98 réponses à ce sujet

[JaegerBane]

swn32 wrote...
Again this is assuming all research upgrades are done and damage maximizing talents and armor parts are chosen. So i totally agree with mosor's post, warp ammo has little utility to a class with only rapid fire weapons.

Mosor's point was that AP ammo is a superior choice for rapid fire weapons - or at least, that's what he wrote.

Your point is that AP ammo is a superior choice on a fully-maxed out upgraded SMG.

They aren't the same argument.

I actually agree with your point... but it isn't the same thing as what mosor was saying.

I don't really understand what you mean by a class with 'only rapid fire weapons' either, as taken literally no such class exists.

Modifié par JaegerBane, 19 septembre 2010 - 10:17 .

[FouCapitan]

If you're running an Inferno AR Soldier, better off getting lvl 1 or 2 Stasis now that LotSB is out. Dropping those YMIR Mechs like flies on insanity without taking a single shot in retaliation is glorious.

[sinosleep]

It's also an exploit. If you want to use it, use it, but at the same time players new to the power should be made aware of what it is. 

Modifié par sinosleep, 19 septembre 2010 - 02:54 .

[termokanden]

According to what some Bioware folks have told us, Incindiary Ammo does not do extra damage against barriers at all. None whatsoever.


Something here doesn't add up.

It's also an exploit. If you want to use it, use it, but at the same time players new to the power should be made aware of what it is.

So now we're asking players to stop taking full advantage of Stasis just so they don't trigger the exploit. Hmm.

Modifié par termokanden, 19 septembre 2010 - 03:04 .

[sinosleep]

No, I'm asking that players be made AWARE that it's an exploit since some players don't like using them. I'm one of those players and have since stopped using it altogether on my vanguards (since the ridiculous fall damage was really the only reason to take it on that class IMO) while continuing to use it on classes that use it for the CC instead. Believe it or not there are those of us out there that would be rather pissed off to find out something we were using for X amount of time and thought was a valid tactic was actually an exploit.

[edit here] And I'll once again clarify that I have no issue with people who want to take advantage of exploits in single player games. I just don't think it should be talked about like it's an intended benefit when there are players who don't want to use exploits and will be unwittingly using one if they don't know any better.

Modifié par sinosleep, 19 septembre 2010 - 03:17 .

[PsyrenY]

Agreed with sinosleep, I don't intend to use the Stasis fall exploit either. I'm quite capable of clearing Insanity without it.



As for AP ammo, it's not all bad. I like it on classes that can't get inferno ammo like a Sentinel, and Tungsten Ammo on a Viper makes taking down Scions much faster.

[mosor]

JaegerBane wrote...

I think you're missing the point on the ammo, mosor. Warp Ammo is a type that trades raw punch for versatility. The argument above doesn't seem consistent, as at one stage you write off 10% reduction in damage as worth the CC on undefended opponents but at another stage consider 20% damage boost to be worth losing *50%* damage boost against Barriers.... on the basis that 'rapid fire weapons take down any barrier quickly', a meaningless statement when made in reference to a comparison of ammo powers. The rate of fire is virtually irrelevant to how fast a given weapon takes down a Barrier - SMGs favour barriers etc, but an Avenger takes them down at the same speed as equivalent level of armour while things like Revenants and Mattocks actually favour armour penetration over Barriers, so in those cases your'e actually experiencing weaker overall defence-busting performance by selecting fire or AP ammo. Not to mention that any heavy pistol takes down armour 'quickly', so using the same logic, AP ammo is superfluous too.

You don't seem to favour a particular aspect of ammos, preferring side effects one second then damage the next. Warp Ammo is generally only worth it when you make use of all of it's features, which is primarily why I noted that characters without ammo powers make best use of it. I would argue the Soldier is also a class that can make effective use of it, as it plugs the only non-cooldown defence gap they have while not interferring with AR use.

Reliance on squadmate ammos is also a dubious proposition - it isn't a simplistic case of 'I save 10 poins for something else' - aside from being weaker, squadmate ammos are affected by issues with the AI, they lack special features in some cases, they rely on you bringing the right squadmate, and they can easily conflict with each other. They're useful in a pinch, but it certainly isn't a case of being able to rely on them to the same degree as using your own ammo power.

