I always got the enemy, but the AOE is so large is often hit my own pc. Ex: blizzard. The gameplay is just poor. DA2 greatly improved it at least. If you don't agree then there's nothing I can say to change your mind.
I always got the enemy, but the AOE is so large is often hit my own pc. Ex: blizzard. The gameplay is just poor. DA2 greatly improved it at least. If you don't agree then there's nothing I can say to change your mind.
Except for Storm of the Century and Paralysis Explosion, the AoE indicator shows exactly where the area of effect is going to be. That makes it possible to place the other spells within an inch of precision, despite their much larger AoE.
Paralysis Explosion and Storm of the Century aren't much more difficult and can be placed with the same precision, once you realise that the diameter of the AoE indicator can show how close its edge (PE) or centre (SotC) can be to the caster while keeping them just outside the AoE. It's pretty much exactly like Kitty said.
It only gets difficult if the terrain is uneven and there are no characters around to gauge the actual AoE. If you move the targetting indicator until a toon gets highlighted and then back a bit until the toon goes dark again, then that character will be just outside the AoE.
The only AoE damage spells without an exact indicator or built-in measuring tool are Walking Bomb and Virulent Walking Bomb.
If you want to live dangerously, cast an AoE spell on a moving enemy.
Same here - I dislike enemies with lists of immunities and resistances as long as your arm, almost all of which exist only to frustrate mages.
But what I hate with a passion is the ever-present gratuitous spell resistance. The game system has dodge, so they could fsck things up a bit for physical fighters as well, and their spell-like abilities and stuns could reasonably be made subject to spell resistance. But they aren't, even though dodge is nowhere near as bad for a fighter as spell resistance is for a (soloing) mage.
The problem with spell resistance is that elites and bosses tend to have a lot of it. Runs of three or four resisted spells in a row aren't particularly rare, and two resisted spells in a row occur in most battles at least once. Against bosses like Piotin and Jarvia - hard hitters with a hard-hitting entourage - a double spell resist almost always means certain death. Not to mention that something like Nightmare flies only if you can cast a chain of four to five spells without any of the spells being gratuitously resisted. Meaning that full success is so rare that you can mark the day red in your calendar (as yesterday against the spider queen, w00t).
Today I had to fight Piotin again, in the name of science. His troops were erased, his health was down to the tiniest sliver of red - about an Arcane Bolt's worth - and he was some twenty metres away. Ajira was at 100% HP. Four resisted spells later she was dead.
This could have been avoid with distribution shaping (like a 2d6 instead of the roughly similar 1d12), or by cheating as they did with stuns. If they can shorten the duration of repeat stuns to one fourth, then they could gently decrease the probability of outliers to avoid things like a bugger who resists four spells in a row on the strength of 5% spell resist. Not to mention the really big cheats, like instant auto-hit abilities. If you start casting Mind Blast when a wolf is ten, fifteen metres away then the beast can run the remaining distance, decide to overwhelm, and win.
The only major difference between the AoE spells of Origins and DA2 was that there was no friendly fire for any difficulty below nightmare in DA2. Was that a good thing?
Really? How about that there is no blizzard spell at all in DA2? Or earthquake? Or what about the changes to death cloud where instead of doing simple damage it targets an individual with drops in attack, attack speed, enemy defense, movement speed, damage resistance, and a chance of paralysis/sleep/stun? Or that you can no longer be knocked on your ass from AOE spells? Or that fire storm is 10 falling fire balls in DA2 while in DA:O it's some moving fire tornado?
No FF means not being hurt by your own spells. But if one takes the time to look at where spells are being cast, the same usually occurs. Blaming the spells for what appears to be poor tactical choices is seemingly poor sportsmanship.
Considering how your companions just charge into a the fray against a cluster of enemies, I'd find it hard to not commit friendly fire. And yet, I've always been a casual Dragon Age player so I'm sure people really into it work around that.
There were many instances where the area was cramped enough that an AOE spell would cover the entire room with me in it. Or if enemies were right on me and running wouldn't help casting an AOE spell would keep us all immobile while at least hurting them.
Really? How about that there is no blizzard spell at all in DA2? Or earthquake? Or what about the changes to death cloud where instead of doing simple damage it targets an individual with drops in attack, attack speed, enemy defense, movement speed, damage resistance, and a chance of paralysis/sleep/stun? Or that you can no longer be knocked on your ass from AOE spells? Or that fire storm is 10 falling fire balls in DA2 while in DA:O it's some moving fire tornado?
Considering how your companions just charge into a the fray against a cluster of enemies, I'd find it hard to not commit friendly fire. And yet, I've always been a casual Dragon Age player so I'm sure people really into it work around that.
There were many instances where the area was cramped enough that an AOE spell would cover the entire room with me in it. Or if enemies were right on me and running wouldn't help casting an AOE spell would keep us all immobile while at least hurting them.
Same here - I dislike enemies with lists of immunities and resistances as long as your arm, almost all of which exist only to frustrate mages.
But what I hate with a passion is the ever-present gratuitous spell resistance. The game system has dodge, so they could fsck things up a bit for physical fighters as well, and their spell-like abilities and stuns could reasonably be made subject to spell resistance. But they aren't, even though dodge is nowhere near as bad for a fighter as spell resistance is for a (soloing) mage.
