760 réponses à ce sujet

[Star fury]

This really doesn't bother me in the slightest.

But you have to:

1) Uphold the public trust.
2) Protect the innocent.


Many people care about tactics even if you don't. It's called a choice.

[Star fury]

Not surprised to see you gif spamming yet another thread.

[AlanC9]

Not surprised to see you gif spamming yet another thread.

Why shouldn't a gif be used to respond to a gif post?

[Meltemph]

Why shouldn't a gif be used to respond to a gif post?

Because he disagree's with that one; his level, get on it.

[Star fury]

Why shouldn't a gif be used to respond to a gif post?

The poster I quoted almost exclusively gif spams with a very little amount of normal messages. Mods ban for gif spam.
The message that was quoted by spammer doesn't have annoying gifs and another poster had decency to hide pics with spoilers.

[Biotic Sage]

If Bioware has really decided to make Tactics simpler at the cost of potential player customization of effective strategies, then this is a very poor decision that is frankly indefensible.  Obviously DA:I is done and I'm going to have fun with the game as it is, but they need to understand through feedback that most people are not ok with this.  Party based combat is DA's main draw, and to limit a core component of that is baffling; I already pause and micro-manage enough on harder difficulties, definitely don't want to be doing it more than necessary when I have a certain behavior that I know for sure a character should be doing every time that situation occurs.

 

For example: I want Rogues attacking enemies that are panicked every single time.  I want them to stop whatever else they are doing and focus all of their firepower on panicked/stunned enemies.  That's because I'm going to give my Rogues "Mercy Killing" passive which grants auto-crit hits on panicked/stunned enemies.  There's no reason they should be doing anything else, and I don't want to have to tell them myself every time.  

 

I hope Bioware sees this.  Can't wait to play the game and it looks like you did a great job; but consider this moving forward to future entries in the series.  This feels like taking out the tactical cam all over again...

[Meltemph]

If Bioware has really decided to make Tactics simpler at the cost of potential player customization of effective strategies, then this is a very poor decision that is frankly indefensible.  Obviously DA:I is done and I'm going to have fun with the game as it is, but they need to understand through feedback that most people are not ok with this.  Party based combat is DA's main draw, and to limit a core component of that is baffling; I already pause and micro-manage enough on harder difficulties, definitely don't want to be doing it more than necessary when I have a certain behavior that I know for sure a character should be doing every time that situation occurs.

 

For example: I want Rogues attacking enemies that are panicked every single time.  I want them to stop whatever else they are doing and focus all of their firepower on panicked/stunned enemies.  That's because I'm going to give my Rogues "Mercy Killing" passive which grants auto-crit hits on panicked/stunned enemies.  There's no reason they should be doing anything else, and I don't want to have to tell them myself every time.  

 

I hope Bioware sees this.  Can't wait to play the game and it looks like you did a great job; but consider this moving forward to future entries in the series.  This feels like taking out the tactical cam all over again...

That is quite the statement, w/o data backing it up.

[Biotic Sage]

That is quite the statement, w/o data backing it up.

 

Yes, the gaming community has always been very happy about developers removing useful features.

[Meltemph]

Yes, the gaming community has always been very happy about developers removing useful features.

There are plenty of people in here who are not as big of fans of the gambit system as others. To infer a majority is silly, why not just speak for yourself?

[CronoDragoon]

Yes, the gaming community has always been very happy about developers removing useful features.

 

It's possible that the things you've described will now be done automatically. Basically, the range of possibility for this is "my companions do all the obvious things I used to have to program tactics for" to "my companions are acting like idiots". That doesn't mean I'm happy with removing the option to let me handle their AI, but since as you said DA: I is done at this point I'm more interested in what we're going to have.

 

I can't imagine a system where a rogue with Mercy Killing doesn't prioritize panicked/stunned enemies, for example, just like I can't imagine a system where companions don't automatically take advantage of a setup for CC combos. If they do, then fine whatever, I'll grumble but since it won't demonstrably change my actual combat experience much, I'll deal with it. If the AI doesn't do this and we have to do it manually then it's a pretty significant failing.

 

But like I said, BioWare has earned the benefit of my doubt.

[Biotic Sage]

It's possible that the things you've described will now be done automatically. Basically, the range of possibility for this is "my companions do all the obvious things I used to have to program tactics for" to "my companions are acting like idiots". That doesn't mean I'm happy with removing the option to let me handle their AI, but since as you said DA: I is done at this point I'm more interested in what we're going to have.

 

There are way too many variables and viable strategies for everything every player wants their party to do to happen automatically.  I certainly hope the AI has been improved to handle the basic "not acting like idiots" like you said; but when you improve the general AI and at the same time remove the deep customization potential of tactics, you aren't ultimately evolving your party-based RPG.