Ultimately, Warp Ammo's prime benefits are that it's virtually always effective at whatever you're shooting at, with the sole issue of shields. It doesn't matter if your opponent is a synth or organic, it doesn't matter what weapon you are using barring sheilded enemies, and if you have biotic support - either as an Adept or with a biotic squadmate - your damage against undefended targets *dwarfs* any other ammo power in the game. AP ammo shares some of these bonuses but trades versatility for a 20% boost against armoured and undefended - but not biotic'd - targets. What you pick depends heavily on how your play, but in conclusion, it simply isn't accurate to summarise all of this into 'only worth it on a Widow'.

You're going too much by the numbers, and not too much by practical experience. The difference in taking out harbringer's barrier using a tempest or locust is about a second difference whether you use squad incindiary or heavy warp ammo. Sure a second extra may matter on paper, but gameplay wise, it's about as useful as a dog licking it's balls.

Regarding SMG upgrades, it does make a difference,. The less base time it takes for an SMG to take out a barrier, the less significant the warp ammo bonus is. These are not real numbers. But for instance if an SMG with no upgrades takes 6 seconds to take out harby's shields than the 50% warp ammo bonus theoretically saves you 3 seconds. If you fully upgrade the SMG to 6/6 and it takes only 3 seconds to take out harby's shields, the warp ammo bonus only saves you a 1.5 seconds give or take.

As for a soldier. The only person's barrier that wasn't a complete joke to take out with the mattock and heightened adrenaline rush was Tela Vasir's. I'll stick with inferno ammo on that class.

Modifié par mosor, 19 septembre 2010 - 04:34 .

[termokanden]

I know exactly what you mean. I personally do not use exploits in games, don't use cheats, don't use mods.



But I was just realizing the other day how ridiculous it is to go out of your way to avoid running into an exploit. I personally stopped using Stasis. But reading a post the other day saying it's up to us if we want to use the exploit or not made me a bit annoyed. We're running into a bug trying to use Stasis as it was intended, we're not trying to exploit it. Well I wasn't at least.

[OniGanon]

Considering how small the window of opportunity is, you're pretty unlikely to exploit it by accident.

[termokanden]

Really? You wouldn't fire on the enemy just as it comes out of Stasis? Because that's what I did every time when I didn't know about this bug.

I just saw they were dropping to the ground, helpless. So naturally I thought this was a good time to shoot them. Furthermore, I also used melee attacks sometimes, which of course also will happen in that window of opportunity.

Even when I tried to wait until they actually hit the ground, someone else in my squad would keep shooting them at just the right time.

Modifié par termokanden, 19 septembre 2010 - 03:58 .

[swn32]

JaegerBane wrote...

Mosor's point was that AP ammo is a superior choice for rapid fire weapons - or at least, that's what he wrote.

Your point is that AP ammo is a superior choice on a fully-maxed out upgraded SMG.

They aren't the same argument.

I actually agree with your point... but it isn't the same thing as what mosor was saying.

I don't really understand what you mean by a class with 'only rapid fire weapons' either, as taken literally no such class exists.

He was talking about classes with no ammo power i.e. Engineer, Adept, Sentinel. Their primary weapon is an SMG.

[JaegerBane]

mosor wrote...
You're going too much by the numbers, and not too much by practical experience. The difference in taking out harbringer's barrier using a tempest or locust is about a second difference whether you use squad incindiary or heavy warp ammo. Sure a second extra may matter on paper, but gameplay wise, it's about as useful as a dog licking it's balls.

In a game where you have no guarantees whatsoever how long you're going to have to shoot a target and that it can take little more than a second for an enemy to deplete your own defences, claiming taking a few seconds less is 'as useful as licking a dogs balls' is glossing over the mechanics to the point where there's no point in making comparisons. Consider throwing a singularity at harby - you've got a few seconds to take him down before it burns out. That extra time is the difference between cleanly taking him down and taking a blast to the face.

