magick archer vocation availability

[Mr Smiley]

What were they thinking? Is this peak bad game design? You are very unlikely to find magick archer pre-endgame without foreknowledge of it's acquisition, in a game that can end before endgame. Assuming you haven't found a way to sprint to its location, you are already roughly lvl 30 to deal with the monsters en route to it, meaning that once you've acquired it, every enemy is already starting to be trivialized. Just down the road from magick archer vocation is an endgame bow. Why bother modeling any other bows because everyone can just use this one and there's nothing better pre-endgame. Oh, and there's no hardmode so if you 'beat' the game after acquiring this vocation, there's basically no point to playing afterwards because everything gets oneshotted in NG+ (because there is no new game plus)

[Hex]

It's garbo anyways, even if you play 50lvls of Sorc before getting it to max out Magicka asap, only the big multishot does anything, and the ultimate skill that kills you. All the elemental shots do like 0 damage except the fire arrow against undead, but the rest are useless.

Play Sorc or the basic Archer if you wanna use bows, the Archer actually does damage.

[Jamation]

Originally posted by Mr Smiley:

Why bother modeling any other bows because everyone can just use this one and there's nothing better pre-endgame. Oh, and there's no hardmode so if you 'beat' the game after acquiring this vocation, there's basically no point to playing afterwards because everything gets oneshotted in NG+ (because there is no new game plus)

I mean one thing answers the other. When you get to the point that things are easy you don't need to equip the weapon that's BiS...or even good, you can equip the one you like the look of best. I mean isn't the real endgame of most games fashion anyways?

Originally posted by Hex:

All the elemental shots do like 0 damage except the fire arrow against undead, but the rest are useless.

You talkin' trash about my Ricochet shot!? Come say that to my face when I'm in a cave!

Jokes aside, MA is really strong. I mean, if played right, most classes can be good, but MA doesn't even require that high of a skill threshold to take things down like it's nobodies business.

[Hex]

Yes, because pressing Maelstrom and then Pressing Flare on Sorc is mad omegalevel gayming skillzzz

[Migromul]

If you do the side-quests, you encounter the magic archer-quest way before the endgame!

Vulcan Island is NOT the endgame on basis. It's the most difficult area and you will get the best buyable gear there. But it still will be a while, until you reach the endgame. You have a lot of quests beforehand, if you don't rush the main quests.

But if you don't do sidequests and don'T talk tot NPCs yourself, then yes, you even might miss that quest, although you're literally fall over the questgiver...

Originally posted by Hex:

It's garbo anyways, even if you play 50lvls of Sorc before getting it to max out Magicka asap, only the big multishot does anything, and the ultimate skill that kills you. All the elemental shots do like 0 damage except the fire arrow against undead, but the rest are useless.

Play Sorc or the basic Archer if you wanna use bows, the Archer actually does damage.

if you don't know, how to play the MA in DD 2, it can be desappointed. In comparson to the first game, the core-attacks do a lot of damage... (that only a tip.)

[Hex]

Originally posted by Migromul:

if you don't know, how to play the MA in DD 2, it can be desappointed. In comparson to the first game, the core-attacks do a lot of damage... (that only a tip.)

You can make all the excuses, it does nothing Sorc doesn't do better. There is no reason to play it at all, except "because I want to".

[Jamation]

Originally posted by Hex:

There is no reason to play it at all, except "because I want to".

Isn't that the whole point of playing games in the first place though...??? Because we're doing something we enjoy???

[Hex]

Originally posted by Jamation:

Originally posted by Hex:

There is no reason to play it at all, except "because I want to".

Isn't that the whole point of playing games in the first place though...??? Because we're doing something we enjoy???

Yes, obviously. That, however, doesn't make MA a good vocation mechanically. The shots take too long to wind up, the healing skills are pointless. You can't substitute it for a mage because you can't heal yourself, and the elemental shots are horrible.

It's like Warrior. Hilarious big damage sweeping attacks. However, Thief does that too, 5 times faster cause the attacks are so slow on Warrior. Funny Vocation, not worth it.

Thief, Sorcerer and Archer are just way too strong in this game. They aren't slightly stronger, they are ridiculously strong in comparison.

[Jamation]

Originally posted by Hex:

Funny Vocation, not worth it.

Not worth what though? You're talking like the vocations are trying to compete for something rather than just being options to pick from.

Hell, I loved playing MA, it was fun and enjoyed the aesthetic and took down large groups or single targets quickly (Got no idea what you're talking about taking a long time. Sorcerer takes longer to fire their load imo, even with multi-casting with pawns, the rings, and the augments).
Liked Sorcerer fine too, but got tired of just going 'big boom and dead' after a slow wind up.
Got a warrior on my team this time around and I like seeing him fight.


You don't have to like it, but it's not like this is an MMO where there's a reason for anyone to try to play "meta". There's different options for people to play different styles. Some people love playing Trickster, but I was disappointed by it and bored. Doesn't make it any lesser, just means it's not something I'll be devoting any more time to.
Providing more options to the player is a good thing. If they plucked out the vocations you mention because there's a better alternative, then you're simply giving people less options. You say the MA healing skills are useless, but if a person wants to be a ranged support that's a decent way to do it. Heck, you don't even have to bring a mage to any group because you could try and play with just items/Chirurgeon pawns.

