76 réponses à ce sujet

[OynxDragon666]

The warrior was one of the most versatile classes in combat in DA:O due to being able to master all the of weapon skills. and I think the weapon skill restrictions on what the warrior and rogue classes in DA:2 was a mistake. It also allowed for more flexibility for both classes, it allowed a warrior to have a ranged attack and the duel weapon skills in DA:O had the best crowd control melee moves.

 

I also miss the ability to have two sets of weapons it allowed players to quickly change weapons depending on the situation, also the ability to duel wield longswords and other main hand weapons .

 

The main reason I want the class skill settings restored is because I want to duel wield Starfang and Vigilance, Vigilance was  in DA:2 coding but is unobtainable on console versions (would be nice to pick which variants of these swords you could get or get both)

[Icinix]

I agree on both points.

 

Weapon switching in particular is something I use quite heavily.

 

Also removing class restrictions on weapon usage. Dragon Age 2 felt to restricted in its classes.

[NoForgiveness]

id rather have the classes not share weapons, as it would make them too similar.

[Icinix]

id rather have the classes not share weapons, as it would make them too similar.

 

At the very least the Warrior should be unrestricted in weapon use.

 

As above though offsets for usage apply.

 

In certain scenarios, for example, the massive penalty to speed and attack for a rogue equipping sword and shield is totally justified for the massive increase in defence over knives.

 

The classes still have their abilities and their strengths and weaknesses - the only difference is the restriction in items allows a greater range of classes within classes.

[Sylvius the Mad]

id rather have the classes not share weapons, as it would make them too similar.

Why is that a problem?

If you like the Rogue as it is, and we add options to the Warrior, that changes nothing about the Rogue. And if you like the Warrior as it is, and we add options, you can not use them.

There's no downside to allowing the Warrior to be the master of all non-magical weapons. And that's what I think the Warrior should be. The Rogue's strength should come from other abilities, or even non-combat utility.

[NoForgiveness]

Why is that a problem?

If you like the Rogue as it is, and we add options to the Warrior, that changes nothing about the Rogue. And if you like the Warrior as it is, and we add options, you can not use them.

There's no downside to allowing the Warrior to be the master of all non-magical weapons. And that's what I think the Warrior should be. The Rogue's strength should come from other abilities, or even non-combat utility.

 

I just want classes to really truly be different then each other. If half of one class is exactly the same as just about all of the other class, then it feels like one of those is pointless to have/use/whatever. Im not actually opposed to sharing weapons but id want the skill trees for those weapons to be way different from each other.

[jlb524]

I just want classes to really truly be different then each other. If half of one class is exactly the same as just about all of the other class, then it feels like one of those is pointless to have/use/whatever. Im not actually opposed to sharing weapons but id want the skill trees for those weapons to be way different from each other.

 

I think the different specs for each class would help with this.  A DW Reaver should feel different from a DW Assassin.

[TheWhitefire]

I think a dual weapon rogue should feel vastly different from a dual weapon warrior, regardless of specialization. Same thing with an archer warrior and an archer rogue.

 

Although to be honest, I think now is a bit late to be requesting this big of a feature change. The game is coming out in four months. They're not going to suddenly restructure a basic feature of the game because some players are angry over not having dual wielding warriors anymore (because lets be honest, that's what this has been about for a while now).

[Hanako Ikezawa]

I too would prefer the Rogues having access to a Rogue-only weapon skill. Doesn't have to be DW or Bows, but something. 

[OynxDragon666]

compared to the duel wielding skill set in Origins, the rogue doesn't have any good attacks for crowds control in DA:2 (except for those bombs skills the rogue can throw) and bringing back the old settings would allow the rogue to instantly switch between weapon sets without going to the menu.

 

I would also like the old class specializations, don't know why the arcane warrior was removed in DA:2 but with the improved combat mechanics in DA:2 it would look a lot better.

[Icinix]

I think a dual weapon rogue should feel vastly different from a dual weapon warrior, regardless of specialization. Same thing with an archer warrior and an archer rogue.

 

Although to be honest, I think now is a bit late to be requesting this big of a feature change. The game is coming out in four months. They're not going to suddenly restructure a basic feature of the game because some players are angry over not having dual wielding warriors anymore (because lets be honest, that's what this has been about for a while now).

 

Well I've been personally hanging out for a duel wielding archer.......

[KaiserShep]

id rather have the classes not share weapons, as it would make them too similar.

This is easily rectified by restricting certain talents related to these weapons. Basically, the rogue would be better suited to take advantage of daggers with certain moves like backstab.

[TheChris92]

Lolno -- The rogue system in Origins was broken. It could barely be distinguished from the Warrior.

 

Not like I'm saying I preferred how it was in DA2. I just didn't like how they were balanced in Origins at all. It was frankly put, a big mess.

[metatheurgist]

We should go back to when rogues couldn't fight. They can have the dagger, sap, short bow and short sword and leather armor only. I'll let the rogue have those exclusively. For Class Distinction!

[rocsage]

《《believing that building inherent, potentially fatal vulnerabilities into characters, playable or otherwise, allows for another layer of specialized planning.

Take Loghain duel, for example.  According to wiki, he can potentially take out a crossbow and shoot, but the aim is terrible.  This gives range-dependent characters a fighting chance against the shield bash, shield pummel, and war cry.

By the same token, if you get within melee range of a high level archer, you effectively nullify the potentially devastating scattering shot by forcing the opposition to use melee and abandon bow.

 

Alternatively, consider da2 mages, aka the wipers.  Boom at any range.  Not sure if developers intended to have players memorize all mage spawn locations, but I really hope that wasn't the primary goal.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I just want classes to really truly be different then each other. If half of one class is exactly the same as just about all of the other class, then it feels like one of those is pointless to have/use/whatever. Im not actually opposed to sharing weapons but id want the skill trees for those weapons to be way different from each other.

I don't see value in the difference for its own sake. All I see here are restrictions.

[Mockingword]

Rogues weren't "more flexible" in DA:O. They got completely shafted.

 

What value is a shield when you're physically incapable of learning the skills required to use it effectively?

[OynxDragon666]

Rogues weren't "more flexible" in DA:O. They got completely shafted.

 

What value is a shield when you're physically incapable of learning the skills required to use it effectively?

Rogues are supposed to be focused at dodging attacks or parrying them, rather then blocking

[Mockingword]

Rogues are supposed to be focused at dodging attacks or parrying them, rather then blocking

Which answers my question how?

[OynxDragon666]

Which answers my question how?

rogues are meant to be high dexterity builds, the higher dexterity the higher the chances of dodging an attack and you can get a dodge statistic to a 100%

[Mockingword]

rogues are meant to be high dexterity builds, the higher dexterity the higher the chances of dodging an attack and you can get a dodge statistic to a 100%

So, what is the value in allowing them to equip a shield, as this thread seems to advocate?

[OynxDragon666]

So, what is the value in allowing them to equip a shield, as this thread seems to advocate?

I meant the restrictions on the weapons rogues are allowed to use, about not being able to duel wield any one handed weapon in  and not about them having the same abilities as the warrior

[OynxDragon666]

Technically the Arishock is also classed as a rogue in DA:2 for duel wielding weapons