64 réponses à ce sujet

[Palipride47]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

sharkboy421 wrote...

Warrior can actually have good damage depending how you spec it.  Granted it will never reach the level of a rogue on a single target, but a warrior can down multiple enemies at once.  The build I found most enjoyable was the berserker/vanguard combo that relied a lot on basic attacks but was immensely powerful.  There are several guides and videos on here that showcase how the build works.

And don't judge yourself based on the Arishok fight.  Cool idea but it just didn't work with the combat system.  It just plain sucks for a melee.

Warriors can down multiple mooks at once. Anything tougher and they're little more than damage sponges.

It's how they're made, but I can't say I like it. You expect someone in full armour armed with a greatsword to be a bit more badass. My warrior was running away from the Arishok and praying her mabari could deal enough damage to take him down. Must have taken at least 10 minutes. Thank the Maker for concussion grenade potions.

Now I feel less awful :happy:

That fight (lfor me) literally took ten minutes, and consisted of my strategically chugging my potions and running away right after a quick holy smite or other activated (which was pointless to do others b/c Holy Smite was the only activated ability he didn't have a big resistance to) talent and then watching him slowly get to 10%,slowly seeing that glimmer of hope where there is a light at the end of the tunnel.......

then he chugs a potion and have health return....

*throw computer out window*

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

sharkboy421 wrote...



I repsectfully beg to differ .  Video is from Arelex's Berserker Vanguard guide found here:
http://social.biowar...5/index/6616406

Hah, ok ok, if you spec it exactly right your (DA2) warrior won't be completely useless.

And seriously, I hate the Arishok fight.  Its so boring.  Grenade to stun > unload abilities for burst damage > kite for 5 minutes for grenade to cool down and repeat x.x.  That fight can just go die in a fire.

Preach it! >.<

Duels in a party-based game are generally quite tedious/ludicrous. I get that the genre wants or needs it's triumphant 1-on-1 fights (Loghain, Arishok, Ser Landry, Connor's Desire Demon), but the mechanics for it are sorely lacking. Not that I'm suggesting I want DA3 to play like Mortal Kombat or anything, but if it can't be done well maybe they should just drop it.

[Nashimura]

Duels are so dependent on class which is why it was a good idea to allow you to nominate another for the fight with Loghain, Loghain was pretty easy with a rouge - no kiting needed. The Arishok had a ton of health and was a pain...i would normally turn down his offer of a duel and just go for the full party brawl....im glad i took for Brawl on my canon save though, makes the legend of hawke sweeter.

[sharkboy421]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

sharkboy421 wrote...



I repsectfully beg to differ .  Video is from Arelex's Berserker Vanguard guide found here:
http://social.biowar...5/index/6616406

Hah, ok ok, if you spec it exactly right your (DA2) warrior won't be completely useless.

And seriously, I hate the Arishok fight.  Its so boring.  Grenade to stun > unload abilities for burst damage > kite for 5 minutes for grenade to cool down and repeat x.x.  That fight can just go die in a fire.

Preach it! >.<

Duels in a party-based game are generally quite tedious/ludicrous. I get that the genre wants or needs it's triumphant 1-on-1 fights (Loghain, Arishok, Ser Landry, Connor's Desire Demon), but the mechanics for it are sorely lacking. Not that I'm suggesting I want DA3 to play like Mortal Kombat or anything, but if it can't be done well maybe they should just drop it.

DA2 is a min-max game in regards to combat.  It really takes the saying "the best defense is a good offense" to heart.  So it really hurts you if you aren't specing in a certain manner.  Personally I prefer that style of play anyway but I agree its kinda dumb that you can't play any other way.

And yes, the duels are cool in theory.  But something in the actual game play needs to change to make them passable x.x.

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

Nashimura wrote...

Duels are so dependent on class which is why it was a good idea to allow you to nominate another for the fight with Loghain, Loghain was pretty easy with a rouge - no kiting needed. The Arishok had a ton of health and was a pain...i would normally turn down his offer of a duel and just go for the full party brawl....im glad i took for Brawl on my canon save though, makes the legend of hawke sweeter.

The nominating other people option is nice, but it doesn't always help if you're a roleplayer. You tend to want things to go a certain way. Being forced to compromise because a fight is too long or patently ridiculous isn't how it should be, regardless of whether or not you RP.

[Nashimura]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

Nashimura wrote...

Duels are so dependent on class which is why it was a good idea to allow you to nominate another for the fight with Loghain, Loghain was pretty easy with a rouge - no kiting needed. The Arishok had a ton of health and was a pain...i would normally turn down his offer of a duel and just go for the full party brawl....im glad i took for Brawl on my canon save though, makes the legend of hawke sweeter.

The nominating other people option is nice, but it doesn't always help if you're a roleplayer. You tend to want things to go a certain way. Being forced to compromise because a fight is too long or patently ridiculous isn't how it should be, regardless of whether or not you RP.

True, but if you are roleplaying a mage or an archer you shouldn't expect to be able to beat Loghain or the Arishok one on one. I don't mind duels as a concept, just that they are done better - the fight with Loghain was good because he killed you quick and you could kill him quick and of course you could put forward someone more suited to that kind of combat.