The problem with spell resistance is that elites and bosses tend to have a lot of it. Runs of three or four resisted spells in a row aren't particularly rare, and two resisted spells in a row occur in most battles at least once. Against bosses like Piotin and Jarvia - hard hitters with a hard-hitting entourage - a double spell resist almost always means certain death. Not to mention that something like Nightmare flies only if you can cast a chain of four to five spells without any of the spells being gratuitously resisted. Meaning that full success is so rare that you can mark the day red in your calendar (as yesterday against the spider queen, w00t).
Today I had to fight Piotin again, in the name of science. His troops were erased, his health was down to the tiniest sliver of red - about an Arcane Bolt's worth - and he was some twenty metres away. Ajira was at 100% HP. Four resisted spells later she was dead.
This could have been avoid with distribution shaping (like a 2d6 instead of the roughly similar 1d12), or by cheating as they did with stuns. If they can shorten the duration of repeat stuns to one fourth, then they could gently decrease the probability of outliers to avoid things like a bugger who resists four spells in a row on the strength of 5% spell resist. Not to mention the really big cheats, like instant auto-hit abilities. If you start casting Mind Blast when a wolf is ten, fifteen metres away then the beast can run the remaining distance, decide to overwhelm, and win.
Does Paralytic Explosion break through spell resistance? I know Winter's Grasp can still freeze (and stop) mobs for a few secs even if they resist the spell and don't take damage. Maybe others, would have to look through the list.
Mages should've probably been given something to lower spell resistance, but they're so overpowered already that anything to make them stronger seems unnecessary...Also, a warrior who's a templar built to destroy mages, I believe should be able to make things extremely hard/near impossible for the mage since that's their whole goal in life...Just my thoughts.
Considering how your companions just charge into a the fray against a cluster of enemies, I'd find it hard to not commit friendly fire. And yet, I've always been a casual Dragon Age player so I'm sure people really into it work around that.
There were many instances where the area was cramped enough that an AOE spell would cover the entire room with me in it. Or if enemies were right on me and running wouldn't help casting an AOE spell would keep us all immobile while at least hurting them.
Did you play on the console and at lower resolutions? I find playing most/any games in lower rez seems to make the play field just too small...
I just replayed the fight with Piotin with my first mage with bad spell choices and he does resist a bit of spells...The main tactic I use however is paralytic explosion which hits well enough, then inferno and force field myself after I unload all my spells and wait for the cooldown timer...
If he isn't paralyzed, then usually something like mind blast, fireball, cone of cold (my char didn't have this), winter's grasp or something else will hit...If not, at that level, you should have plenty of hit points to survive sitting in an inferno for a while to at least cast that and follow up with force field on yourself so even if he resists a good chunk of the damage, his minions will probably be dead already.
Can't force field him with the bug fix mod...
I criticize the combat from my experience and hence people throw tactics at me to avoid some of my issues, but they're missing the point. I shouldn't need to become an expert at DA:O to potentially, but not likely, have fun with the gameplay. From my subjective experience gameplay in DA:O sucked. From combat to leveling mechanics it was poorly done. I feel DA2 improved on it.
I did play on casual.
That's really fine...At the end of the day, people simply like different things out of life/tv shows/movies/games whatever and if DA:O just didn't do it for you, move on. Whatever the reason, it wasn't your thing and it's probably a waste of everyone's time to try to convince you otherwise...
or you trying to convince people that Skyrim was all that...
I never played Skyrim yet, but it sounds like some people actually don't like the whole open world freedom...
Again, different strokes for different folks. Waste of time to convince anyone on the Internet anything really...
I played the Witcher (1st one) and didn't find the combat that great...no idea if that was considered a good combat game...maybe I didn't play it enough to get good at it...Played Dark Souls and combat was fun (action oriented), but after a bit, I suppose it was more about timing overall (to say be able to parry anything).
I think some people also have different preferences like I don't like the 1st person combat as much like Skyrim since looks a little like a FPS. DA:O probably appeals to my 3rd person isometric and turn based game playing bias...
I criticize the combat from my experience and hence people throw tactics at me to avoid some of my issues, but they're missing the point. I shouldn't need to become an expert at DA:O to potentially, but not likely, have fun with the gameplay. From my subjective experience gameplay in DA:O sucked. From combat to leveling mechanics it was poorly done. I feel DA2 improved on it.
Such is your opinion, I won't question it.
Me personally, I felt it wasn't so much about tactics but more about knowing how to level up your character. For example, if you're a warrior with a two handed weapon, and you know that's how you want to specialize your combat at the beginning of the game, you would level up your stats differently than if you wanted to be a sword/shield combo, dual wield, or specialize in bows. It's also about knowing what role your character will play in your party, and which companions will complement you best.
DA2 had less of that, but I'm glad you enjoyed it.
Congokong does have a point, though. With my first character I used auto-levelling and let the AI take care of the companions, on the assumption that I knew nothing about the game (which was certainly true) and that the devs would have known what they were doing (which is where I was horribly wrong). The difficulty slider didn't seem to have any appreciable effect in situations where my party was overwhelmed and outgunned (Brecilian right after Lothering).
There was a little booklet like in KotOR and NWN, but the information there was so minimal and superficial that it was by and large useless for decisions regarding combat, tactics, character development and so on, and everybody knows what a sick joke the in-game descriptions are. Needless to say, that character died at level 10 after he picked an unwinnable fight with a revenant...
That's why I started the Jedi Warden Academy, as a place where people could find inspiration and information about the ways of Wardening.
Retour en haut