36 réponses à ce sujet

[Eternal Phoenix]

So I've recently done a playthrough of Dragon Age 2 again so I can have a save to import into Inquisition. I went through as a two handed warrior using the vanguard skill tree and the berserker specialization and still find it too pretty weak for a two handed warrior. Even with all the activated abilities to increase offensive the warrior still manages to fall short when compared to the rogue whose massive critical strikes and overpowered 100% chance critical hit abilities make it stronger.

Then we have the mage who at the beginning is the worst class to pick but later on in the game becomes way too overpowered with the elemental attacks and abilities which are able to exploit the weaknesses in any enemy. This is another area where a warrior falls short. So I find a two handed warrior weak in terms of the DPS compared to a rogue who has the advantage with its critical strikes, although on a positive, with vanguard abilities like assail and other abilities to increase knockback, the two handed is able to incapacitate enemies by staggering them or hitting them far. With barrage active with cleave and assail I often hit regular enemies across the entire battlefield giving them no chance for a counter.

Even when the two handed warrior does catch up with the damage a rogue does, the rogue still performs better AoE attacks and single attacks due to its speed and mobility.

Finally we have a sword and shield warrior who is a walking immunity tank even on nightmare.

Anyone else in agreement or am I missing out on something here? Not that I'm bashing the two handed warrior where once I called it completely weak, I just find that for a party based game, the classes don't add up with one another. With all the speed increases by Act III the warrior becomes too fast cancelling out the need to even have any other rogue, other than Varric in the party. For me the game started feeling like bloody Diablo...

This is something I hope is fixed for Inquisition. Origins suffered with some over/under balanced classes too.

Modifié par Eternal Phoenix, 06 juin 2014 - 10:00 .

[cJohnOne]

I don't understand what your saying: Tanks usually don't out dps the rogue class. I found the warriors to be less exciting than Rogues and Mages. Having Warriors equal to the other classes would make the warriors over-powered when you consider their armor class and larger hit points.

I agree that the warrior classes weren't as interesting to play.

[Eternal Phoenix]

I mean that the tank in DA2 is rather strong in terms of defense. Ridiculously strong to the point of near immunity. I actually enjoyed playing as a two handed warrior more so than a rogue or mage but there wasn't really any point in leveling up in the two handed skill tree as the actual strength boosts come from Vanguard and Berseker which can used with a regular sword and shield warrior which for me, almost negates the reason to play as a two hander as a sword and shield warrior can end up just as strong but with more defense. Plus the speed of a one handed warrior further puts it down as the more advantageous warrior build.

[Bigdawg13]

I had a big response typed, but realized it was too long and could be downsized. Note, I only play on nightmare mode, so take that into consideration.

With respect to the OP:
- I agree the 2H warrior is lacking.
- The SnS warrior is a walking immunity tank most of the time.
- The mage, when things work out well, is godly. But when things do not work out, you die very fast.

A few notes I'd like to add to the discussion since we are critiquing the game.
- The hardest part of the game, is preventing your companions from doing something stupid.
- Micromanaging companions becomes tedious so you start letting them die...a lot.
- Anders needs a rune slot in his armor a lot earlier than Act 3.
- The end fights in the DLC (and some of the intermediate fights) are a LOT harder than the rest of the game. They are harder, not only because they dish out a lot more elemental aoe damage, but also because they take advantage of your companion's stupid AI.

This being said, I still love the game. I've played through it multiple times. It gets old, but a few months go by and I pull it out again and love it all the more. Can't wait for Inquisition to arrive.

[Eternal Phoenix]

I will admit that after the all the DA2 hype and hate that coming back to the game a few years later has shown it in a different light. I do actually enjoy the combat and I think the only flaws with it are the imbalances between classes, waves of enemies and ridiculous attack animations but fundamentally the combat is Origins combat (relying on statistics and abilities) but simply faster.

But I also noted some other things such as the character creator and some bugs within it that haven't been fixed still and the recycled areas and low textured characters still annoy me.

However I won't deny it's an enjoyable game even if my choices don't matter in the end...

Inquisition looks sweet though even if it is more action-orientated.

Modifié par Eternal Phoenix, 16 novembre 2014 - 08:14 .

[ElementalFury106]

*play on Nightmare, all opinions based on Nightmare playthrough(s) experiences*

Every class has its pros and cons, but each have a definitive purpose.

1) No one is ever going to out DPS a Rogue. Rogues are DESIGNED for being the most proefficient at DPS and speed.
2) A Mage is structured to be underwhelming at first, but ascend to more powerful and dangerous levels through strategic progession.
3) 2H Warriors aren't meant to be all about DPS or even hitting the hardest, but to charge into groups and contain threats while dealing satisfactory-damage.
4) SnS Warriors are supposed to be tanky and take the brute of the damage for the team...why consider them unbalenced for doing well at their role is beyond me.

