205 réponses à ce sujet

[Blazomancer]

jvaz wrote...

MerinTB wrote...

jvaz wrote...
Fight the ARW and tell me that positioning isn't important.  Hell, do the Nexus Golem fight and tell me positioning isn't important.  Duel the Arishok's whole crew at the end of Act 2 and tell me that positioning isn't important.  Fight any fight where there are enemy elite assassins and mages and tell me that positioning isn't important. 

Yay, real time twitch timing and hiding behind things.  Whee.  Exactly what I want in my party-based, tactical RPG.

/end sarcasm

No.  It's more like paying attention to whats going on, reacting accordingly, and in the ARW case using cover.  

In your own words, "after you go through the game the first time, you literally
know where everything and everyone is. Tactics blown out of the water." Same applies here.

[ScarMK]

Pheh.  Double post.

Modifié par ScarMK, 19 juillet 2013 - 04:43 .

[ScarMK]

ioannisdenton wrote...

OP here. Friendly fire on da2 evben on normal would not work and it would turn people of due most abilities beeing AoE.
On DAO only the mages have AoE friendly fire (if i can recall correctly)

Any class could use the poison flasks and explosive bombs, which dealt a fair amount of damage. 

Yes Huge hitpoints. What is the wrong wiith that? again in DAO ALL ENEMY MAGES were ONE HIT K.O. due to mana clash. 

Not a problem in itself, but when Hawke and CO have about 200 hp average and the common mook is in the thousands to ten-thousands, that's a problem.  As for Origins, i believe that's a case of, don't want it that easy?  Don't use it.  It's overpowered abilities like those that are probably the closest Bioware will ever do to let people skip combat.

Defensive position on Da2 on hard and above does not work, Rogues dissapear? MOVE the mage FAR AWAY.

It doesn't work because the enemies spawn where you wouldn't expect them too.  IE, dropping out of the ceiling. or jumping from the roof.  If they came through doors or something, then the player would know to either watch the door to prevent being flanked, or just back up to a wall.  

DaO on nightmare was nothing like Da2 on nightmare. Da2 on nightmare is really a nightmare on some occassions.

DA2 is only harder than Origins because of the insane and lore-breaking buffs they give the enemies.  In both games neither of the enemies changed their tactics much, only get bit more spells/abilities to use and possibly buffed stats.  But at least Origins tried to keep enemies grounded to lore. Unlike Da2 where every criminal group in Kirkwall apparently can afford enchanted outfits that provide complete resistance to the element of their choice or Mabari and Qunari being completely immune to fire.  This is just one of the insane buffs they give.

Ander's recruitment and quest (dissent) in act 2...
Use poisons, bombs there are tons of tools. Use pertrify, horror spells or isabella's duel spell. When a rogue dissapeas use warriors whirlwind and you ll get him.

I find it really hard to believe that most poisons/bombs/abilities are unlocked by the time you recruit Anders and do his quest.   Much less that someone could actually afford those poisons/bombs without a mod that alters the value of junk loot.  As for Dissent, I don't know.  I didn't care much for Anders and didn't bother with his personal quests.

Save the best abilities for the most appropriate moments, this was Da2 all about.
Not just spam damage dealing abilities.
this work sonly on normal and frankly all bioware games are way boring on normal. 

Wasn't this true of Origins as well?  It could be the mods I'm using, but I'm fairly certain that spamming damage dealing abilities never worked either.

[Gorguz]

jvaz wrote...

Get that crap outta here.  Every enemy in DA:O had the SAME positioning.  Which means after you go through the game the first time, you literally know where everything and everyone is.  Tactics blown out of the water.  Storm of the Century everything in sight and mop off stragglers.  

Fight the ARW and tell me that positioning isn't important.  Hell, do the Nexus Golem fight and tell me positioning isn't important.  Duel the Arishok's whole crew at the end of Act 2 and tell me that positioning isn't important.  Fight any fight where there are enemy elite assassins and mages and tell me that positioning isn't important. 

Watch some of the videos of the people who play on nightmare without pausing.  Look at their walkthrough tactics setup on BSN here, and tell me that tactics aren't important? 

Positioning is not running around the room (that's how you play DA:O if you do not know how to assemble a good team, btw). It is putting the rogue-mage-warrior there where is best for him to be (deal damage, tank, heal, what not). And with tactics I don't mean the ones you can set. I mean using a rogue to lead the enemy  in an ambush, for example.  But I do not expect somebody who prefers fancy animations over an elaborate combat system to understand.

[ScarMK]

There's no need to resort to insults.

[jvaz]

Gorguz wrote...

jvaz wrote...

