Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 5 1 2 3 4 5
Joined: Jan 2009
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
Originally Posted by Benny89
Good Post. For me now everything is really THAT much obvious and breaking but I agree with 3 points THE MOST, and I think larian should focus on it:

1. Initiative should be Initiative based. End of story. That should be rather simple, you just need to change algorithm to calculate initiavite first and make turns based on it. That is issue no 1.

2. Talents- some should be fused, some like Demon changed and be more rewarding. Those that are already good (Execut, Hotheaded, Lone Wolf, Elemental Aff etc. doesn't need change). Guerilla for example is good talent- but make sneaking in combat 2 AP. We have to install mod for it to have fun with Guerilla, Assassinate etc.

3. AI should NOT automatically know what talents you have- that is retarded. If I have glass cannon- how they hell enemies can know that? They should know it after I am getting hit but some CC and then AI should "aaa, dam, take this boi there!!!". Same with Undead. If I have helemet AI should not know until I start to heal on posion, no Bleed etc.

I don't think those are THAT huge things to change. Definitelly doable to change them at this point in game.


Agreed with all of these.

1. Right now, Wits and Initiative are just useless remnants of a broken system and have no reason to exist.

2. I recommended fusing Escapist with Duck Duck Goose in the alpha, it should still be fused now, because Escapist is just pretty useless and not worthy of being its own Talent.

3. Is good too, it will preserve the existence of the smarter AI, but it won't feel like it's cheating so much.

Joined: Sep 2017
K
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
K
Joined: Sep 2017
Originally Posted by Stabbey


2. I recommended fusing Escapist with Duck Duck Goose in the alpha, it should still be fused now, because Escapist is just pretty useless and not worthy of being its own Talent.



To be honest, most talents are not worth it. They are so incredibly uninspaired that it hurts. One quite interesting but probably useless would be Ambidextrous. If it would work with only a shield equiped, character with tonnes and tonnes of scrolls could be quite viable.

Joined: Sep 2017
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Sep 2017
Actually, uh, I'm not so sure.
I'm testing a lot (like... A LOT) the throwable weapons (grenades and scrolls) and I was really happy to see that Ambidextrous reduce the cost of scrolls by 1 too.

The thing is : I have absolutly no idea how the Scrolls spell damages are calculated. I have no clue. The only thing I know is that Scroll damage is -at best- garbage compared to the real deal.

When I throw a 1AP Fireball with a scroll + ambidextrous => 80 damage (scale with character's level only)
With the exact same character, when I cast a regular 2AP fireball => 210 damages. (scale with INT, Pyro, AND level)

Maybe there's something I'm doing wrong, but DAMAGE grenades and scrolls live in their own little world and doesn't scale really well. Mostly Scrolls, because grenades still scale (badly) with pyro, warfare, etc depending of their elemental damages.

(Savage Spell and Huntsman works with grenades and scrolls tho. Yep, grenades can CRIT. And you can still use Ambidextry while using a bow/crossbow. So that's a plus.)

Same problem with the skill Explosive Trap who seems to scale only on your level. Maybe Explosive Toybox (scoundrel skill) too.

Effect/status/utilitary scrolls and 'nades are fine, obviously. And the 1AP teleportation scroll is sweet. But man the damage grenade/scrolls needs some tweaks. Or maybe there's something I'm missing. think


...Uh, but it's maybe a 'lil bit offtopic. I should start my own "What's the deal with Consumable weapons?" offtopic

Last edited by Dopelgingembre; 26/09/17 11:01 PM.

Sauce Hunter
Joined: Mar 2014
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Mar 2014
There is a mod that fixes loremaster levels on enemies so those you wouldnt expect to be proficient with it are not psychics anymore.

Also, ban Luckman for excessive oppressive nitpicking.


Joined: Sep 2017
Z
stranger
Offline
stranger
Z
Joined: Sep 2017
Originally Posted by Luckmann
enemies often tries to run away from players with Opportunist..."the AI doesn't know that you have Opportunist, nor should they!"

Originally Posted by Larian_Rimevan
This is intentional (we don't want the talent to go to waste), but clearly it's giving some issues at the moment.


Having a character choose not to move away from you as not to take an Opportunity Attack isn't a waste of a talent.

