifié par wsandista, 26 mai 2012 - 08:14 .

[wsandista]

Dakota Strider wrote...

An example of real life "kiting". Find an old clip of the young Mohamed Ali, when he was boxing someone considered to a larger and more powerful slugger. He would dance around the ring, just out of reach of his opponent, jabbing him consistantly with nuisance attacks. Ali would find his spots for his big blows, and let his slower opponent tire himself out chasing him.

If a boxer can kite in a 20 foot by 20 foot "ring", a skilled combatant should be justified in using the tactic in a similiarly comfined space. My experiences with the Arishok were part Kite, and part Hide and Seek, behind the columns. Seriously, if your character is allowed to live after being impaled even once on that sharpened jet wing they called a sword, than you should be able to Kite with a clear conscience.

There is a difference between dodging out of reach while hitting with weaker blows and running around a mansion being chased by wraiths waiting to regenerate and abilities to cooldown.

[Sith Grey Warden]

Dakota Strider wrote...

An example of real life "kiting". Find an old clip of the young Mohamed Ali, when he was boxing someone considered to a larger and more powerful slugger. He would dance around the ring, just out of reach of his opponent, jabbing him consistantly with nuisance attacks. Ali would find his spots for his big blows, and let his slower opponent tire himself out chasing him.

If a boxer can kite in a 20 foot by 20 foot "ring", a skilled combatant should be justified in using the tactic in a similiarly comfined space. My experiences with the Arishok were part Kite, and part Hide and Seek, behind the columns. Seriously, if your character is allowed to live after being impaled even once on that sharpened jet wing they called a sword, than you should be able to Kite with a clear conscience.

Mohammed Ali would not have been able to do that if instead of launching quick jabs he was trying to load and fire a bow.