50 réponses à ce sujet

[WhiteThunder]

 I just want my DW Warrior back.  I had a lot of problems with DA2, but the biggest was the nonsensical exclusion of DW Warriors.  My DW Strength warrior did not play similarly to my DW Cunning rogue in any way shape or form, so it was slightly patronizing when the developers kept insisting that reducing my options was the best way at drawing class distinctions.

Any other thoughts? Is there a reason why they shouldn't bring it back?

[h0neanias]

God, if only. That was my favourite build.

[Pzykozis]

Mine played the exactly the same... except my rogue was better since he pretty much had 100% dodge.

I'm not really sure if there's much of a point to bringing it back unless they made it play fundementally different and then I'm not sure if I wouldn't prefer them to push the current ability sets to the next level instead (Or outright add more different styles like polearms / spears / unarmed / otherstuff)

[MillKill]

No. I'd rather that the classes remained different and development resources went to including a new weapon styles for both, such as rapier-wielding swashbuckler rogues and polearm warriors.

I'd take more differentiated classes that any day over Origins, where DW warriors and rogues felt exactly the same.

Modifié par MillKill, 27 octobre 2012 - 10:48 .

[WhiteThunder]

So how on earth did you play your rogues? Did you try to backstab at all? Did you use daggers or swords? Did you use light or medium armor? Did you not use talents with your warriors? Or did you waste stamina that could be used for momentum with your rogues?

[MillKill]

WhiteThunder wrote...

So how on earth did you play your rogues? Did you try to backstab at all? Did you use daggers or swords? Did you use light or medium armor? Did you not use talents with your warriors? Or did you waste stamina that could be used for momentum with your rogues?

Rogues used lighter armor than warriors and pumped up cunning and dex instead of strength and con. The animations and talents were all the same for DW character, regardless of class, armor, or weapons.

If there was any difference in actual playstyle it was that rogues took an extra 2 seconds to walk behind stronger enemies before attacking.

Clearly, they were wildly different experiences.  <_<

[Pzykozis]

Nah not really, backstabbing isn't really my thing I always see rogues as agile fighters not randomly constrained to simply hitting things in the back, not to mention the annoyance of shuffling and the general loss of damage as I reposition when I could chunk folks in seconds from the front anyway. use dual sweep and whatever other aoe attacks when you have people around and I guess you could use punisher because that was fairly hardcore. Momentum only needs to last aslong as combat which wasn't hard. As for armour it doesn't really matter when the only time you get hit is from overwhelm (which is pretty much the case in the second half of the game as a rogue) but I think I was using Light since it had the best pieces outside of massive.

As a warrior you could use more stamina on the skills since you were reliant on them but that was all and you didn't even get the bonus of not being hit and you could use massive armour more easily, but were probably more likely to use medium / heavy anyway.

[WhiteThunder]

So, what I'm gathering is that you didn't play your rogue as effectively as you might have. Because a Warrior would use two swords and spam his talents to deal a lot of AoE damage. A rogue would use momentum and backstab a single target until he died, then moved to another target etc. etc. The loadouts were completely different, as well. Literally the only overlap between my Warrior and my Rogue was that both wore the Helm of Honnleath.

[Nashimura]

I want the ability to weld to full sized swords, it being Rouge or Warrior who can do this does not worry me. I dont really see the advantage a dual wielding Warrior had over a dual wielding Rouge anyway.

[Doctoglethorpe]

MillKill wrote...

WhiteThunder wrote...

So how on earth did you play your rogues? Did you try to backstab at all? Did you use daggers or swords? Did you use light or medium armor? Did you not use talents with your warriors? Or did you waste stamina that could be used for momentum with your rogues?

Rogues used lighter armor than warriors and pumped up cunning and dex instead of strength and con. The animations and talents were all the same for DW character, regardless of class, armor, or weapons.

If there was any difference in actual playstyle it was that rogues took an extra 2 seconds to walk behind stronger enemies before attacking.

Clearly, they were wildly different experiences.  <_<

Considering I can dodge just about everything short of a ogre charge and get guaranteed crits every time I hit an enemy, not to mention stuns and debuffs you didn't have access to, yeah I'd say they played pretty differently...

[deuce985]

I want DW Warriors back but give them a unique tree exclusive to Warriors. That way they can stay different from Rogues. Doesn't make sense to see a Warrior with the same DW skills.

[Fiacre]

deuce985 wrote...

I want DW Warriors back but give them a unique tree exclusive to Warriors. That way they can stay different from Rogues. Doesn't make sense to see a Warrior with the same DW skills.

I don't see how it doesn't make sense. I think the skills in Origins worked just fine for both.

In any case, I'd certainly want them back. I like Dual Wielding, but I don't like playing as a rogue. And I liked DAO's clas/talent/skill system better, anyway.

[Nurot]

I played a dual wield warrior first in DAO. The second time through the game I realised how boring dual wielding warriors were. They really felt like a bad version of the DW rogue. The fact that I used Zevran instead of Leliana made me realise this. The rogue had more talents that fit with that weapon style.

If they do bring back the DW warrior they really have to find a way to make the class vastly different from any other class or weapon style. I liked how the classes in DA2 were more distinct and filled different roles in combat. They also have to make the class fun to play with.

Modifié par Nurot, 27 octobre 2012 - 11:46 .

[deuce985]

Fiacre wrote...

deuce985 wrote...

I want DW Warriors back but give them a unique tree exclusive to Warriors. That way they can stay different from Rogues. Doesn't make sense to see a Warrior with the same DW skills.

