86 réponses à ce sujet

[MichaelStuart]

My biggest problem with combat in both Dragon Age games is that a attack's success is determined by random.
I can not count the amount of times combat has been slowed by characters not hitting anything.
I ask that all dice rolling be removed in Dragon Age 3.

As replecement, I would suggest either requiring a set attack skill to hit an enemy/character, or just auto hit and have defence reduce damage.
I would also suggest that if a enemy/character is surrounded that they be atuomatically hit.

Reguardless of what is done, I ask that combat be made less of a chore.

[cJohnOne]

I like dice rolls. It's so old school.

Why should an attack always hit? It's sort of annoying when they always hit.

[Tommyspa]

I thought DA2 removed the "miss" function. Instead putting glancing blows in instead. Or it seemed this way for me. I would prefer to always hit when swinging my weapon across someones chest though.

[Lithuasil]

How about we scrap the rolling, and get a system based on playerskill?

[MichaelStuart]

cJohnOne wrote...

Why should an attack always hit? It's sort of annoying when they always hit.

It would hit because your more skilled then your opponent.
The challange with this would be having to reduce your opponents skill.

[MichaelStuart]

Lithuasil wrote...

How about we scrap the rolling, and get a system based on playerskill?

I would enjoy that.

[cJohnOne]

Because my player skills suck. er I mean It wouldn't make for a better game.

[PaulSX]

Lithuasil wrote...

How about we scrap the rolling, and get a system based on playerskill?

but unlike mass effect, in dragon age you have 4 untis that can be directly controlled by player. Action based system would cause much more problems unless they decide to get rid of party based system.

[ElazaraDawn]

Keep the dice. RPG'S are based off chance and modified from old RPG's which were all like D&D.

[Plaintiff]

ElazaraDawn wrote...

Keep the dice. RPG'S are based off chance and modified from old RPG's which were all like D&D.

There are tabletop systems besides D&D that people could be using.

[Lithuasil]

suntzuxi wrote...

but unlike mass effect, in dragon age you have 4 untis that can be directly controlled by player. Action based system would cause much more problems unless they decide to get rid of party based system.

You had allies in ME, that you could give orders to. I see absolutely no reason why one wouldn't do the same in DA. No, nostalgia does not count. No, "rpgs who lacked the tech to do anything better didn't do it" doesn't count either.

[RazorrX]

I actually enjoyed the combat in DA2 as well as in ME1-3. I would not mind a player skill based combat.

[mazariamonti]

lol ok, if you get rid of the dice roll eventually the only attributes to pick from will be "strength, mana, and stamina" next thing you know they'll change the point of view to first person and we'll basically be playing Skyrim. Just because you can't live with the occasional time your attack misses.

[Lithuasil]

mazariamonti wrote...

lol ok, if you get rid of the dice roll eventually the only attributes to pick from will be "strength, mana, and stamina" next thing you know they'll change the point of view to first person and we'll basically be playing Skyrim. Just because you can't live with the occasional time your attack misses.

There's no (fantasy) rpg in existence that would not be improved by lifting the combat system from Dark Messiah, period.

[TsaiMeLemoni]

I've never had combat slow down because of too many misses, and it happens so rarely. Combat goes by pretty quick, even in the slower DA:O.

Modifié par TsaiMeLemoni, 28 septembre 2012 - 01:34 .

[Fawx9]

Wait how does player skill work?

I mean at one end we could have a rapid attack button like LoZ, Arkham and other action games games and everything just hits as long as we aim at it or the other option would be to have some weird funky aiming that's supposed to take place in close quarters combat that deals damaged based on where you hit.

The first option although fun for certain games doesn't really seem to fit this one and the second just sounds like it would slow the game down completely as well as be way to dependent on positioning to be fun(talk to anyone that played a cat druid in WoW, ask them how fun it was to try and constantly 'correctly' position your character to deal good damage in a dynamic setting).

[Lithuasil]

Fawx9 wrote...

Wait how does player skill work?  

Dark Messiah, as I said - not perfect by any stretch, but by far the best close-combat / magic gameplay of any fantasy game I've played. 

[mazariamonti]

No thanks.

[Fawx9]

Lithuasil wrote...

Fawx9 wrote...

Wait how does player skill work?  