Get that crap outta here.  Every enemy in DA:O had the SAME positioning.  Which means after you go through the game the first time, you literally know where everything and everyone is.  Tactics blown out of the water.  Storm of the Century everything in sight and mop off stragglers.  

Fight the ARW and tell me that positioning isn't important.  Hell, do the Nexus Golem fight and tell me positioning isn't important.  Duel the Arishok's whole crew at the end of Act 2 and tell me that positioning isn't important.  Fight any fight where there are enemy elite assassins and mages and tell me that positioning isn't important. 

Watch some of the videos of the people who play on nightmare without pausing.  Look at their walkthrough tactics setup on BSN here, and tell me that tactics aren't important? 

Positioning is not running around the room (that's how you play DA:O if you do not know how to assemble a good team, btw). It is putting the rogue-mage-warrior there where is best for him to be (deal damage, tank, heal, what not). And with tactics I don't mean the ones you can set. I mean using a rogue to lead the enemy  in an ambush, for example.  But I do not expect somebody who prefers fancy animations over an elaborate combat system to understand.

Your insults prove your own ignorance.

Putting mage-rogue-warrior there can be simply broken down into:

Mage - excels at medium to long range AOE and debuffing/buffing abilities

Rogue - enemy misdirection and single target spike damage

Warrior - holding choke points for ranged characters, drawing aggro away from teammates and/or kiting

DA2 has many more options than Origins for these roles to be carried out.

They removed traps to a degree in DA2 but you can still lead enemies into a trap/ambush(glyph of Parlaysis, firestorm, pull of the abyss, etc).  Positioning is a part of tactics whether you have the sense to admit it or not.  It's not about running around the battlefield senselessly.  It's: "Hmmm, these enemies have spawned behind or around my mage.  I should move him so he/her has the best positioning that makes them most effective."  While the wave system is a bit over the top in DA2, it forces you to be dynamic and pay attention to the positioning of your characters.  DA:O did a horrible job at this because all the enemies were just standing around in the same position waiting for the player to show up and there was no randomization to enemy placement.  Plus if you had a really good team, traps and all that extra stuff were trivial and not needed. 

[Gorguz]

ScarMK wrote...

There's no need to resort to insults.

It relieves my frustration. I mean, one game has good content and its little flaws are in the form. The other game has fancy form, but no content. I don't see why some people prefer a dry combat system over a solid one, and when I ask all I got is "it's very tactical to run around the room". Try to understand me.

[jvaz]

Gorguz wrote...

ScarMK wrote...

There's no need to resort to insults.

It relieves my frustration. I mean, one game has good content and its little flaws are in the form. The other game has fancy form, but no content. I don't see why some people prefer a dry combat system over a solid one, and when I ask all I got is "it's very tactical to run around the room". Try to understand me.

Understanding is a mutual thing.  Clearly ignoring what all aspects of positioning are if you are still taking that stance

[Melca36]

If you read the Twitter thead...You will see that it was just stated again that combat will have the fluidity of DA2 and the Tactics of Origins. So its obvious its not going to be like either game but completely different.

[Gorguz]

jvaz wrote...

Your insults prove your own ignorance.

Putting mage-rogue-warrior there can be simply broken down into:

Mage - excels at medium to long range AOE and debuffing/buffing abilities

Rogue - enemy misdirection and single target spike damage

Warrior - holding choke points for ranged characters, drawing aggro away from teammates and/or kiting

DA2 has many more options than Origins for these roles to be carried out.

They removed traps to a degree in DA2 but you can still lead enemies into a trap/ambush(glyph of Parlaysis, firestorm, pull of the abyss, etc).  Positioning is a part of tactics whether you have the sense to admit it or not.  It's not about running around the battlefield senselessly.  It's: "Hmmm, these enemies have spawned behind or around my mage.  I should move him so he/her has the best positioning that makes them most effective."  While the wave system is a bit over the top in DA2, it forces you to be dynamic and pay attention to the positioning of your characters.  DA:O did a horrible job at this because all the enemies were just standing around in the same position waiting for the player to show up and there was no randomization to enemy placement.  Plus if you had a really good team, traps and all that extra stuff were trivial and not needed. 

