94 réponses à ce sujet

[Tirigon]

soteria wrote...

Storm of the century--now see, this is where multiple mages really start to shine.  Have one cast glyph of repulsion while another casts glyph of paralysis, and now everyone is paralyzed, including bosses that normally couldn't be paralyzed.  Now have one mage cast blizzard while the other casts spell might + tempest, and boom, sotc, without any way of being interrupted.  If you really wanted to get unfair you could throw an earthquake or grease or mass paralyze or fireball or blood wound in there as well, just to make sure no one gets out, and add a vulnerability hex just for kicks.  While you're at it, why not cast death cloud + affliction hex + death hex on the boss?  Now everyone is taking 100+ damage a second, and except for the boss, they're probably still paralyzed.

Let´s say it like this: Your strategy sounds cool, and I´d love it if it would actually be like that ingame.
But I found that, on my playthrough, planning combos like that, and even abuses like casting through walls, are - though more fun - actually making the fight harder than having a Dualwielder as PC and just dual sweep -> dual striking -> momentum and watch him own.

[soteria]

If your counter-argument is simply that a dw warrior takes less effort on the part of the player... you said yourself you got bored of that half-way through. Do mages take more pausing and planning than warriors? Yes. But the result really is more power.

[Tirigon]

Yes, mages are strong. But I think saying a class that rewards you for playing good is OP is stupid.

To me, OP means ownage WITHOUT effort to play.

[soteria]

You're entitled to your opinion. I think what you're saying is stupid, too, so I guess it's mutual? I guess we're done here.

[draxynnus]

I think I'd have to agree with Tirigon on this point. It's a single-player game, so the important thing is challenge. If you have to think carefully about what you're doing to get the most out of your character, that at least feels more like a challenge than a character you can run fairly mindlessly, even if the result is more power overall.

Plus, the DW character, and martial characters in general, are probably more forgiving. I hear about being able to make virtually invincible warriors and rogues, but mages who aren't AWs (and by that I mean fully going AW, not just splashing a point so you can wear armour) tend to be fragile, and if something gets to you or you mess up your own spellcasting, you can find yourself in a lot of trouble quite quickly regardless of how powerful you may theoretically be if everything went perfectly.

I will agree that Mana Clash is overpowered, however. I'd like to see Drain, Cleanse, and mana-denial in general made significantly more powerful so that it's actually a viable strategy, but Clash should probably become a case of "like (the new) Cleanse, except it deals damage proportional to the amount of mana lost" rather than being an instant kill and draining of ALL mana. That's something I can probably go into in more detail when the mage Dev Feedback comes up, though.

Storm of the Century I'll say is an interesting option, but not overpowered due to the risk involved in using it properly and the investment you have to make to get it (Lightning is a lacklustre line, and Mana Manipulation would be if Clash is nerfed without some form of compensation). Once you've made that investment, it's possibly the epitome of how Mage balance works - used correctly it can be incredibly powerful, used incorrectly and it can do you more harm than good.

Modifié par draxynnus, 31 janvier 2010 - 03:31 .

[dkjestrup]

Mana Clash should be changed, so it's single target, and it drains all your mana, doing damage equal to Mana lost x 1.5 or something.



And how does a class requiring crowd control any less strong? Easy to learn, hard to master right? It's like comparing a RPG with a Sniper on an FPS. Snipers have bigger clips, are more accurate, and move faster. They have no explosion though. So although they're stronger than an RPG, they require more skill to use. Does that make them any less powerful?

[dkjestrup]

soteria wrote...

*boggle*

Cast Cone of Cold on a group of archers, or any group of enemies. Now cast virulent walking bomb on them. Now cast stonefist on that same person with the walking bomb, and congrats, you just did 250 damage to all of them, and probably killed them in the process even without spell might. That's just one of many ways a mage can do loads of damage in a hurry.

Wow, I can't believe I never thought of that. That's pure genius!

Also, another thing that people seem to overlook, is Glyph of Repulsion, on its own. It is absolutely wonderful when your tank loses aggro, or is disabled somehow, or dies. It means I can take on groups of melee fighters without worrying about parayzing/sleeping them.

[Jono564]

I've played an Arcane Warrior solo and they are strong but get boring fast. You can cast spells but most of your play is just auto attack with 5-6 sustainables running.