To fix this issue I would be to just bake OA's back into the system. All characters with a melee weapon get OA's (or with specific ones, like backstab and daggers). Golem Studios is in the early stages of demoing a TTRPG now that gives attack preferences to monsters. Some stronger preferences will have them take an OA while others the monster will respect that threat.

Could do something similar to that so that melee character's aren't overly sticky and they get to use OA sometimes. Can even reveal these priorities to players with Loremaster so they can do things to try and trigger the OA's.

Originally Posted by Luckmann
The laughably bad defensive abilities.

I think you're missing the primary reason these defensive abilities aren't very good, and some of your criticism I don't consider valid.

The primary reason that the defensive abilities aren't good defensive abilities is that offensive abilities are the best defensive abilities. The best defense is a Hard CC. To enact hard CC you need to break armors, which you need damage to do. So maximizing your damage output to break armors to allow for Hard CC is the most effective defensive ability in this game.

As for this:
Originally Posted by Luckmann
However, even if Retribution would be buffed to 200%: you'd be rewarding the player.. for doing nothing

That's not true. To use Retribution well you need to find ways to encourage the enemy to be attack your players with Retribution. That requires some planning and positioning to use well. It is hardly nothing.

I'm not going to defend Retribution's mechanics as valuable to gameplay, I'd remove it as well, but to suggest the player has to do nothing to use it well is false. There is gameplay in using Retribution well.

I agree on the problems with circumstances you put forth on Leadership and Perseverance (as an aside Petrify was resisted by Armor in EA, seems they forgot to change this).

Originally Posted by Luckmann
Binarity of outcomes, predictability, and the armor system.

You throw a lot of criticism here and I disagree with most of it.

Originally Posted by Luckmann
Unintuitiveness of effect types and targeting armor

I'm actually not entirely sure I understand this complaint. Is it breaking immersion for you? Magic armor is visualized as a force field in Dos2 that blocks objects that are elemental from harming the player. For me this was neither immersion breaking or unintuitive. So I'm confused as to the nature of the complaint. Can you clarify?

Originally Posted by Luckmann
What it does is that it leads to a completely predictable combat system on any given turn...
Simply put, the armor system completely negates any element of the Delta of Randomness. This is terrible design in itself, because that delta of randomness is one of the staples, I would say fundamentals of good turn-based gameplay, and the armor system breaks this completely on a systemic, tactical level.

I greatly prefer being able to plan, execute my actions and my adapt my plan are to choices the AI makes in targeting, abilities I didn't know they had etc. This makes each fight feel more like a tactical puzzle I have to solve vs hoping my CC's proc.

I don't think this armor and CC system is perfect, and there are changes I'd make but it is a great improvement over DOS1.

For an EC video, which are generally pretty bad, that one was surprisingly decent. Yet...it has no relevance at all to this circumstance. It's largely talking about randomness in competitive games and barely gets into the balance implications of randomness in PvE.

Saying that randomness is a stable of game design is also patently absurd. I can't think of a single great turn based game that has high reliance on randomness besides poker and accounting for randomness is just a low aspect skill of that game. While it is a common thing to use in turn based games, to simulate variance in ability to execute, it diminishes the value of the core skill these games test, strategy. Are you prepared to argue that Chess and Go are not just bad but terrible games? Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you are trying to say here. If my response to this doesn't seem on point can you clarify?

Originally Posted by Luckmann
So how can it be resolved? Short of reworking the entirety of the game and reinstate a save- or resistance-based system, there's not a whole lot that can be done. If absolutely determined to maintain the armor system at it's core in how it works right now, several things would have to change.
I'm not entirely sure what you think needs to be solved, besides that you wrongly seem to think reliability in effect is bad.

Even if I agreed, there is a large variety of options in changing the armor system as it is now while keeping the heart of it. My primary concern is that dual damage type parties don't work well. An easy solve to this is having all damage target vitality and deal damage to an armor type. Status doesn't apply until the related type is broken but all attacks will deal HP damage. Suggesting you need randomness to have not terrible games is just moronic.

Originally Posted by Luckmann[/quote

The Round-Robin Turn Orders.
We kind of agree here. It a confusing choice, not because round robin was chosen but because the rest of the system wasn't then modified to account for this choice.

Having initiative as it was in early access seemed fine. Players had to choose between putting points into the better offensive stats or going earlier in the round. The problem only seemed to present itself by having all enemies that had silly scaling initiative based on level.

There seemed to have been many systemic changes late in development (like moving Petrify to magical instead of physical) and they didn't account for the systemic effect of those changes. It's a hard thing to account for especially as you are near an end of a project and so close to the project. It's also solved by hiring an experienced system designer, something they can hopefully do easily now as this game seems to be selling quite well.

Initiative systems are hard to make not bland. Many games over the years have tried interesting things, none have really stuck and become persistent to the genre. The closest is FF's Active Time Battle but really only square uses that. FF Tactics, Radiant Historia and various others have tried to make changes and mechanics around it, however it really does require an whole system to be based around the initiative mechanic to do anything complex well.

Now to address your specific points.
Originally Posted by Luckmann
The only time set-ups like this can be done reliable, to see a plan and see it take shape, to get that rush of "feelings" is when you're at the absolute end of the turn order in a little clump.

First I question the value of your rush of feelings. That's a longer discussion and I'll ignore it for now.

Why aren't you checking the initiative order if the enemies, to see where they are going and who isn't moving between your team so you can combo them? Just because you have to be a little careful with the order of your combo and which enemy you pick doesn't mean the opportunities aren't there. Be more selective in who you are choosing to combo, and account for which enemies go between allies you need to combo in future rounds, the game gives lots of tools for dealing with those units (teleport, slow from oil, clouds if they are ranged, etc).

Originally Posted by Luckmann
Yes, yes I was, and they are - to a point...
And if you kill an enemy, you might expect them to be removed from the turn order, right? Well they are. But someone else will immediately take their place.

Right...this is again requires you to have better planning to know when to knock people out vs down. That you don't like that the game tests that element of planning multiple turns isn't bad game design, its just a part of this game that you don't like.

Both the round robin and straight initiative value systems have drawbacks. Neither are much greater than the other. The criticism should stop at how their initiative system isn't transparent, has elements that suggest it behaves different than it does and the rest of the system has issues with how the initiative system behaves (the value of Wit as you pointed out or gear changing your preferred character turn order because it has +init, etc).


I appreciate that you took time to post something long and that you care about. There is some valid criticism you provide and I think I was fair in pointing out where, but there are also places where you miss the mark by quite a bit.

Last edited by Zeth; 26/09/17 11:59 PM.
Joined: Sep 2017
member
Offline
member
Joined: Sep 2017
Originally Posted by Luckmann
This is a compilation of my thoughts on a range of topics, originally prompted by the thread on the RPG Codex and the request by Kevin at Larian for feedback.


I read this entire thread out loud to my wife and we both loved it.

Great thread! <3

Joined: Jul 2017
Location: USA
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jul 2017
Location: USA
I agree with a lot of things on this post, especially the talents.

The talents have been such a huge disappointment. Things that made skills and other playstyles unique or just added an extra bonus. Also I never understood why Pawn and Executioner can't go together, it's stupid. Like so what if there is extra AP. Enemies on classic get 6-8 Fking Ap meanwhile, we're stuck with 4 AP unless you do glass cannon or lone wolf.

On one hand I wanna play the game again, i don't want too considering how unbalanced this game is. In terms of combat, skills and the way things are coded. And in order to fix all this will require enhanced edition, because I doubt they can patch fix all of this. And even then it could take year(s).

Joined: Jan 2009
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
Originally Posted by Zeth

Why aren't you checking the initiative order if the enemies, to see where they are going and who isn't moving between your team so you can combo them?


Largely, because of the armor system. Although this does depend on your team composition. I'm running a 2/2 mixed team, so I simply cannot always drop a combo on the next guy to go. Admittedly that would be easier if I was running a 4/0 Team.

But because of the armor system, it's better to get armor down quickly on as many targets as possible instead of chipping away at both magical and physical on the same target and leaving several others at full strength.


Originally Posted by UnderworldHades
I agree with a lot of things on this post, especially the talents.

The talents have been such a huge disappointment. Things that made skills and other playstyles unique or just added an extra bonus.


They really have. Larian largely ignored the Talent system despite feedback about how lackluster it is, stretching back all the way to D:OS 1.