WTF are you saying. Seriously. It is near to impossible to hold choke points in DA2. Mages can have different roles but surely they do not excel in long range aoe attacks, since the enemy have too many HP and they run out of the area. The tricks to let them stay in place are insufficient.
Your DA2 "traps" cannot compete with the DA:O ones.
"It's not running around the battlefield senselessly.". It is. There are not challenges or thoughts or tactics in "move cast move cast". All you have to do it's keeping the mage alive so that he can heal the warriors. That's it. What a great combat system.
And I don't know what DA:O you played. In my game, there wasn't the ambient recycling that there is in DA:2. The enemy have differet positions, since the ambients change.
"Your insults prove your own ignorance." Really? I don't see how. But I have problem understanding idiots.
Listen kids, buy "NightyNine Nights". It's a game where you kill thousands of enemies with fancy moves. You will love it. Maybe it will keep you busy, and you can stop trying to make a trpg in a hack n' slash.

[Melca36]

jvaz wrote...

Gorguz wrote...

ScarMK wrote...

There's no need to resort to insults.

It relieves my frustration. I mean, one game has good content and its little flaws are in the form. The other game has fancy form, but no content. I don't see why some people prefer a dry combat system over a solid one, and when I ask all I got is "it's very tactical to run around the room". Try to understand me.

Understanding is a mutual thing.  Clearly ignoring what all aspects of positioning are if you are still taking that stance

Does it matter? They already said it will NOT be the same for the next game. Check the twitter thread.

[Big Magnet]

Bionuts wrote...

If it had combat like Dark Souls...

nomnomnomnomnomnom ddroooool

As someone who has just started in Dark Souls, all I have to say is...

yes, Yes, YES! A million times YES!!

[MerinTB]

I just have to say -

Kiting is not fighting tactically. It is exploiting game mechanics. Which, I guess, is PLAYING THE GAME tactically, but that should really be a different thing than managing a combat, via your character's abilities, tactically inside the rules of the game's combat system.

Because you can get an AI to get stuck on a piece of scenery is NOT fighting tactically, as far as I'm concerned, or memorizing the pattern of the boss's pre-scripted attack routine.

[Plaintiff]

Every single game has some form of 'tactics'. DA2 is not any less tactical than DA:O, both games provide a set of tools and the player is forced to work within their limitations to achieve the best outcome they possibly can. That's the exact definition of tactical gameplay.

If I had to choose, I'd take DA2's faster pace and dramatic animations over DA:O's wading through molasses.

[Blazomancer]

@Jvaz - "DA:O did a horrible job at this because all the enemies were just standing around in the same position waiting for the player to show up and there was no randomization to enemy placement."

I disagree. The battlefields of Origins and DA2 were essentially the same except for the wave mechanic. Enemy placement was not random even in DA2. The first wave of a DA2 encounter also stood in the same place for the player to show up. It's only the following waves that made the battlefield a bit dynamic, but that is practically for one time since the spawn points are fixed. Kiting was possible in Origins just like it is in DA2. For instance, you could play 'tag' with the revenant in the whole Orzammar palace.

[Gorguz]

Plaintiff wrote...

Every single game has some form of 'tactics'. DA2 is not any less tactical than DA:O, both games provide a set of tools and the player is forced to work within their limitations to achieve the best outcome they possibly can. That's the exact definition of tactical gameplay.

If I had to choose, I'd take DA2's faster pace and dramatic animations over DA:O's wading through molasses.

Ask yourself this question: if da2 is tactical and positioning has a meaning, then why do the developers want to change how the waves work?

[Plaintiff]

Gorguz wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Every single game has some form of 'tactics'. DA2 is not any less tactical than DA:O, both games provide a set of tools and the player is forced to work within their limitations to achieve the best outcome they possibly can. That's the exact definition of tactical gameplay.

If I had to choose, I'd take DA2's faster pace and dramatic animations over DA:O's wading through molasses.

Ask yourself this question: if da2 is tactical and positioning has a meaning, then why do the developers want to change how the waves work?

What a nonsensical question.

For starters, "positioning" is not an inherent aspect of "tactical" gameplay, and an emphasis on positioning is not needed for a game to be tactical. Nor is the ability to plan all your moves ahead of time. Hell, if you can't think on your feet, then what sort of tactician are you? Not a very good one.

If the devleopers are changing the way waves work, and I've seen no direct comments from them to that affect, it could be for any number of reasons, most of which have nothing to do with "tactics". It could be as simple as "enemies popping out of thin air damages immerion".

[ioannisdenton]

jvaz wrote...

Gorguz wrote...

jvaz wrote...

Get that crap outta here.  Every enemy in DA:O had the SAME positioning.  Which means after you go through the game the first time, you literally know where everything and everyone is.  Tactics blown out of the water.  Storm of the Century everything in sight and mop off stragglers.  