With a warrior you can become a Templar and gain access to plate armor with 40% spell resistance, along with other items hit 100%. If you go a dex based dual wield or take the shield talents you can deal with physical damage quite well. As a warrior you have full access to all your weapon abilities to spam during combat. This is more fun then casting 2 spells then auto attack with no other buttons to press.

A mage may technically be better with things like Mana Clash being extremely powerful but both classes are capable of getting the job done.

Modifié par Jono564, 31 janvier 2010 - 08:25 .

[dkjestrup]

You can't argue that Mages aren't the strongest in a combat sense. Other classes are good, sure.



As I said earlier. It's hard to beat the game without Mages. It's a challenge. It's much harder than beating the game without Rogues or Warriors.

[Tirigon]

dkjestrup wrote...
As I said earlier. It's hard to beat the game without Mages. It's a challenge. It's much harder than beating the game without Rogues or Warriors.

Wrong. My Dualwielder warrior didn´t need mages. My mage needs warriors to tank.

[soteria]

My mage really doesn't. I think you're doing something wrong. Plus, although my mage is only hurt by the presence of a dw warrior--I have to be more careful about aoe--your dw warrior will be many times more effective with a mage along to cast flaming weapons, miasma, haste, mass paralysis, death hex... and what does the warrior do for the mage? He does a job that is easily replicated with CC.

[Lord Phoebus]

Unfortunately mages are the best at everything in this game other than opening locks and disarming traps.



Crowd Control: no contest.

Buffing other party members: Glyph of Warding, Heroic line of spells, Regeneration, etc. Vs. Bard Songs and Rally

Debuffing enemies: Entropy and Spirit lines.

Healing: Only class that can heal other than the Reaver ability which is self only

AOE Damage: no class comes close.

Spike Damage: Mana Clash, Entropic Death, Nightmare and Shattering vs. Arrow of Slaying and Final Blow

Single Target DPS: Hexes + Crushing Prison + VWB + insect plague + a combo of single target spells and staff damage. Granted only a boss is going to last long enough to stack all this stuff on them, but that boss is going down fast. This is also a fringe build for a single mage, but very easy to set up on multiple mages.

Tanking: With the AW spec they can have the highest armor and defence in the game (they have some problems keeping aggro, but if they start off with an AoE spell they'll probably get most of it and the hexes seem to draw single target aggro better than any other ability in the game)



No mage can do all of these things, but any mage can do 2 or 3 of these things.

[draxynnus]

dkjestrup wrote...

Mana Clash should be changed, so it's single target, and it drains all your mana, doing damage equal to Mana lost x 1.5 or something.

Oh, it definitely needs to be fixed - and the lower things in the tree need to be buffed so they're actually worth using.

Personally, I'd be inclined to at least double the effect of Drain and Cleanse, then make Clash identical to Cleanse except that it deals damage at a 1-1 ratio. This is stuff I'll go into in more detail when the Mage Dev Question shows up.

And how does a class requiring crowd control any less strong? Easy to learn, hard to master right? It's like comparing a RPG with a Sniper on an FPS. Snipers have bigger clips, are more accurate, and move faster. They have no explosion though. So although they're stronger than an RPG, they require more skill to use. Does that make them any less powerful?

And do people call out for snipers to be nerfed in FPS games? Shouldn't the development of that skill have some payoff?

It's because it's a single-player game. If we were playing against each other, then this would be an issue, since the good players would master mages and make everything else obsolete. Since we're talking about a single-player game, however, you essentially have a theoretical-power-versus-complexity scale starting with the warrior, progressing through the rogue and ending with the mage.

Compare two parties you could be running - one has three warriors and a mage, one has three mages and a warrior. The first is probably less powerful on paper - but it's certainly a lot easier to run: you can probably largely get away with leaving the warriors on tactics, and possibly the mage as well if it's Wynne. The three-mage party gives you more options and flexibility at the likely cost of fragility - with such a group, you're probably having to pause and give orders regularly to make the most of it. Really, shouldn't you be getting some benefit for the extra effort required to run a mage-heavy party? If mages and warriors were made equal, then you'd have a situation where the game really would be that much easier with a warrior-heavy party since you can get the same results with much less investment in the part of the player. As things are, while the mage can be more powerful, they're much less forgiving of mistakes, meaning that playing with a mage-heavy party is of similar difficulty to a warrior-heavy one.