Quote
Also I never understood why Pawn and Executioner can't go together, it's stupid. Like so what if there is extra AP.


I think this is largely because Executioner used to give 2 AP per kill instead of 2 AP per turn. (As an interesting side note, it still counts as the previous turn if you kill an enemy with an AoO from "Opportunist" before your next turn comes around, so you can start with 6 AP, kill another enemy and Executioner can go off on THAT turn to give you another 2).


Last edited by Stabbey; 27/09/17 12:43 AM.
Joined: Sep 2015
A
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
A
Joined: Sep 2015
I agree that turn order is currently awful and encourages some strange tactical decisions. Like leaving enemies alive with 20 hp so that I can oneshot them next turn and have 2 of my people go in a row. Or not using totems because they steal places in the turn order from my heroes.


Originally Posted by Larian_Rimevan
I can give some clarification on the mentioned AoO issue. The AoO issue is known, and the explanation for this issue is rather simple actually: Ai does not take AoO into account at all. This is intentional (we don't want the talent to go to waste), but clearly it's giving some issues at the moment. We have plans to fix the behaviour in the future, which should get rid of the annoyances that have been mentioned (like getting killed by AoO) while ensuring the viability of the talent.



Wait, but it would still be useful if AI took AoO into account. I primarily took the talent to somewhat control AI movement. Like, you teleport enemy archer or rogue to your opportunist and they won't go to high ground/to hit your other heroes because enemies want to avoid AoO. For me that'd be a far more interesting use of the talent than simple "enemies get hit each turn because too stupid to take AoO into account".

And somehow you don't prevent enemies from taking glass cannon or undead into account so why is opportunist treated differently?

EDIT: I think there's a simple way to somewhat fix issues with the turn order while still preventing your whole team from going first turn 1 and murdering everything. Have the turn order established turn 1 be permanent. Summons always go right after the summoner. When an enemy is kill, another won't jump to his place in the initiative queue, instead 2 of your characters go one after another. Wits would still be useless though.
Alternatively, have the new turn order only apply to turn 1 of combat. All the other turns should determine the turn order based solely on initiative.

Last edited by Alanta; 27/09/17 02:18 AM.
Joined: Feb 2015
G
addict
Offline
addict
G
Joined: Feb 2015
Signed.
The Luckmann initial post covers perfectly most of my issues. Althou use of examine toon is allowed for players, to know in the first round of combat enemy vulnerabilities, so same skill use AI. That is OK. Same rules for player and AI.

Anyway was a bit suspicious since they announced "streamlined" AP of combat system, but it was worst and worst and worst.
Finally all this dumb down issues escalated to monstrous sells. Which is good for Larians.
On the other side, people like Luckmann, Baardvark, Hiver, Stabbey and other RPG fans are no longer part of the target group.

Sad, but true. Orginal Sin series becomes mainstream swamp. Find something else.... .

Last edited by gGeo; 27/09/17 02:42 AM.
Joined: Dec 2010
Location: Brazil
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Dec 2010
Location: Brazil
I'm not sure most of the elements we're talking about here are linked to the huge number of sales and incredible critical reception. For instance I'm not sure a casual player/reviewer would even notice how the initiative system works.

I will grant that the armor system probably did help with that though, but that's just one issue out of several raised here.

My point being, I think that most of them, save for the armor system which they may not want to change, can indeed be fixed without the game losing its appeal to the casual audience it garnered.

I do find myself surprised that reviewers seem to have got through the game without having issues with, for instance, stat bloat, since the game does have problems that should impact both casual and hardcore audiences more or less in the same way. It's fairly puzzling that this hasn't happened.

Last edited by taviow; 27/09/17 03:16 AM.
Joined: Sep 2017
T
stranger
Offline
stranger
T
Joined: Sep 2017
Good to see a passionate gamer just wanting to help improving a great game.

Joined: Mar 2014
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Mar 2014
Originally Posted by taviow
I'm not sure most of the elements we're talking about here are linked to the huge number of sales and incredible critical reception. For instance I'm not sure a casual player/reviewer would even notice how the initiative system works.

The fact they dont notice it is what makes it good.
No need to think about it, see.

