63 réponses à ce sujet

[Tigerman123]

If you spec your party correctly you can get mountains of dps and those enemies will die quick fast in a hurry, even on nightmare. I think most of the complaints about the duration of combat were down to poor optimization of parties thanks to opaque game mechanics, which was coupled with low damage output from your adversaries on normal difficulty, which hid the fact that your group was weak and poorly synchronized

[Bfler]

Tigerman123 wrote...

If you spec your party correctly you can get mountains of dps and those enemies will die quick fast in a hurry, even on nightmare. I think most of the complaints about the duration of combat were down to poor optimization of parties thanks to opaque game mechanics, which was coupled with low damage output from your adversaries on normal difficulty, which hid the fact that your group was weak and poorly synchronized

Most of the elemental tree of the mages is useless in DA2 in nightmare mode, because you do more harm your own party members, than the enemies.

Modifié par Bfler, 07 décembre 2012 - 01:00 .

[Tigerman123]

There's stuff you can do to counteract that;

Put resistance runes on your warrior

Use the Force Mage tree to bunch up enemies

Kill everything before it even reaches your party ( which is quite possible)

[In Exile]

Bfler wrote...
Most of the elemental tree of the mages is useless in DA2 in nightmare mode, because you do more harm your own party members, than the enemies.

Not at all. Elemental tree owns in nightmare - it's just about using choke points. DA2 seems to try and trick you to play it by just managin aggro and having enemies swarm you, but that's a bad way to play (like it was in DA:O). Retreat from where enemies spawn to a chokepoint, and then you can create a cone of cold/fire storm kill zone, especially with a force mage and varric.

The massive AOE from a Force mage PC, Varric, Sebastian, and Merril is very effective against mooks.

Modifié par In Exile, 07 décembre 2012 - 02:04 .

[Nefla]

I hate DA2's combat not just for the parachuting waves of exploding meatsacks but also because the combat itself was boring and basically just involved pressing "A" over and over again with an occasional ability (with long cooldown). I wasn't a fan of DA:O's combat either as much as I love that game. It was better than DA2 with more abilities and you could actually plan strategies, but I prefer a 100% action/skill based combat system.

[iOnlySignIn]

Change the title to "Make spawn mechanism different".

[PinkysPain]

Zeta42 wrote...
A video game is exactly that - a game. It's supposed to be cool. If in order to be cool it has to be a little unrealistic, what's the problem? Next thing you'll be saying that dragons can't fly because of their massive and heavy bodies. Oh wait, dragons don't exist at all.

I don't really care about realism (although I think DA2 combat is out of tone with the world they created and they should use something like the flask kicking animation and high jump stab sparingly and use something less ostentatious as the standard) but you can't have a game with highly reactive fast combat and group tactical positioning in one.

If you want to please the people who want to play DA as a DMC type game and the people who want to play it like an IE type game you need two completely seperately designed/balanced systems ...

[Abraham_uk]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

I don't care what you do with combat, just make it different than DA2's. The never-ending spawining horde system you have in place isn't fun at all. Killing 20 enemies just to have 20 more respawn right on top of you isn't fun. Especially on normal. I can only imagine how annoying it is on higher difficulties. So, for the next Dragon Age please find a way to make combat difficult without resorting to spawning wave after wave of enemies. Please and thank you if you are considering. 

In other words.
No more hoard mode.


Boy you must really not like Mass Effect 3 N7 Special Forces.

[Robhuzz]

As long as it's closer to Origins than DA2 I'm happy. The (slightly slow) tactical combat of DAO beat the DBZ style hack and slash waves spawning out of thin air of DA2 by a landslide...

Modifié par Robhuzz, 07 décembre 2012 - 07:58 .

[Realmzmaster]

As long as DA3 does not give the set battles like in DAO. I want enemies with the ability to realistically come from anywhere not just having them arrayed in front of my party. Eneny rogues should be using stealth to sneak up behind my mage to take them out. No more putting you mage or squishes in a safe place. If the party is in a city environment I expect the enemy to come from every alleyway or door way possible.

I did not like the way the wave system was implemented in DA2, but MotA did a better job. The wave system has it place and should be used in moderation to throw off the gamer's plans.

[Lethys1]

Liamv2 wrote...

As long as they don't make it like origins im happy

Really?  That game was so well-crafted from a combat perspective, everything felt difficult initially but definitely doable.  It was a very satisfying difficulty and depth.  

[Auras_Mendalla]

I liked the auto-attack in Origins, but I prefer DAII's combat in every other way, especially speed.

[ShaggyWolf]

As of today, I completed a hard difficulty DA:2+ all DLCs playthrough, which I started immediately after completing DA:O, DA:A, and Witch Hunt on nightmare a few weeks ago. With both games fresh in my mind, I can say with honesty that I have found them both immensely enjoyable.