 

And yes, I'm far more interested in what we have too.  But if nobody (or not enough people) said anything about the better tactics system being removed, then Bioware would think, "Eh, I guess it wasn't that big of deal to people to begin with.  One less thing to worry about implementing moving forward."  And I plan on sticking with this series for a while, so I spoke my peace.

[Almostfaceman]

And yes, I'm far more interested in what we have too.  But if nobody (or not enough people) said anything about the better tactics system being removed, then Bioware would think, "Eh, I guess it wasn't that big of deal to people to begin with.  One less thing to worry about implementing moving forward."  And I plan on sticking with this series for a while, so I spoke my peace.

 

That's cool, but I don't think Bioware designs their games based mainly on what people complained about in the past. These guys/gals seem to have a lot of their own preferences they bring to the table. 

 

We'll see what happens, like others here on the boards I'm at the point where I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. 

[Biotic Sage]

That's cool, but I don't think Bioware designs their games based mainly on what people complained about in the past. These guys/gals seem to have a lot of their own preferences they bring to the table. 

 

We'll see what happens, like others here on the boards I'm at the point where I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. 

 

I have no doubt I'll enjoy any Bioware game I play because that's always been the case.  It doesn't mean I've agreed with every decision in every game.  Tactical cam being removed in DA2 was one example of this, even though I enjoyed DA2.  And as we can see, they've brought it back because enough people gave feedback about it.  Overly-simplifying the level up system in ME2 was another feature I wasn't fond of, even though I actually thought ME2 was a better game as a whole than ME1.  And enough people spoke up about that, and they listened and brought a much more thoughtful approach to the level up system for ME3.

 

That's all this is.  Some people get very defensive when they hear any sort of criticism.  And I've been on these forums enough to understand why they'd have a gut defensive reaction to it, believe me.  A large number of people don't know how to voice criticism in a reasonable and respectful manner and it wears on the community.

[ViSeiRa]

Just saw a video by Gamekult, the image showing the tactics screen is old, this is one from their hands-on vid showing an option called tactics settings, so these are most likely the if-then scenarios we thought were missing:

 

[Brogan]

Just saw a video by Gamekult, the image showing the tactics screen is old, this is one from their hands-on vid showing an option called tactics settings, so these are most likely the if-then scenarios we thought were missing:
 

Nope. That is clearly 'hit square' to adjust the highlighted tactic (presumably between the check mark, 'X', or star mentioned earlier in thread)

If there was a different screen to go to it would be shown at the top most likely.

[Looper128]

Just saw a video by Gamekult, the image showing the tactics screen is old, this is one from their hands-on vid showing an option called tactics settings, so these are most likely the if-then scenarios we thought were missing:

 

 

Please let this mean we atleast can costumize it a bit, like only use this attack againt that thing.

[IVI4RCU5]

Just saw a video by Gamekult, the image showing the tactics screen is old, this is one from their hands-on vid showing an option called tactics settings, so these are most likely the if-then scenarios we thought were missing:

 

YES!  At the very least, there's more to it. 

[Brogan]

....
 
For example: I want Rogues attacking enemies that are panicked every single time.  I want them to stop whatever else they are doing and focus all of their firepower on panicked/stunned enemies.  That's because I'm going to give my Rogues "Mercy Killing" passive which grants auto-crit hits on panicked/stunned enemies.  There's no reason they should be doing anything else, and I don't want to have to tell them myself every time...

Quoting this again so everyone understands exactly what is potentially going to be lost if they really did dumb down the tactics.

Hopefully a dev will wander by and notice this and reassure us that No, this is still in the game, We are not total morons.

[IVI4RCU5]

Nope. That is clearly 'hit square' to adjust the highlighted tactic (presumably between the check mark, 'X', or star mentioned earlier in thread)

If there was a different screen to go to it would be shown at the top most likely.

I've never seen a star.  Presumably Check = mapped to battle menu / X = not mapped to battle menu.  I'm willing to bet "Tactics Setting" is something else more in-depth. 

[Brogan]

I've never seen a star.  Presumably Check = mapped to battle menu / X = not mapped to battle menu.  I'm willing to bet "Tactics Setting" is something else more in-depth.

It's to cycle the individual setting for the highlighted item in the list. Consoles don't have mouse cursors. That area on the screen can't be interacted with.

[IVI4RCU5]

It's to cycle the individual setting for the highlighted item in the list. Consoles don't have mouse cursors. That area on the screen can't be interacted with.

Uh... and why is it not possible that X switches the ability between on hotbar/off hotbar and square opens a new screen where you adjust when the AI uses that particular ability?

[Brogan]

I'm willing to bet "Tactics Setting" is something else more in-depth.

The only screen where there would be any chance of some semblance of traditional (to Dragon Age) tactics designating would be in this one:

Behaviours 

Spoiler

.

... and the hope that there are way more than those 4 items, and that they get much more complex than, 'stop using abilities'.

Btw, can someone explain to me why anyone would not set that 1st setting to 0%? Why would you need to save mana/stamina for after the fight is over? Both regenerate.