Different strokes for different folks.

[Hex]

Originally posted by Jamation:

Originally posted by Hex:

Funny Vocation, not worth it.

Not worth what though? You're talking like the vocations are trying to compete for something rather than just being options to pick from.

Hell, I loved playing MA, it was fun and enjoyed the aesthetic and took down large groups or single targets quickly (Got no idea what you're talking about taking a long time. Sorcerer takes longer to fire their load imo, even with multi-casting with pawns, the rings, and the augments).
Liked Sorcerer fine too, but got tired of just going 'big boom and dead' after a slow wind up.
Got a warrior on my team this time around and I like seeing him fight.


You don't have to like it, but it's not like this is an MMO where there's a reason for anyone to try to play "meta". There's different options for people to play different styles. Some people love playing Trickster, but I was disappointed by it and bored. Doesn't make it any lesser, just means it's not something I'll be devoting any more time to.
Providing more options to the player is a good thing. If they plucked out the vocations you mention because there's a better alternative, then you're simply giving people less options. You say the MA healing skills are useless, but if a person wants to be a ranged support that's a decent way to do it. Heck, you don't even have to bring a mage to any group because you could try and play with just items/Chirurgeon pawns.

Different strokes for different folks.

But they aren't a different playstyle, like at all. Both MA and Sorc has the same auto-targeting you keep locked on while drawing the bow for max effect or chanting a spell with sorc, which is MUCh faster btw if you spend stamina for quickspell except for meister skills.

In DD1, most vocations had 2 weapon sets. MA had daggers, it bought some actual versatility to a magic class. In DD2, it's just a bad mage. Again, you can make all the justifications you want, it's just bad.

[Nightslaver]

Originally posted by Jamation:

Different strokes for different folks.

Amen.
But you only writes against a wall, he will never understood this with his betonhead.

Originally posted by Hex:

In DD1, most vocations had 2 weapon sets. MA had daggers, it bought some actual versatility to a magic class. In DD2, it's just a bad mage. Again, you can make all the justifications you want, it's just bad.

In DD1 / DDDA the most classes had a melee and range weapon option and assassin was king in melee and good in range, so there was never a reason to play anything other as an assassin.

Why you should do this. *roll eyes*
So your argument are pointless.

[Hex]

Originally posted by Nightslaver:

Originally posted by Jamation:

Different strokes for different folks.

Amen.
But you only writes against a wall, he will never understood this with his betonhead.

Originally posted by Hex:

In DD1, most vocations had 2 weapon sets. MA had daggers, it bought some actual versatility to a magic class. In DD2, it's just a bad mage. Again, you can make all the justifications you want, it's just bad.

In DD1 / DDDA the most classes had a melee and range weapon option and assassin was king in melee and good in range, so there was never a reason to play anything other as an assassin.

Why you should do this. *roll eyes*
So your argument are pointless.

Yes, because in DD1 the "advanced" classes were actually good, and hybrids were actually hybrids.

[Nightslaver]

Originally posted by Hex:

Yes, because in DD1 the "advanced" classes were actually good, and hybrids were actually hybrids.

Only Bu*ll*sh*it...
Ranger was and magic archer was only a worse versions of assassins and on the end sorcerer was also only a nuker, warrior had not really any usfull role and msytic knight was only a fighter with a bigger shield and little bit pointless magic pew pew.

So every "advanced class" which was an other as assassin was completly usless in DDDA. *roll eyes*

[toranaga1985]

Originally posted by Nightslaver:

Originally posted by Hex:

Yes, because in DD1 the "advanced" classes were actually good, and hybrids were actually hybrids.

Only Bu*ll*sh*it...
Ranger was and magic archer was only a worse versions of assassins and on the end sorcerer was also only a nuker, warrior had not really any usfull role and msytic knight was only a fighter with a bigger shield and little bit pointless magic pew pew.

So every "advanced class" which was an other as assassin was completly usless in DDDA. *roll eyes*

MK was setup king, more then pointless pew pew.
redoundant, possible
less "viable" then others, likely.
but not a Warrior with a Big shield son, moderate your wrong opinions :p ^^

[Nightslaver]

Originally posted by toranaga1985:

MK was setup king, more then pointless pew pew.
redoundant, possible
less "viable" then others, likely.
but not a Warrior with a Big shield son, moderate your wrong opinions :p ^^

You dont need tell me that, i know this.
I only troll him with his own bu*ll*sh*it "arguments", that he is bringing permanently to DD2, in reverse on DDDA (where the gras is so much more green for him).

[Jamation]

Originally posted by Hex:

Again, you can make all the justifications you want, it's just bad.

Justification for what? It's existence? You want DD2 to only have:

Originally posted by Hex:

Thief, Sorcerer and Archer are just way too strong in this game. They aren't slightly stronger, they are ridiculously strong in comparison.

Like...what point are you trying to make in argument to what I'm saying other than that you want there to be less vocations?