As Tigerman123 said, pretty much every common criticism I've read about DA2's combat can be countered by composing at least a somewhat decent team build. I think DA2's combat is incredibly fun if you know what you're doing. Frustrating if you don't. I can say the same thing about DA:O, though.

[Kileyan]

All I really care is that if you have a fight an enemy, that it be on the map. Only very special encounters should have enemies that appear out of no where.


I like carefully crafted encounters that challenge a well balanced party, push them to the limits. I like a system where a smart player can scout ahead and set up traps, or pick a place of battle. Picking your place of battle should be a strategy, making enemies appear out of nowhere to challenge such strategies is not the best way to handle it.

For example, if I was designing certain battles, I would make the set peice battles that were nearly impossible on challenging difficulties unless you chose a good bottleneck place for battle, made use of crowd control like barrier or paralyze runes. That is a good battle to me.

A bad battle is one with so many waves from many different directions that the long timer crowd control spells are least useful. A bad battle is one where the design of the game says LOL LOL, you though backing against a wall and protecting your mages was smart, HAHAH 12 ninjas dropped onto your heads.

It is a fine line to tread, but a player has to feel that tactical placement and well laid plans mean something. I don't want a game where "protecting" you squishies is made impossible, a game where the only thing that matters is min maxing your dps and wftwasting entire waves with big explosions.

I like a bit slower, more methodical battle that just random chaos and cross class aoe damage combos.

[Ziegrif]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Actually I think it's pretty fun. 

It sure is.~

Well... I'm going to be prolly flamed for this but I'd rather DA3 was turned into a 3rd person hack and slash even more so than DA2 was. Something like Kingdom hearts. KH has a fun combat system.
Course I want this because I have no tactical bone in my body.
Twitchy sword fights would be fun for me.

[Realmzmaster]

A good battle to me is when the enemy is using the same tactics as the party.So the enemy should be scouting, setting traps and picking the place of battle. The enemy should be making the party come to them. Two quotes stand out in my mind:

In preparing for battle I have always found that plans are useless, but the planning indispensable. General Dwight D. Eisenhower.

We plan alone, but we fulfill our plans together with the enemy in accordance with his opposition.
Marshal Ivan Konev WWII Red Army

[Pzykozis]

Lethys1 wrote...

Liamv2 wrote...

As long as they don't make it like origins im happy

Really?  That game was so well-crafted from a combat perspective, everything felt difficult initially but definitely doable.  It was a very satisfying difficulty and depth.  

Really? It was even easier than DA2 which is not hard (especially after level 5 or so) by a long shot.

Maria wins a crateful of cookies carried by helper kittens for her post though.

[Kileyan]

Ziegrif wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Actually I think it's pretty fun. 

It sure is.~

Well... I'm going to be prolly flamed for this but I'd rather DA3 was turned into a 3rd person hack and slash even more so than DA2 was. Something like Kingdom hearts. KH has a fun combat system.
Course I want this because I have no tactical bone in my body.
Twitchy sword fights would be fun for me.

I'm not even against more twitchy combats, but I like the 4-6 party member games. I can't imagine such a twitchy game being all that good for a full party of different classes style game. I don't really want a game where your main character is the god that does everything, I like that the current DA games have other party members with skills that are just as meaningul as the player characters.

I guess I am saying I don't mind a full twitch combat game, but I'd prefer that be another game, not a Bioware DA game.

[Kileyan]

Realmzmaster wrote...

A good battle to me is when the enemy is using the same tactics as the party.So the enemy should be scouting, setting traps and picking the place of battle. The enemy should be making the party come to them. Two quotes stand out in my mind:

In preparing for battle I have always found that plans are useless, but the planning indispensable. General Dwight D. Eisenhower.

We plan alone, but we fulfill our plans together with the enemy in accordance with his opposition.
Marshal Ivan Konev WWII Red Army

Nice quotes, but we are talking about gameplay, not WWII.

Describe that in gameplay terms.

Should a guard post in a typical jailbreak quest have 17 ninjas and 4 mages? Along with several waves of insta gib fodder guards? Or should it have a set number of bad guys you can see, predict and plan for?

Should a random encounter with some bandits have 4 waves of invisible guys that appear from behind you every encounter in full platemail? Even though it should be assumed that you just walked through that area with a party full of intelligent people who were looking for trouble.

Should the simple act of walking up a hill have several wave encounters, adding up to 45 cannon fodder, 12 super special ivisible ninjas, 8 archmages, and 3 plate armored warriors of elite status? Not to mention armies of undead, the only ones that do have an excuse to be rising from the ground or maybe appearing out of no where.

We have to come at this as a story and adventure. It makes sense for certain encounters, special encounters to have waves that screw up our best plans, make us think and do things better.

If every encounter is randomly appearing ninjas, it isn't planning at all, it is just building up enough healing and dps to overcome each wave ad nauseum. That isn't fun to me.