Dark Messiah, as I said - not perfect by any stretch, but by far the best close-combat / magic gameplay of any fantasy game I've played. 

I watched some combat videos (), while it looks ok, you can still see the way they had to stagger enemys in order to not overwhelm the PC. It also would feel like an entirely different game.

Now maybe that wasn't the best example of combat, but its not selling me on change just to get rid of dice rolls for hit/crit.

If they wanted to explore something like that I'd suggest a new IP. As not only would it take an entire new combat engine, but could also throw a lot of people off. I mean how do squad tactics work when you can only see from FPV?

[Lithuasil]

Fawx9 wrote...

If they wanted to explore something like that I'd suggest a new IP. As not only would it take an entire new combat engine, but could also throw a lot of people off. I mean how do squad tactics work when you can only see from FPV?

It's easily possible to map certain kinds of orders to buttons (See Mount and Blade for example). Beyond that, it'd be possible to set general tactics for each squadmate (like what real military units would do) - perhaps even have friendship/rivalry play into that, with friendly characters likely to rush to your aid if you're in danger of being overwhelmed or knocked down, while rivalrous characters might abandon the preset tactics to fight more recklessly / retreat when they feel outmatched.

(Beyond that, I'd fully support the option to avoid combat alltogether by the way - either by means of diplomacy or by means of enlisting suffiecient npc troops in one way or the other, to do the fighting while you yell orders from the back.)

Edit: Watching the video - the "kick all the people down flights of stairs" doesn't really do the system justice - and if I was to improve on it, tuning down the strength of pushing people back would probably be the first thing to do.

Modifié par Lithuasil, 28 septembre 2012 - 01:58 .

[Realmzmaster]

Basically what you are suggesting is to remove random chance. That is not realistic. I do not care how skilled a combatant is the chance of failure is always present. What skill does is lessen the effect of chance it does not remove it entirely. What you want is the game to based on gamer skill and not character skill.
You voiced this argument before. So I will repeat what I stated. In role playing you are playing the character. If the character is not good at a skill then that should be reflected in the game. If my character cannot dodge then no matter how fast I the gamer react the character should still get hit.

If the character skill at dodging is high then the character should rarely get hit. If the character's strength is too low and the character is trying to wear plate armor then the character will move slowly. If the character is carrying nitroglycerin which is highly explosive there should be a chance of it doing just that.
Combat in RL is not always determine by the skill of the combatants but by other factors beyond their control. That dice roll represents those other forces.

Dice rolls represent chance which happens in real life. Random events happen. My character could be dueling an enemy and the character slips on a banana peel. The enemy runs him/her through

[PaulSX]

Lithuasil wrote...

suntzuxi wrote...

but unlike mass effect, in dragon age you have 4 untis that can be directly controlled by player. Action based system would cause much more problems unless they decide to get rid of party based system.

You had allies in ME, that you could give orders to. I see absolutely no reason why one wouldn't do the same in DA. No, nostalgia does not count. No, "rpgs who lacked the tech to do anything better didn't do it" doesn't count either.

This is my point. ME does not have party based game mehcanics. That's why it will have no problem with action-packed combat. 

[upsettingshorts]

Player skill systems have their place but they aren't terribly conducive to party-based games.

Sure Mass Effect (2-3 especially) was player-skill based and had party members, but those party members weren't remotely as useful as DA companions and were never intended to be.

[TJPags]

Yup, never miss.

Made no sense for DA2, makes no sense now.

As others mentioned (including Realmz just above), even the best at ANYTHING misses now and then - the best batter in baseball, best pitcher, best boxer, etc. Hell, even the best free throw shooters in basketball miss now and then, and they have a stationary target with nobody guarding them.

Misses are part of the world, and they should remain part of the game.

[Realmzmaster]

The point of a party based game (like DA) is the ability to assume control of any of the characters and see through that character's eyes during battle.. ME does not allow that. The player controls Shepard and that is it. Giving order to squadmates is not like assuming control of a character in the heat of battle.
What is wanted is that combat is based on fast the gamer can react not the character which the gamer is suppose to be role playing. If the character I build sucks at archery I the gamer should not be able to compensate for that with my reaction skills.

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 28 septembre 2012 - 02:17 .