warrior vs warrior

View previous topic View next topic Go down

warrior vs warrior

Post by Heyro on Tue 23 Feb 2010, 11:02 am

Who is stronger??? Who will win this fight??? At whom from these classes most of all chances to win???
avatar
Heyro
Administrator
Administrator

Messages : 244
Glasses : 35059
Standing : 394
Registered : 2010-02-22

http://www.deezer.com/profile/750437615

Back to top Go down

Re: warrior vs warrior

Post by Гость on Tue 23 Feb 2010, 11:04 am

To campaign of Var, but not the fact, can also Var... But likely warrior warrior will make, if at warra certainly hands not curves...
avatar
Гость
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: warrior vs warrior

Post by Walle on Thu 12 Aug 2010, 6:05 pm

ganador de esta semana es ringersol:

[¿Cómo se siente esto afectará el juego? ]

Positivamente. Reino clases específicas de crear un desequilibrio en el combate PvP por su propia naturaleza. Dar un "sabor único a cada lado es un noble empeño, pero para la salud a largo plazo del juego debería limitarse a los factores modificadores de inmersión y racial que en la mecánica básica de una clase.

[¿Va a hacer que sea más fácil conocer a tu oponente o más difícil?]

Sin lugar a dudas más fácil. Se aprende de tu reino compañeros de las ventajas y desventajas de las especificaciones de lo posible, y puedan formular las tácticas en los duelos.

[¿Se quitará la diversidad de contar con un gran número de diferentes clases para jugar?]

No, en absoluto - en caso de múltiples especificaciones son viables y cada uno tiene sus propias tácticas. Diversidad viene de opciones de caracteres que dan lugar a modificar las tácticas de juego, no ajustar una lista de habilidades especiales y combos.

Reproducción de una clase cuerpo a cuerpo puro en DAoC fue en gran parte el mismo independientemente del ámbito o de la cisterna / selecciones principales ejercen de doble (o pequeña diferencia en habilidades especiales). Tras seis distintas "clases" de esto no se reflejó en gran medida la "diversidad", como los seis esencialmente / reproducir / lo mismo. La combinación de estos en una sola "clase" con múltiples líneas de especificaciones no hubiera destruido toda la diversidad, sin embargo, habría promovido el equilibrio. Por definición.

Considere la posibilidad de Ajedrez, Fútbol, o cualquier otro juego de competición:

Un lado nunca se le concede una capacidad de la otra no tiene. La diversidad es manifiesta en diferentes piezas o posiciones capacidades tener que modificar radicalmente la forma en que se utilizan. Cada lado tiene todavía la igualdad de acceso a esta capacidad.
avatar
Walle
Member
Member

Messages : 4
Glasses : 7
Standing : 0
Registered : 2010-08-12

Back to top Go down

Re: warrior vs warrior

Post by Fezzunix on Thu 12 Aug 2010, 6:14 pm

Runner-up #1 is Nostruum:

The obvious advantage to having the same classes on both sides is that they are inherently balanced against themselves. The only two unique classes are paladin and shaman and if you actually look at them closely they share many of the same abilities, IE healing, with only a few cosmetic differences. Otherwise they are balanced against each other. This only leaves Blizzard to balance the races against each other. Which can be done fairly easily if you give each side a smart race, a strong race, an agile race, and an average race. As long as say a troll hunter is the same as a night elf hunter balance is struck. Assuming of course that each qualifies as the agile race for the two sides.

The difficulty will be in how to maintain this balance in expansions when adding new races and classes. The starting classes are pretty basic and make sense that they would appear on both sides. A warrior is a warrior is a warrior and will exist in any society. So would preists. Only the name of their gods would change. Blizzard will be faced with a choice of two directions for new classes in expansions. Either to continue to give the same classes to both sides or do as they did with the shaman and paladin and create two very similar classes with only slight differences to balance them against each other.

The classes that have similar abilities but only slight differences will actually pose the greatest threat to game balance in the future as the players of the paladin and shaman classes clamber for upgrades to their classes that don't make sense for the other. Blizzard will have to approach such improvements with weary eye since giving such upgrades one without giving a countering upgrade to the other could prove disasterous as suddenly one side gains a distinct advantage over the other.
avatar
Fezzunix
Member
Member

Messages : 12
Glasses : 15
Standing : 0
Registered : 2010-07-17

Back to top Go down

Re: warrior vs warrior

Post by Ul'trobass on Thu 12 Aug 2010, 6:15 pm

The level of character diversity is completely independent of the number of classes actually in the game.

Take a look at Diablo1. It had a grand total of three different 'classes.' You would look at that, not having played the game, and say something like "that's a joke," as far as diversity is concerned. But, once you did play the game, you'd realize that there were many paths you could take within each broad class -- which, in fact, made it a very diverse game. You would be hard pressed to find another person of your class having the same skills as you, at any given point in the game (given that you weren't following some player-invented uber template).

Now, look at a game like EQ. I'm not attempting to compare the games directly, just the implementations of their class systems. In EQ, you had virtually no options inside your class. You more or less had to play a certain way, and 95%+ of the people you'd meet of the same class would be playing exactly the same. There were some small deviations from this, such as the spell specializations and such, but they were hardly deal-breakers when it came to the lack of character diversity. Of course, what EQ's system had over Diablo's was in its number of classes.

What's the big difference between these systems, in the end? Not much, really. Except, from an outsider's perspective, EQ's would probably be more appealing. I think the general idea is that WoW will implement much more of a Diablo system than EQ's. A Warrior won't be extremely limited in his choices of what skills to pick to be minutely effective. Instead, he'll have options like becoming defense-oriented, spending his talents in defensive stances/styles, becoming offense-oriented, spending them in damage bonus stances/styles, specials-oriented, focusing on techniques akin to 'whirlwind' and 'bladestorm' and such, and probably many more.

A system with many, many cookie-cutter classes looks better on paper, but I'd say the extremely diverse fewer class choices allows a lot more freedom, and is generally more fun to play. :D
avatar
Ul'trobass
Member
Member

Messages : 11
Glasses : 11
Standing : 0
Registered : 2010-07-29

Back to top Go down

Re: warrior vs warrior

Post by Ul'trobass on Thu 12 Aug 2010, 6:17 pm

http://wow-video.ru/index.php?key=wow+warrior
avatar
Ul'trobass
Member
Member

Messages : 11
Glasses : 11
Standing : 0
Registered : 2010-07-29

Back to top Go down

Re: warrior vs warrior

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum