Both parties are viable, and mighty enough. The only one who requires more micro is the bloodmage/assassin.Īnd now I have some intermediate results in both solid(mixed)-roles parties (preconditions are: veteran difficulty, viability, mighty enough, convenient play) and another question.ġ. Another alternative is a soulblade/trickster who can deal high single target dps with Sun and Moon Tuotilo's Palm and also great AoE damage from the back of your tanks with Whispers of the Endless Paths (and he can also buff your other cipher).Īnyway all these characters, if well built, don't require end game items to be strong and can roll over most encounters just on AI. A devoted/trickster with sabres is a very solid damage dealer and can trigger disengagement attacks with Ryngrim's Repulsive Visage. An assassin/bloodmage is also very powerful and once he obtains the invisibility spell can also solve encounter by himself. An ascendant/ghostheart with Frostseeker is also great and can clear the field very fast with his bow/spells and later can provide Brilliant to the entire party. I would add to your party a forbidden fist monk who is also nearly immortal and by the end can beat any encounter by himself. Is "Priest(berath) monk" - good striker (it good crowd killer, but striker)? Will it have enough time to strike in 2-nd party?Ī well built darcozzi/troubadour is basically immortal and can also rez fallen companions if needed. #LORDS OF THE FALLEN 2 HANDED WEAPONS WEAK MANUAL#Paladin-Fighter or Paladin-rogue (riposte quarterstaff - is it viable "tank-damager"? If "yes viable", which of them better, providing no manual control?Ħ. Chanter(skald) monk sun-and-mood - is it viable character? How will it cast his spells, providing "one handed weapon" specialization?ĥ. "casters-assassin: Fighter-monk / monk-barbarian / rogue-monk / rogue-fighter" - which of this characters better for this role (looks line monk-barbarian)? Providing, that in battles with "boss" it have to strike boss (looks, like fighter-monk)?Ĥ. = Honestly I like second party more, but I have doubts about practically any of it characters:ģ. = If both parties "approximately viable", I have more specialized questions about them Criticize both parties (providing above requirements), is any of them viable? Which of them better for comfortable paying? The general question is: is mixed-roles characters work good enough to play? Or I must make solid-roles characters?Ģ. Wizard-rogue (this is only character I am confident in).ġ. Support-damager: Monk-chanter(skald) sun and moon single weapon multiple crits Tank-damager: Paladin-fighter (of paladin-rogue: if riposte quarterstaff-modal works). Wizard-rogue (this is only character I am confident in) casters-assassin: Fighter-monk / monk-barbarian / rogue-monk / rogue-fighter. Solid specialized party looks more effective in the linear battle, on the other hand it looks more vulnerable to loosing high-specialized characters, in case of ambush for example. So I prepare two similar parties (I hope that general idea is clear for experienced players). Requirements : comfortable gameplay (of course party have to be powerful enough), flexible tactics (including long \ short battles), readiness to characters sudden deaths.Ĭomfortable gameplay means, that vast majority of battles have to be passed with self-written AI scripts, and a little manual control: party positioning, and maybe wizard crowd control/killing, assassin kill mages in enemies backline, so it means "minimum manual-control demanding character classes", such as rogues. I practically finish assembling party, but there are some questions (the general is: "must I make solid-roles characters, or 'half tank-damager, half tank-support. I'm going to play on "path of the dammed" difficulty (I never did it before).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |