328 réponses à ce sujet

[johndud0]

Sidney wrote...

Jzadek72 wrote...

DA:O's combat wasn't realistic, and I think I'd like a slight increase in speed. Having said that, I'd much prefer for the combat to draw more from Origins than DA2 - people who call it boring probably barely scratched the surface of it's depths. I know this, because for my entire first playthrough, I was one of them. DA2's combat is by comparison shallow and hack'n'slash, and frankly looks silly. I'd like a return to the tactical gameplay more than the wave based awesome buttoning of DA2.

Again, your latter concern is about encounter design not combat mechanics. No one wants waves back as they were done.

No one in the "DA2 is hack n' slash" can give me any reason combat in DA2 was less deep than DAO. Again, not looks or encounter desing but the actual mechanics of combat.

That's bcuz it wasn't less deep, combat and ability wise DA2 wins everytime...its far superior.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Filament wrote...

I could just as well ask why the anvil has a contraption that spits out spirits in four directions who just stand there and wait for you to kill them so you can press a button that damages it

You should ask that question.  Combat designs should match both the lore and the mechanics.

but who really cares

I do.

it's an interesting fight

Any fight so nonsensically designed that it causes me to break character is not okay,.

[philippe willaume]

Sidney wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

1. It was more difficult to execute plans in DA2,

2. We couldn't ambush opponents. 

3. We couldn't pre-cast spells. 

4. And DA2 generally had fewer and less effective options for crowd-control.

1. It was harder isn't a "problem".Plans have to be adaptable - no plan survives contact with an enemy and all that. In fact, the problem in DA2 was that because you "knew" about the waves you could plan ahead and do things like save up mana rather than just nuking that last mob.

2.Ambush being your code for kiting a suck AI who followed you into kill zones? Even if you find beating up on mentally ill puppies challenging the reality is that "ambushes" didn't matter because: your guys would move too slow to carry them out, there was no surprise damage bonus.


3 and 4. You mean like the ability cast artillery through the walls with Inferno? I'd say that is a balance design decision - and a good one. Same with your last point because mages needed to be taken down a notch from DAO where the best party was the most mages for your money.

hello Sidney
Sure we "planned" for waves. which is great master plan of kill a mook once and a while to get you stamina going and that's it. and that for the vast majority of the fight from act I to Act III. 

Before going any further yes several mages in the party in DA:0 is just as  or even more tedious than DA:2 . and no I am not in favour of casting spells without LOS.

yes there is a lot to be said about sunder being more efficient damage dealing than powerful strike.

yes tip toeing your rogue in the right position was tedious as if you click on a talent you would expect the bugger to find the best backstab spot (after all that is what they do)
and yes I have posted several time that DA:2  was conceptually better than DA:0




now I am overwhelmingly  confident that Sylvius meant  more something like being able to create, before the combat starts, a situation  where your char can mutually support each other taking advantage of the natural terrain or any modification created by the player that kitting like a muppet.

For example, using trap to get in the blind spot
of an opponent with a rogue. or just plain agro from your tank.

Basically yes  it is a pain to get the rogue in place but you can build and adapt strategy so that it becomes easy

and of course we could mention  using you warrior and rogues as archers for long range then switch to weapons or  since you could intel where the ennmy was you could actually buff before starting the battle.

All that you can't do in DA:2 but you could in DA:0
phil

Modifié par philippe willaume, 27 octobre 2012 - 12:42 .