I don't see how it doesn't make sense. I think the skills in Origins worked just fine for both.

In any case, I'd certainly want them back. I like Dual Wielding, but I don't like playing as a rogue. And I liked DAO's clas/talent/skill system better, anyway.

I say that because I want them to differentiate between the class. That keeps them unique and opens up even more options on how you want to play. DA2 did a better job allowing the classes to differentiate than DAO. But it was at the expense of losing things like DW Warriors or Arcane Warrior Mages. I want them to keep what DA2 did but also bring back what DAO did. Merge them together.

Modifié par deuce985, 27 octobre 2012 - 11:50 .

[Bondari the Reloader]

I'd love to see DW warriors return. It makes absolutely no sense to me that a warrior, whose main purpose is fighting, is unable to learn certain fighting styles. I enjoyed playing a DW warrior in Origins, though I have yet to play a DW in Origins (I've only played one in DAII) so I can't compare the two experiences. I wouldn't mind if they differeniated between warrior and rogue talents a little, but I just want both classes to have dual wielding as an option.

[Fiacre]

deuce985 wrote...

I say that because I want them to differentiate between the class. That keeps them unique and opens up even more options on how you want to play. DA2 did a better job allowing the classes to differentiate than DAO. But it was at the expense of losing things like DW Warriors or Arcane Warrior Mages. I want them to keep what DA2 did but also bring back what DAO did. Merge them together.

Fair enough. While I still think the talents worked for both, wanting the classes to be different from each other does make sense.

And I's be all for a merger. DA2 did have some improvements, even if I like DAO better, and having the best of both... I especially want the Arcan Warrior spec to come back. "Normal" mages are fun to play, but I loved my Arcane Warrior and Farren seemed more badass than his cousin, strutting around in heavy plate, sword and shield on his back and just as ready to fight with his blade as to use spells... (They'd have made a good team, though.)

[WhiteThunder]

deuce985 wrote...

I want DW Warriors back but give them a unique tree exclusive to Warriors. That way they can stay different from Rogues. Doesn't make sense to see a Warrior with the same DW skills.

Honestly, though, even though they had the same skills, the skills they actually used were completely different.

[DKJaigen]

WhiteThunder wrote...

So how on earth did you play your rogues? Did you try to backstab at all? Did you use daggers or swords? Did you use light or medium armor? Did you not use talents with your warriors? Or did you waste stamina that could be used for momentum with your rogues?

Warriors where nothing more then gimped rogues in orgins. If you are going to implement dual wielding for  classes then you really should give some ideas what its role should be. right now its not necessary as rogues are supposed to be the single target dps kings

[Reptillius]

With my rogues. Stuns, paralyzes and knockdowns were often part of my party build. Not hard to get the ability that let's you backstab a stunned guy in the face. So I backstabbed and took the guy out from the front.

why were my playstyles supposed to be different?

I'm either stacking strength and dex or I'm stacking cunning and dex. and Rogues come built in with an ability that makes cunning work like strength for them in many ways. And with enough stamina both could plow through a drawn out battle like an automated cheese slicer through a block of cheese. maybe I'm odd but I found use for all of the DW abilities on both characters.

Modifié par Reptillius, 28 octobre 2012 - 07:46 .

[Terrorize69]

Would much prefer getting something that separates the classes, not prohibits re-playability. Polearm Warriors, now your talking. Leg sweeps and thrusts

[GipsyDangeresque]

Dual Swordsman is a must. I despised Dragon Age 2 for the lack of it. Daggers are for wimps, if you're going to dual wield you better use full sized weapons exclusively or just get out.

[Reptillius]

Atemeus wrote...

Dual Swordsman is a must. I despised Dragon Age 2 for the lack of it. Daggers are for wimps, if you're going to dual wield you better use full sized weapons exclusively or just get out.

While I understand practicality doesn't always mix with games. holding two actual swords isn't easy...  And the guy with two daggers just might beat you even in a head on fight.

[Ophir147]

Forget dw warriors, they were a poor man's rogue. They had all of the same skills as a DW rogue, with none of the positional requirement (aka strategy) with a bit less squishiness.

However, if we're pointing out things we would like to happen but most definitely won't, then why can't Rogues have a duelist-like spec, nothing like what we've been presented with so far. Having the ability to use rogues with only one weapon would be awesome because

1. Some people, like myself, like the melee classes but think that dual-wielding weapons is impractical, and don't even get me started on the two handed weapons you wouldn't be able to fit through a doorway
2. It would provide an interesting new playstyle for rogues, who keep the fast-paced single-target mayhem of a rogue while retaining a good part of the warrior's survivability
3. If DW warriors were actually implemented into DAIII, duelist rogues would be a nice addition to even out the choices for warriors and rogues, giving them both three playstyle choices (warriors get sword and shield, 2h weapon, and dual sword/mace/axe/etc, while rogues get dual daggers, archery, and single sword playstyles)

Wishful thinking at best however. That's what we're best at, though

Modifié par Ophir147, 28 octobre 2012 - 08:16 .

[Shadow Fox]

Reptillius wrote...

Atemeus wrote...

Dual Swordsman is a must. I despised Dragon Age 2 for the lack of it. Daggers are for wimps, if you're going to dual wield you better use full sized weapons exclusively or just get out.

While I understand practicality doesn't always mix with games. holding two actual swords isn't easy...  And the guy with two daggers just might beat you even in a head on fight.

try impossible