[Eternal Phoenix]

Because in every other RPG the warriors have the best strength and therefore physical damage (as they should because logically, a greatsword weighing tons, being slashed against your body should do more damage than someone slashing a dagger against it). This was also the case for all prior Bioware RPG's but here the warrior has to go to extreme lengths just to come out top above a rogue.

The rogue does more damage in this game because the eventual unlock of abilities giving you 100% critical chance means that the rogue always gets double damage. Surely you can see how that's broken? One passive skill gives you 100% critical damage when you're flanking an enemy and some abilities have 100% critical chance combined with 200% increased damage.

As Bigdawg13 put it:

- 2H warrior is lacking.
- The SnS warrior is a walking immunity tank most of the time.
- The mage, when things work out well, is godly. But when things do not work out, you die very fast.

So again. I still think there was a lot of under-balancing. It's no surprise that when you type "Dragon Age 2 overpowered class" into Google, rogue and mage come up as suggestions but not warrior.

But I'm personally (again) putting this down to rushed development just like the broken and non-functioning skill of "Destroyer" and possible others that I may have missed.

[jvaz]

Are you guys even playing the two handed warrior properly? You need to use berserker WITH reaver. And whoever mentioned using talents as a berserker -- you are doing it wrong. berserker gets it main extra damage from your willpower stat and if you diminish that by using abilities outside of CCC finishers you are gimping yourself. The only reason you are investing into vanguard tree is to get massacre for the death blow passive to keep your stamina up there and dispatch enemies quicker. Might, Control, Destroyer, Cleave, Claymore, and Massacre is it for Vanguard tree. After you get to 45 ish strength and 38 constitution you put the rest of your points into willpower. When under the effects of barrage, primeval lyrium rune and fervor passive combined with sacrificial frenzy and berserk you will out damage a fully spec'd shadow assassin rogue in auto attack simply because you are hitting multiple enemies with one swing.

Modifié par jvaz, 03 décembre 2013 - 04:02 .

[Eternal Phoenix]

I shouldn't have to be restricted to those two specs. My warrior in Origins simply had berserker and templar and did fine in damage.

[jvaz]

Elton John is dead wrote...

I shouldn't have to be restricted to those two specs. My warrior in Origins simply had berserker and templar and did fine in damage.

Well you can clearly see that this is not Origins.  Reaver synergies better and is more optimal with templar than templar does with berserker.  If playing the optimal way doesn't suit you why play the sub optimal way that you know is worse and then complain about it?

[Magdalena11]

I found the classes pretty much the way you did, OP. I frankly didn't enjoy playing warriors at all. The thing that made them easier to play for me was leaning more on their specializations and setting up/exploiting cross-class combos. I have had to do careful editing of base tactics to exploit this and not be micro-managing all the time. This involved moving tactics around in order as well as changing the situation trigger or action required. My favorite spec is probably the templar tree but everyone will have a different gameplay style and favorite.

[Eternal Phoenix]

jvaz wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

I shouldn't have to be restricted to those two specs. My warrior in Origins simply had berserker and templar and did fine in damage.

Well you can clearly see that this is not Origins.  Reaver synergies better and is more optimal with templar than templar does with berserker.  If playing the optimal way doesn't suit you why play the sub optimal way that you know is worse and then complain about it?

I clearly saw it was not Origins after a few hours with my warrior.

I shouldn't have to read an online guide for what is normally universal in RPG's (i.e warriors equaling bigger damage than other classes by default).

[jvaz]

Elton John is dead wrote...

jvaz wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

I shouldn't have to be restricted to those two specs. My warrior in Origins simply had berserker and templar and did fine in damage.

Well you can clearly see that this is not Origins.  Reaver synergies better and is more optimal with templar than templar does with berserker.  If playing the optimal way doesn't suit you why play the sub optimal way that you know is worse and then complain about it?

I clearly saw it was not Origins after a few hours with my warrior.

I shouldn't have to read an online guide for what is normally universal in RPG's (i.e warriors equaling bigger damage than other classes by default).

This is bioware were talking bout here, they aren't default RPGs.   soldier/warrior classes haven't been the damage dealers for quite a while now.  Even in Origins warriors did the least damage overall.

You don't have to read a guide but it sure helps out a ton.  Give it a try before you knock it. 

[shepisavanguardgetoverit]

@OP are you running the bravery stance? Plus you should be using assail and cleave from the vanguard tree on cd.  Might stance with its upgrade will help allot as well.  Also beserker/reaver IS  a no brainer if you are looking for dps.  Its as simple as that. Reaver gives u a bunch of dps boosts plus the lower your health is the more damage u start to deal. Beserker has a stacking +% damage boost that stacks up to 10 times (don't quote me on this been a while since I have played).  So the basic approach to combat is to beserk a bunch of times + assail + cleave and go for it.  Once u start killing stuff the +attack speed boost after killing an enemy from the reaver tree will help your dps skyrocket. Its duration is also reset by each consecutive kill.  Also giant's reach is a must as well.  +1m hit radius is more powerful than u think.  