Effectively, it comes out in the wash: Warriors are easier because they're easier to run, harder because they are less powerful when you get down to it. Mages easier because they're more powerful if you do things right, harder because if you make a mistake you'll probably get punished a lot more than if you make a mistake with a warrior.(I'm treating a dedicated AW as a warrior here, as such a character will often splash - although the thought does strike me that a party of three warriors and one AW/spirit healer may be the most forgiving of all...)

Now, if warriors (and rogues) were remade so they were of the same complexity to run as a mage, then sure, we can worry about putting them both on the same power level. Simply bringing the mage down to the level of other classes will remove that tradeoff, so instead of being a harder-to-run-but -more-powerful-if-you-master-it class, bringing mages beyond your basic easy-to-run healbot would simply become a de facto hardmode.

(Note, also, that I do think warriors and rogues SHOULD be given stamina potions.)

Modifié par draxynnus, 01 février 2010 - 03:44 .

[dkjestrup]

If you think mages are fragile, you're right. But that can be worked around SOO easily. Just cast a Glyph of Repulsion at your feet. You're just about immune to melee damage. Archers are ridiculously easy with a mage, just throw fireball at them, or sleep them, or shatter them, or trap them in an AoE using CC.

[kosarev]

I cant see how someone still sais mages are not op in this game. You can regain mana easily, while stamina is always low, they can shine more than anyone at any role, and can take 3 roles at a time. WTB a 4 mage team, so enemies dont even move all along the game.

[beancounter501]

Hmm, I do not think a three mage party with no rogues or warriors would be hard at all. Lets see you could bunch them all up and have each one rotate Glyph of Replusion. No need for a tank if no melee character can even get close to you. Drop a glyph of warding on top of that and Archers can not hit you.



Three mages opens up sooo many options. Sleep + 3 horrors = three dead critters every 20 seconds. Cone of cold + 3 Stonefists = 3 dead critters every 15 seconds. Or paralysis explosion + SotC combo = dead everyone. And if the paralysis explosion starts to wear off have another mage make the combo all over again. Spec one or two of the mages as a Spirithealer and your party of three mages will never die. And if one does just revive him.



You could have all three mages be Arcane Warriors, with better defense and higher armor then a regular warrior. Combat Magic/Miasma/Heroic Offense gives you an attack rating that is only a couple of points below a warrior. You could even have two of your mages cast haste and watch your team of three Arcane Warriors buzz saw everything in sight. That is one hit attack every second from all three! Tough boss in the battle - just drop a misdirection hex on them! Or place a death hex on the boss and watch your three AW demolish any boss with melee!



Mages can do it all: Crowd Control, AOE Damage, single target damage, spike damage, buff/debuff, ranged combat and melee.



Don't get me wrong - I like warriors. But in this game the mage is just a beast.

[Sylvius the Mad]

draxynnus wrote...

dkjestrup wrote...

Mana Clash should be changed, so it's single target, and it drains all your mana, doing damage equal to Mana lost x 1.5 or something.

Oh, it definitely needs to be fixed - and the lower things in the tree need to be buffed so they're actually worth using.

I disagree.  Those lower-tier talents are the balancing mechanism.  Mana Clash is hugely powerful, yes, but it takes 4 talent points to buy it and that one spell is basically all you get.

That's terrific design.

[draxynnus]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

draxynnus wrote...

dkjestrup wrote...

Mana Clash should be changed, so it's single target, and it drains all your mana, doing damage equal to Mana lost x 1.5 or something.

Oh, it definitely needs to be fixed - and the lower things in the tree need to be buffed so they're actually worth using.

I disagree.  Those lower-tier talents are the balancing mechanism.  Mana Clash is hugely powerful, yes, but it takes 4 talent points to buy it and that one spell is basically all you get.

That's terrific design.

If you're not being sarcastic, I cannot disagree more. You've got two spells that are, basically, wasted game coding and one that will basically waste any white mage and many yellow mages instantaneously and thus renders most other means you may have of disabling enemy mages pretty much irrelevant (which in turn is an indirect nerf to Templars, electricity damage, the entire Anti-Magic line...). Bioware went to the effort of coding in alternate means of dealing with enemy mages than just throwing a Mana Clash and watching them all die (and be completely drained if they are big enough to survive) - it'd be nice to see those alternate means actually being viable options rather than a waste of coding and space against the 200-pound gorilla that is Mana Clash.