Fight the ARW and tell me that positioning isn't important.  Hell, do the Nexus Golem fight and tell me positioning isn't important.  Duel the Arishok's whole crew at the end of Act 2 and tell me that positioning isn't important.  Fight any fight where there are enemy elite assassins and mages and tell me that positioning isn't important. 

Watch some of the videos of the people who play on nightmare without pausing.  Look at their walkthrough tactics setup on BSN here, and tell me that tactics aren't important? 

Positioning is not running around the room (that's how you play DA:O if you do not know how to assemble a good team, btw). It is putting the rogue-mage-warrior there where is best for him to be (deal damage, tank, heal, what not). And with tactics I don't mean the ones you can set. I mean using a rogue to lead the enemy  in an ambush, for example.  But I do not expect somebody who prefers fancy animations over an elaborate combat system to understand.

Your insults prove your own ignorance.

Putting mage-rogue-warrior there can be simply broken down into:

Mage - excels at medium to long range AOE and debuffing/buffing abilities

Rogue - enemy misdirection and single target spike damage

Warrior - holding choke points for ranged characters, drawing aggro away from teammates and/or kiting

DA2 has many more options than Origins for these roles to be carried out.

They removed traps to a degree in DA2 but you can still lead enemies into a trap/ambush(glyph of Parlaysis, firestorm, pull of the abyss, etc).  Positioning is a part of tactics whether you have the sense to admit it or not.  It's not about running around the battlefield senselessly.  It's: "Hmmm, these enemies have spawned behind or around my mage.  I should move him so he/her has the best positioning that makes them most effective."  While the wave system is a bit over the top in DA2, it forces you to be dynamic and pay attention to the positioning of your characters.  DA:O did a horrible job at this because all the enemies were just standing around in the same position waiting for the player to show up and there was no randomization to enemy placement.  Plus if you had a really good team, traps and all that extra stuff were trivial and not needed.

1) Let's keep it civil please guys . we are discussing after all
2) i totally agree with jvaz.

Been playing the fight with the templar ambush on highttown night in act 2 today.
Got killed 4 to 5 times mercilessly when i decided that i should kill the lieutenant asap and then move my mages far far away away from templar hunters , eventually i got the fight right with isabela dying; nothing wrong with companions falling in battle, it is nightmare after all.
this is so true.

P.S Isabela sometimes tries to attack enemies but she keeps swinging her weapons unable to attack unless i have conroll of her 100% of the time. anyone knows why???
Is this a revival bug?

[ioannisdenton]

Gorguz wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Every single game has some form of 'tactics'. DA2 is not any less tactical than DA:O, both games provide a set of tools and the player is forced to work within their limitations to achieve the best outcome they possibly can. That's the exact definition of tactical gameplay.

If I had to choose, I'd take DA2's faster pace and dramatic animations over DA:O's wading through molasses.

Ask yourself this question: if da2 is tactical and positioning has a meaning, then why do the developers want to change how the waves work?

cause people really almost blow bioware building up after da2 release. they hated every aspect of da2. Same with Me3.
And bioware has the trend of totally removing feats instead of fixing them when people complain

[jvaz]

Gorguz wrote...

jvaz wrote...

Your insults prove your own ignorance.

Putting mage-rogue-warrior there can be simply broken down into:

Mage - excels at medium to long range AOE and debuffing/buffing abilities

Rogue - enemy misdirection and single target spike damage

Warrior - holding choke points for ranged characters, drawing aggro away from teammates and/or kiting

DA2 has many more options than Origins for these roles to be carried out.

They removed traps to a degree in DA2 but you can still lead enemies into a trap/ambush(glyph of Parlaysis, firestorm, pull of the abyss, etc).  Positioning is a part of tactics whether you have the sense to admit it or not.  It's not about running around the battlefield senselessly.  It's: "Hmmm, these enemies have spawned behind or around my mage.  I should move him so he/her has the best positioning that makes them most effective."  While the wave system is a bit over the top in DA2, it forces you to be dynamic and pay attention to the positioning of your characters.  DA:O did a horrible job at this because all the enemies were just standing around in the same position waiting for the player to show up and there was no randomization to enemy placement.  Plus if you had a really good team, traps and all that extra stuff were trivial and not needed. 

WTF are you saying. Seriously. It is near to impossible to hold choke points in DA2. Mages can have different roles but surely they do not excel in long range aoe attacks, since the enemy have too many HP and they run out of the area. The tricks to let them stay in place are insufficient.
Your DA2 "traps" cannot compete with the DA:O ones.
"It's not running around the battlefield senselessly.". It is. There are not challenges or thoughts or tactics in "move cast move cast". All you have to do it's keeping the mage alive so that he can heal the warriors. That's it. What a great combat system.
And I don't know what DA:O you played. In my game, there wasn't the ambient recycling that there is in DA:2. The enemy have differet positions, since the ambients change.
"Your insults prove your own ignorance." Really? I don't see how. But I have problem understanding idiots.
Listen kids, buy "NightyNine Nights". It's a game where you kill thousands of enemies with fancy moves. You will love it. Maybe it will keep you busy, and you can stop trying to make a trpg in a hack n' slash.