The key thing to remember about 2h warriors in da2 is they spread there damage out over multiple enemies, so the more dudes your fighting the higher the +damage +attack and +crit chance bonus from bravery is, therefore the more damage u will deal.  To this end I actually find taunt usefull as i taunt, stuff clusters around me and I use a whirlwind and aoe stagger everything.  You get the most from warriors by exploiting the cross class combo's.  A mage that can brittle is a warriors best friend as enemies will have less armor therefore taking more damage. Also a mage that can exploit the stagger effect will boost the dps of the whole party.

No class in da2 can match a rogue for single target dps. That is there role, to wittle down individual targets with precision and speed, they dont last as long in direct combat with hordes of enemies (which da2 just loves to throw at u). 

[mr_afk]

As a genre rpgs seem to have moved towards warriors having more durability (hp/shields), rogues having more single target damage (crit chance/crit damage), and mages having elemental damage and crowd control abilities. While this may be a little unintuitive, it does have logical balance reasons once you consider the reduced importance/exclusiveness of the traditional rogue skills in newer rpgs (e.g. stealth, persuasion, lockpicking, stealing, finding traps, using magical items), and the increased importance placed on combat.

It has been mentioned, but this can already be seen in DA:O. A properly specced rogue in DA:O deals significantly more damage than a warrior - especially given their access to backstabs - however for the majority of the game (until rogues are able to dodge everything), warriors are much more durable and able to tank more damage.

And before it's said that this is a terrible change that should never have happened, such a change is actually the logical progression from having smaller party setups/voiced dialogue. Maintaining the traditional need for utility party members in a smaller party would be a hassle (i.e. for scouting, unlocking, persuading, and obtaining better prices), and locking out content for those that don't bring them along isn't fun for anyone.

So instead of having to choose between the pinacle of combat prowess and the opposite (falling apart when an enemy sneezes at them, missing the majority of attacks, and having to rely on sneak attacks to deal decent damage), we have a more balanced choice between decent aoe damage and tanking abilities, or high single target dps and evasive abilities. For a more combat oriented game, the choice between high damage, high attack-rating, high hp, the ability to equip heavier armour, compared to the opposite, isn't really a choice at all.


That said, DA2 classes are relatively balanced, and a properly specced (and played) warrior can clear rooms at a similar speed to rogues, if not faster. Just watch some of Arelex's videos/speedruns - the ability to hit multiple enemies at once allows a warrior (particularly 2H) to clear out entire clusters of enemies at once. This means that instead of having to jump from one enemy to another, a warrior just needs the enemies close together. Warriors also get access to a lot more damage and attack-speed modifying abilities, so specced for damage, their spike damage compares to a rogue. It's hard to say that warriors are weak damage-wise when they can kill an entire cluster of enemies with their spike damage - especially since enemies should automatically cluster around them when they do their jobs at drawing and holding threat.

So long story short, DA2 has a great balance between the roles, combat effectiveness, and feel of the three classes - and I don't think it's fair to draw a comparison between different levels of optimisation. A well-specced rogue will obviously seem much more powerful than a warrior not utilising it's advantages of aoe spike damage, damage modifiers, and ridiculously fast attackspeed.

[frustratemyself]

Elton John is dead wrote...

I shouldn't have to read an online guide for what is normally universal in RPG's (i.e warriors equaling bigger damage than other classes by default).

I haven't experienced this in rpg's I've played. I've always found nuker mages and rogues to be the biggest damage dealers. They are glass cannons so it balances out by them having less survivability than warriors.

[Eternal Phoenix]

jvaz wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

jvaz wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

I shouldn't have to be restricted to those two specs. My warrior in Origins simply had berserker and templar and did fine in damage.

Well you can clearly see that this is not Origins.  Reaver synergies better and is more optimal with templar than templar does with berserker.  If playing the optimal way doesn't suit you why play the sub optimal way that you know is worse and then complain about it?

I clearly saw it was not Origins after a few hours with my warrior.

I shouldn't have to read an online guide for what is normally universal in RPG's (i.e warriors equaling bigger damage than other classes by default).

This is bioware were talking bout here, they aren't default RPGs.   soldier/warrior classes haven't been the damage dealers for quite a while now.  Even in Origins warriors did the least damage overall.

You don't have to read a guide but it sure helps out a ton.  Give it a try before you knock it. 

You know what? I will.

[Dank Rafft]

jvaz wrote...

This is bioware were talking bout here, they aren't default RPGs.   soldier/warrior classes haven't been the damage dealers for quite a while now.  Even in Origins warriors did the least damage overall.