Because thinking has become an enemy, especially of fun. Thinking is too heavy see... its not fun.
And you can notice the same psychosis across the mass market and entertainment industry as well as popular culture in general.

And since this system does not require anyone to think about things above some superficial level, they can just play and have fun and experience the story and cool explosiunz and "tactics". While being under illusion they are "old school rpg" players or something.


Originally Posted by taviow

My point being, I think that most of them, save for the armor system which they may not want to change, can indeed be fixed without the game losing its appeal to the casual audience it garnered.

No, because in that case that same audience would have to think about these mechanics and you would reintroduce the greatest enemy of all - the dreaded ..."randomness"

Which does not exist as such but due to these morons consistent bitching and crying about it, the devs decided to "remove it" as much as possible.

And it worked.

Originally Posted by taviow

I do find myself surprised that reviewers seem to have got through the game without having issues with, for instance, stat bloat, since the game does have problems that should impact both casual and hardcore audiences more or less in the same way. It's fairly puzzling that this hasn't happened.


They are playing at "classic" at most so never had to see any of it. And besides they are already trained to "think" more HP to whack away is "harder" and "tactical".

I cant say i blame the devs too much about it considering the business necessities and knowing how in the past they were close to bankrupcy and took huge risks and abrely managed to stay afloat. Knowing how many great game studios are not around anymore. Knowing about three new studios Larian opened and all that.

But neither that or the momentary popularity or 10 gamespot reviews while other reviews now all copy-paste how "divine" or "heavenly" the game is make these mechanics any better or gameplay any different.


Joined: Sep 2017
G
stranger
Offline
stranger
G
Joined: Sep 2017
Great post. I really hope the enhanced edition version of the game (if it ever comes; I hope it does!) makes combat and stats more robust. Act 1 was a 10/10 for me, but each act after that solidly drops the rating a bunch because you start to get into these same fight situations with your AP and setup that you always start a fight the same way, and damage scaling is so insane that in act 3 now mobs just die before they get a turn to do anything, which makes support skills kind of bad.

OP covered everything so there's no point repeating stuff, but I do hope they fixed a bunch of the shitty "exploits" with fleeing and reentering combat and stuff too, or being able to nuke something far out of range from high ground if you are high up enough without going into combat with the pack.

Don't get me wrong, I love the game and think it's one of the best RPGs to be released in a long time, so I really just want to see this become even better!

Last edited by Grandam; 27/09/17 06:00 AM.
Joined: Jul 2014
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Jul 2014
Great write-up but a bit overly negative too. I get it, its incredibly frustrating to see something -very- close to greatness be marred and flawed, but excessive bitching is just that, and doesn't really serve anyone IMHO.

Don't get me wrong, your arguments were salient 9 out of 10 on content, but maybe 7/10 on delivery since it was a bit acerbic. Stylistically though, its right up my alley 10/10.

The only contradictory element is that you call for the delta of randomness which I 100% agree with but then complain that initiative as implemented now makes each turn completely unpredictable. Bit of an opposing statement, but I take your meaning which is the randomness should come in other more logical ways not from flawed mechanics.

Last edited by Darkwind; 27/09/17 07:27 AM.
Joined: Sep 2017
A
stranger
Offline
stranger
A
Joined: Sep 2017
This feedback comes across as so angsty and angry. Playing the game on tactician and thoroughly enjoying it, I struggle to relate to the levels of angst in the post. You must really hate the game? If it makes you feel depressed then maybe it's not for you? I don't know. Anyway, here is some quick feedback on those points:

AI retards
Agreed. The AI bugs need fixing.

Bad defence
I think you're underestimating the role of spells in defence. There are plenty of good defensive abilities in the game.

Still though, the actual attributes are bad. Fine.

Meaningless attributes
"Near meaningless" and "slaughter of complexity and depth". It's so untrue and unnecessary.

Your point only holds up on a relative level. You can't argue that because they affect less than the first one that they are bad. Criticize it rather in isolation.

Anyway, I disagree. The attributes achieve exactly what they need to so why add extra fluff? Especially considering that points in "class attributes" give you stats as well i.e. Warfare gives damage, scoundrel gives crit and movement, etc.

Calling memory "tax" is arbitrary. Instead of "tax", the correct word is "trade-off".