You are very, very, very wrong there.  You probably dont have a sound understanding of all the abilities and specializations at your disposal within the DA2 combat system if you say this. Again you spout nothing but ignorance

If you spec your abilities and talent points correctly and have the right items equipped on your characters, Firestorm and Tempest do buttloads of damage where a nightmare level mook is reduced to a sliver of health in one hit.  With a blood mage/force mage Hawke I can one hit mooks with a single firestorm hit beginning in the middle to end of Act 2.  Lets not forget a warrior upgraded (got your fire runes and elemental aegis and spirit runes if you use walking bomb?) with the "massacre" passive can then neutralize said enemy in the next hit, restoring stamina and moving on to the next threat all while taking little to no damage at all.   To keep the enemies inside the AOE zone, you can use taunt, goad, pull of the abyss, gravitic sphere, telekinetic burst, miasmic flask, hemorrhage, wounds of the past, etc. 

On any playthrough that you do in DA:O all the enemies are in the same exact place ALL THE TIME.  Anyone with half a brain (which is obviously lacking on your part) realizes this.  Great example:  Urn of the Sacred Ashes questline: the room where you encounter the first Ash Wraith, there are ALWAYS two enemies waiting on either path to the left or right passage to that encounter.   Want another example: when assualting the castle to get to Arl Eamon initially, the revenant ALWAYS spawns by the tree between the castle steps and the gate towards the opposite side that the player enters.  Another example: During the questline a paragon of her kind, there is a section where you navigate a set  of tunnels.  There are three "genlock runners" who, if followed will lead you to a Bronto who is oriented to the left side of about 8-10 darkspawn  (included in the darkspwan is a genlock emissary) on an elevated ramp.  I could go on for ages. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

Realmzmaster wrote...

The difference being that at the time those games came out that was the best that the developers did or could do.

Not relevant.  Good design is good design.

Those games I expected to be slow because they were minicling the tabletop experience.

All CRPGs should be trying to mimic tabletop games.

DAO on the other hand came out at a time when the technological limitations were not the same. There was very little reason for DAO to be slower than BG1 or BG2 which also had RTwP.

The animations were more complex and more interesting.  Slowing the combat down gave the player more tiem to watch the combat.

But I dispute that DAO was slower than BG.  BG's combat had 6 second combat rounds.  DAO's combat was significantly quicker than that.

DA2 prove that it did not have to be as slow since both DAO and DA2 use the same basic engine.

DAO wasn't slow because of technical limitations.  DAO was slow because slow as a good design.

Now you can agrue that DA2 was too fast and some of the animations were over the top, but for me DAO was to slow especially in regards to two handers and mages attacking with staff.

I really liked the speed of DAO.  First, the characters were far more responsive than in DA2 (sure, the DA2 characters were faster, but they didn't do what I wanted when I wanted them to.  Also, the time it took to use abilities created dramatic tension during fights.  Will my archer fire his bow in time to stop the charging enemy before he closes to melee range?  DA2 moved so quickly that everything happened instantly, so there's was never any suspense.

DAO combat told better stories.

[Sylvius the Mad]

jvaz wrote...

Fight the ARW and tell me that positioning isn't important.

Oh, you mean that enemy whose area-effect attack broke the rules established by every other AoE ability in the game?

Until the Ancient Rock Wraith, and after the Ancient Rock Wraith, every AoE attack in the game ignored environmental barriers.  Every one.  Except that one.

[Plaintiff]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

jvaz wrote...

Fight the ARW and tell me that positioning isn't important.

Oh, you mean that enemy whose area-effect attack broke the rules established by every other AoE ability in the game?

Until the Ancient Rock Wraith, and after the Ancient Rock Wraith, every AoE attack in the game ignored environmental barriers.  Every one.  Except that one.

So what?

[Sylvius the Mad]

How were the characters supposed to know how to deal with something that violates the rules of the world in which they live?

I must have fought that thing 8 times before I accidentally stumbled into the area where the attack didn't hit me. And once I did, the fight was trivial. How is that fun? There was a gimmick - a world-breaking gimmick - and once that gimmick was discovered the fight was laughably easy.