In Origins warriors did the highest damage overall. Massive defense (nearly unhittable/magic immune), fast like hell and the highest DPS all over the place by far. In Awakening warriors are even superior. They can kill tougher enemies in a few seconds alone while the rest of the party only scratches the HP bar of another (equally powerful) enemy just a bit.

Hint: pure DEX dagger dual wielding autoattack face rolling tank. 

[jvaz]

Custos Orcinianus wrote...

jvaz wrote...

This is bioware were talking bout here, they aren't default RPGs.   soldier/warrior classes haven't been the damage dealers for quite a while now.  Even in Origins warriors did the least damage overall.

In Origins warriors did the highest damage overall. Massive defense (nearly unhittable/magic immune), fast like hell and the highest DPS all over the place by far. In Awakening warriors are even superior. They can kill tougher enemies in a few seconds alone while the rest of the party only scratches the HP bar of another (equally powerful) enemy just a bit.

Hint: pure DEX dagger dual wielding autoattack face rolling tank. 

In origjns highest DPS was always done by backstabbing dex rogues.  In awakening the highest DPS came from archers dude. 

Modifié par jvaz, 14 décembre 2013 - 01:51 .

[Eternal Phoenix]

From critical attacks.

There's a difference between the basic attacks of the rogues and the basic attacks of the warrior.

The warrior would do far more powerful attacks in any position. The rogue only out-powered the warrior if she/he went behind an enemy or flanked them. DA2 made this incredibly easily (especially with the rogue's teleportation ability) and all the incredibly passive bonuses they gained.

Hopefully Inquisition puts more work into the classes this time because the rogue was still way over-powered however you look at it.

[jvaz]

The only way to properly use the dw rogue in Origins was to control them and backstab. In that manner whether the hit was critical or normal it still did way more damage than a warriors attacks because that was the way they were meant to be used.

In awakening archers were the cream of the crop. Set up properly i could get my archer warden doing 400 to 750 damage a hit. With all the weapon and gear bonuses and sustains you get almost guaranteed critical at that point.

[Dank Rafft]

jvaz wrote...

The only way to properly use the dw rogue in Origins was to control them and backstab. In that manner whether the hit was critical or normal it still did way more damage than a warriors attacks because that was the way they were meant to be used.

Wrong. The warrior can easily achieve a high crit rate, so the backstab bonus of a rogue is nearly negligible. The rogue needs time to set up his attacks properly. The warrior rushes in starts attacking. So the rogue loses additional DPS by time. Furthermore the warrior has far higher base damage than the rogue.
The warrior can achieve a DPS of >1000. In Awakening it gets even better.

jvaz wrote...

In awakening archers were the cream of the crop. Set up properly i could get my archer warden doing 400 to 750 damage a hit. With all the weapon and gear bonuses and sustains you get almost guaranteed critical at that point.

If you're talking about warrior archers you're right. The arey awesome, extremely damaging and safe to play due to their distance advantage - even close range. The don't need to move to hit moving targets. That's one of the biggest advantages. But warrior DEX dagger beasts are still undefeated in terms of DPS and tankiness.

Modifié par Custos Orcinianus, 14 décembre 2013 - 03:16 .

[amggrunt]

Eternal Phoenix one thing everyone forgets about DA2 was that in version 1.0 every enemy attack had a knock back effect that checked against your strength rating. This meant that if your warrior wasn't maintaining aggro through out the entire fight your super high DPS rogue was basicly getting stun locked the entire time.

 

In one of the patches they removed this knock back effect and suddenly DW rogues became easy mode.

[Eternal Phoenix]

Eternal Phoenix one thing everyone forgets about DA2 was that in version 1.0 every enemy attack had a knock back effect that checked against your strength rating. This meant that if your warrior wasn't maintaining aggro through out the entire fight your super high DPS rogue was basicly getting stun locked the entire time.

 

In one of the patches they removed this knock back effect and suddenly DW rogues became easy mode.

 

By the time I played as the rogue, the game had been patched and I do agree that the game was easier as one.

 

I'm glad to see the community has finally realized this about the classes though. When I made a topic on the weaknesses of the two hander when DA2 first came, a bunch of emotional trolls who thought DA2 was the perfect game attempted using every trick in the book to dispute that.

 

The simple fact is: My great hammer, smashing down on someone's skull, should do more damage than a dagger impacting someone's plate armor.

[TheWhitefire]

Presumably, your dagger isn't impacting their plate and is actually sliding into their weak spots. That's the fluff on how DW rogues work, at any rate. Still prefer Archer Rogues, myself. More versatility in role there (they work equally well as a single-target scrapper as a multi-target nuke machine/controller). 

 

I will say I'm not a huge fan of the low single-target DPS of TH and SNS warriors, but I do enjoy laying low five hurlocks at once.