Sometimes you have to let the player plan and execute a battleplan and enjoy he did the right thing or didn't do the correct thing. Just saying that the enemy can do everythign we can do, and nullifying any strategy other than having the most DPS isn't a game I want, which seems to be what you are saying.....not sure.

Modifié par Kileyan, 08 décembre 2012 - 01:18 .

[Rawgrim]

Da2 combat felt more like...Soul Calibur, or something. Freakishly over the top moves, oversized weapons, teleporting enemies. Gravity not an issue at all.

[Realmzmaster]

Kileyan wrote...



Nice quotes, but we are talking about gameplay, not WWII.

Describe that in gameplay terms.

Should a guard post in a typical jailbreak quest have 17 ninjas and 4 mages? Along with several waves of insta gib fodder guards? Or should it have a set number of bad guys you can see, predict and plan for?

Should a random encounter with some bandits have 4 waves of invisible guys that appear from behind you every encounter in full platemail? Even though it should be assumed that you just walked through that area with a party full of intelligent people who were looking for trouble.

Should the simple act of walking up a hill have several wave encounters, adding up to 45 cannon fodder, 12 super special ivisible ninjas, 8 archmages, and 3 plate armored warriors of elite status? Not to mention armies of undead, the only ones that do have an excuse to be rising from the ground or maybe appearing out of no where.

We have to come at this as a story and adventure. It makes sense for certain encounters, special encounters to have waves that screw up our best plans, make us think and do things better.

If every encounter is randomly appearing ninjas, it isn't planning at all, it is just building up enough healing and dps to overcome each wave ad nauseum. That isn't fun to me.

Sometimes you have to let the player plan and execute a battleplan and enjoy he did the right thing or didn't do the correct thing. Just saying that the enemy can do everythign we can do, and nullifying any strategy other than having the most DPS isn't a game I want, which seems to be what you are saying.....not sure.

No we are not talking WWII, but we are talking about combat. I want an intelligent enemy. That means that I expect the enemy to be planning the way I am planning. You think that criminals do not plan out their attacks? You think that the enemy if on the level with the party cannot hide themselves from detection?

The party rogues are the only ones that go into stealth? I expect my enemy if it has rogues like mine to use them the way I would or surprise me and use them in a way I may not have thought of. 

I want an encounter to have the ability to surprise me and make me re-evaluate my strategy and tactics on the fly.
If I am in a city and the enemy could be all around the party I expect them to come from realistically anywhere. 

I am playing Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas now. When I walk into a ruin or building I expect the enemy to come from everywhere and be moving while the party is moving.  I expect the enemy to take total advantage of its surroundings the way I would have my party.

I expect the enemy if it has the numbers to either overwhelm the party or send their forces in waves to wear my party down and really screw up any plans I have. I want the enemy to force my party and I to think and swiftly assess the situation.

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 08 décembre 2012 - 06:52 .

[sea-]

1. Ditch the retarded MMO systems design. Annoying cooldowns, annoying +3 to stats every level that have no discernible difference in your effectiveness until you gain 10 levels, annoying aggro mechanics, idiotic DPS stuff that ruins all distinction between different weapon types.

2. No more wave combat. It's stupid, it's unrealistic, it ruins tactics, and it makes no sense that there would be 500 bandits hiding in a clown car just off-screen.

3. No more awesome button stuff.

4. No more having companions tied to specific classes so you are limited to having X or Y people in your party based on what the story says.   Bring back full party creation.

5. No more console development. Concessions made for console input devices, audiences and technical limitations ruined Dragon Age, and generally speaking also ruined RPGs.

Modifié par sea-, 08 décembre 2012 - 06:57 .

[Robhuzz]

sea- wrote...

1. Ditch the retarded MMO systems design. Annoying cooldowns, annoying +3 to stats every level that have no discernible difference in your effectiveness until you gain 10 levels, annoying aggro mechanics, idiotic DPS stuff that ruins all distinction between different weapon types.

2. No more wave combat. It's stupid, it's unrealistic, it ruins tactics, and it makes no sense that there would be 500 bandits hiding in a clown car just off-screen.

3. No more awesome button stuff.

4. No more having companions tied to specific classes so you are limited to having X or Y people in your party based on what the story says.   Bring back full party creation.

5. No more console development. Concessions made for console input devices, audiences and technical limitations ruined Dragon Age, and generally speaking also ruined RPGs.

QFT

I don't think I've ever seen a BSN post that I agree with more.

Modifié par Robhuzz, 08 décembre 2012 - 07:03 .

[Wulfram]

I don't really like MMO cooldowns, but DA's longer cooldowns are fine by me.

I agree about the +3 stats every level and the aggro mechanics. Though I generally do OK not worrying about the aggro too much, or picking something that works passively to manage it, so I'm not bothered by that.

Wave combat makes sense in some places. When the player is facing a lot of enemies, it's a sensible way to show that if you lack the ability to show too many enemies on the same screen. But of course it shouldn't be anything like ubiquitous - only when it makes sense for there to be regular reinforcements.