The Arishok was done wrong due to like you said the reasons for wanting to avoid it are more to due with how bad it was than anything - my comment on doing the Duel to make the legend of Hawke better was me roleplaying and forcing my self through that fight. 

[RandomSyhn]

Clearly I need to respec my rougue.

[Solmanian]

I liked the multi stat dependancy! The fact that in DA2 had only 2 stats to dump point in was ridiculous. It would have been better if they didn't give us any stats. I mean srsly: "OK, you have six stats! Now these one, and that one, and that one too, and also that one are utterly meaningless to you. Also if you won't dump all your points into these two you won't be able to pick lock, use armor&weapons (class restricted no less!), cast spells or anything else you were planning to do while adventuring...

But, back to rogues. You HAVE to bring a rogue with you, or you won't be able to open all the locked chests in the game. I'm sure all the warriors&mages would be interested in how you join their union...

Did I mention I'm against the rogue monopoly on opening locked chests...

[Solmanian]

Hey, don't dish on the warrior! The devs themselves said that highest dps goes to 2h reaver. They even showed him soloing the dragon in the end of act 1!

[Orian Tabris]

I'm sure lots of people have already told you this, but in DA2 rogues can do massive damage. In fact, a combination of Shadow and Assassin specialisation with dual weapon, makes battles finish less than half the time it would take some other rogue or other class combination (so basically it's the strongest Hawke). Lots and lots of dexterity make dual weapons finish critters and normal rank enemies die in like 5 or less seconds, without even using a talent. It really didn't get the short end of the stick.

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

Nashimura wrote...

True, but if you are roleplaying a mage or an archer you shouldn't expect to be able to beat Loghain or the Arishok one on one.

An archer? Hell no. Not unless the combatants had started with more room between them. A good dozen paces, however, and I'd expect a good archer to win unless the adversary was a really good dodger.

A mage? Depends on the talent tree. I wouldn't expect a Spirit Healer to win. But anyone who can set someone else on fire inside their own armour I wouldn't expect to lose. It's not like Loghain's a templar after all, and despite the DA2 trailer the Arishok showed no anti-magic skills.

Alas, games tend to be made with more of an eye toward balance than realism. If mages were as awesome as NPCs and cutscenes showed them, then everyone would play them and no other.

Kind of how I'm feeling about transferring to only playing rogues from now on. ;D

I don't mind duels as a concept, just that they are done better - the fight with Loghain was good because he killed you quick and you could kill him quick and of course you could put forward someone more suited to that kind of combat.

Well, I don't consider 10 minutes to be quick. Matching Alistair against him is even worse. Two sword-and-boarders do not make a thrilling combat (I sympathise with a poster above me who was mentioning lots of healing potions and the use of templar skills. YES. YES THAT. XD)

The Arishok was done wrong due to like you said the reasons for wanting to avoid it are more to due with how bad it was than anything - my comment on doing the Duel to make the legend of Hawke better was me roleplaying and forcing my self through that fight.

I've never tried the group combat against him. Is it actually any easier?

[Nashimura]

I normally played dual wielding rouges in origins and would take down Loghain in under a min - he would be stunned for most of the fight. As for mages, in game there decent at range but squishy up close - but i agree, depends on the talent tree. I think the reputation of mages being really dangerous is for what they can do outside of combat, mind control, sinking citys and such When i was a mage i would choose Leliana or Zevran and Alistair but only for story reasons.

The group combat....i wouldn't say easier, but more fun for sure. Lots of decent level mooks to kill with the Arishok running around too, its one of the better fights in the game takes about the same amount of time but you are killing someone then moving on to the next guy...more engaging.

Modifié par Nashimura, 29 octobre 2012 - 08:34 .

[wright1978]

I love Rogues in DA2. However since my favourite companions Isabela & Varric are rogues i usually end up playing the other classes more often.

[Rpgfantasyplayer]

I always play a rogue first. In DA:O my rogue did high damage but she danced around a lot to get into position when switching targets. In DA2 my rogue did most of the fighting. I would have half the enemy's down before my party even caught up to me.

[Palipride47]

Solmanian wrote...

Hey, don't dish on the warrior! The devs themselves said that highest dps goes to 2h reaver. They even showed him soloing the dragon in the end of act 1!

But highest DPS in terms of basic DPS (no specializations, buffs, anything) went to daggers. One dagger had higher DPS output than 2H. And my mage/rogue can solo that Act 1 Dragon no problem (heck, that Act 3 dragon I nearly solo-ed with Archery Hawke, I had two down most of the fight - did bad job specing Aveline and Fenris)
~
My mistake was metagaming/roleplaying and picking Templar spec

I figured for RP purposes, Templar would also be the most realistic. I mean, where the heck are you drinking dragon blood normally (did you even know how to properly become a reaver?), or what berserkers did you encounter just chilling in Kirkwall?

*sigh* I found it pretty much useless. Like Templar Spec in DAO.

Mana Clash and Spirit School> Holy Smite and Templar Spec.

Lore about templars and Templar Spec does not match up by a long shot. 

Modifié par Palipride47, 30 octobre 2012 - 01:28 .