If you think that memory is unnecessary and that you don't have enough AP to even cast all the abilities you've memorized, well then I've got news for you. You're missing out on a lot of builds in the game.

Rollercoaster talents
I can barely relate here. I think talents are fine. Maybe a few tweaks here and there, but each talent I choose greatly benefits me.

Binary outcomes of armor
Quick little point: Technically in both games the outcome is binary. Either CC works or it doesn't. What you mean to say is that the outcome is now certain.

I disagree here. It adds another layer of depth to the game. The first one was an immediate CC fest and it was too easy and simple as a result.

They could add some passive defense to CC itself, sure. I'm not sure how it will impact combat, but I don't feel like it is necessary. Just because there is no RNG based uncertainty doesn't mean there is no uncertainty. As in chess there is no uncertainty in the outcomes of taking pieces, but you still don't know what moves your opponent will make. We must consider whether we want uncertainty for its own sake or whether it will add something to the system.

As to what reduces what kind of armour, I think "elemental" damage reducing magic and "physical" reducing physical is perfectly fine. It serves the purpose it seeks to achieve. To apply your own views as to how it should work is arbitrary.

I agree about taunt though. Taunt seriously needs to work always regardless of armour.

Initiative.
Yeah, initiative is weird. I think the armour system solves the problem they were trying to fix with this new initiative system.


Last edited by Aryah; 27/09/17 07:39 AM.
Joined: Aug 2014
J
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
J
Joined: Aug 2014
Great write-up by Luckmann, even though it's a bit more "dramatic" than necessary at some points.
I really hope Larian is reading this!
Even better, I would love some official response acknowledging the existence of these issues and that there is a conscious effort in addressing them smile

Joined: Sep 2017
B
stranger
Offline
stranger
B
Joined: Sep 2017
I would like to respond to the criticism of Retribution.
Note that I'm only at the beginning (middle?) of Act 2 and also use a mod so the Taunt bypass armor to make my life easier but it's still fine without it. I have around 50% reflect damage at the time.

I think Retribution is balanced. My tank phoenix dive into the enemy, taunt a few of them (let him engage alone if you don't use cheats taunt), and maybe buff my armor. At the end of the turn, my tank has done as much damage as my secondary DPS while tanking the damage. Even destroying enough physical armor for my other characters to CC the enemies.
My tank would not have done as much damage with his one hand or the shield bash. The fact that I can taunt enemies to mitigate damage and do a little damage on top for free is a great tool in my fights. I don't regret putting point into this attribute.

Joined: Sep 2017
A
stranger
Offline
stranger
A
Joined: Sep 2017
Originally Posted by Benbass
I would like to respond to the criticism of Retribution.
Note that I'm only at the beginning (middle?) of Act 2 and also use a mod so the Taunt bypass armor to make my life easier but it's still fine without it. I have around 50% reflect damage at the time.

I think Retribution is balanced. My tank phoenix dive into the enemy, taunt a few of them (let him engage alone if you don't use cheats taunt), and maybe buff my armor. At the end of the turn, my tank has done as much damage as my secondary DPS while tanking the damage. Even destroying enough physical armor for my other characters to CC the enemies.
My tank would not have done as much damage with his one hand or the shield bash. The fact that I can taunt enemies to mitigate damage and do a little damage on top for free is a great tool in my fights. I don't regret putting point into this attribute.


That's pretty cool. I had in mind to do this with my tank as well, but quickly realised how flawed it was in the base game. Without taunt working on armoured characters, there's no real point to go with a tank build because they're going to target your weak characters at the start anyway, as they should. Then your tank character is just standing there wishing he/she has more damage.

"Soft CC" should be able to go through armours by default (like oil slowing). This should apply to the Shackles of Pain skill as well IMO.

As a result I scrapped the sword and shield idea and just went with dual wield. If Larian change this, I'd love to try it again in a later play through and after seeing your post I'll add retribution as well.

Last edited by Aryah; 27/09/17 09:12 AM.
Joined: Jun 2017
K
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
K
Joined: Jun 2017
I don't agree on retribution. You should invest it on your tank to make it work. I have 12 retribution and shield deflect on my lone wolf tank. He never dies. Ranged enemies basically kill themselves.

Page 2 of 5 1 2 3 4 5

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5