I mean, you're making a huge hooplah about how a few seconds don't matter. What kind of time advantage are you expecting from 20% extra damage against armour? What are you expecting to see in that 20% that takes it so far ahead of Warp Ammo, considering that you disregard anything less than a few seconds? Any argument you make that Warp Ammo's effects just aren't noticable on barriers also applies to AP against armour, as the numbers we're talking are so low.

Regarding SMG upgrades, it does make a difference,. The less base time it takes for an SMG to take out a barrier, the less significant the warp ammo bonus is. These are not real numbers. But for instance if an SMG with no upgrades takes 6 seconds to take out harby's shields than the 50% warp ammo bonus theoretically saves you 3 seconds. If you fully upgrade the SMG to 6/6 and it takes only 3 seconds to take out harby's shields, the warp ammo bonus only saves you a 1.5 seconds give or take.

You weren't mentioning SMGs beforehand - you vaguely mentioned 'rapid fire weapons'. Obviously Warp Ammo's advantages over AP waver somewhat on guns that have a 75% - 100% extra damage against Barriers. You were the one, however, that claimed practicality trumps numbers, so hence I'm not sure why you consider the mere 20% damage extra against armour on a gun that isn't that good at dealing with armour *that* significant. By your logic above you shouldn't even be using an SMG on armour.

As for a soldier. The only person's barrier that wasn't a complete joke to take out with the mattock and heightened adrenaline rush was Tela Vasir's. I'll stick with inferno ammo on that class.

A lot of this is anecdotal, mosor - I don't doubt that Inferno ammo is a very good ammo. That doesn't somehow mean Warp Ammo is a 'garbage' or 'only good on a Widow' or whatever the offhand comment you made was pointing out. Ultimately, once all the big upgrades are brrought in and AR is maxed out, it becomes a question what purpose *any* ammo power gives. Inferno only gets some press because it effects multiple enemies.

[JaegerBane]

swn32 wrote...
He was talking about classes with no ammo power i.e. Engineer, Adept, Sentinel. Their primary weapon is an SMG.

...up until the collector ship. Then they generally go for Assault Rifles or Sniper Rifles. Neither of which are particularly well-served by AP ammo.

[JaegerBane]

sinosleep wrote...
[edit here] And I'll once again clarify that I have no issue with people who want to take advantage of exploits in single player games. I just don't think it should be talked about like it's an intended benefit when there are players who don't want to use exploits and will be unwittingly using one if they don't know any better.

The problem is that you're on a rickety raft when you start requesting certain exploits/tricks/'advanced techniques' not be discussed, but others are kosher. Conceptually there's nothing different between taking advantage of Stasis' wtfpwnage and using the reload trick on the claymore - if one's ok, there isn't really any good reason to claim the other is not.

[Kronner]

JaegerBane wrote...

The problem is that you're on a rickety raft when you start requesting certain exploits/tricks/'advanced techniques' not be discussed, but others are kosher. Conceptually there's nothing different between taking advantage of Stasis' wtfpwnage and using the reload trick on the claymore - if one's ok, there isn't really any good reason to claim the other is not.

Except that one (reload trick) is a feature recommended by lead gameplay designer, the other (stasis' fall of death) is said to be a bug/exploit by the very same person.

Modifié par Kronner, 19 septembre 2010 - 06:11 .

[mosor]

JaegerBane wrote...


I mean, you're making a huge hooplah about how a few seconds don't matter. What kind of time advantage are you expecting from 20% extra damage against armour? What are you expecting to see in that 20% that takes it so far ahead of Warp Ammo, considering that you disregard anything less than a few seconds? Any argument you make that Warp Ammo's effects just aren't noticable on barriers also applies to AP against armour, as the numbers we're talking are so low.

I'm talking about a second difference, maybe a second and a half, but not a few. That really makes little difference gameplay wise, even on an adept.  Except for the odd occasion, 1 extra second isn't going to make a difference if you live or die. It happens, but really rarely.  This difference is even more negligable considering most collectors you kill a lot faster than harbringer. As for AP ammo, personally I don't use it either. Though in AP's defence, armor is generally harder to take down than most barriers. Regardless, the differences are small. I'd rather spend 10 points on a more useful skill like area reave.

You weren't mentioning SMGs beforehand - you vaguely mentioned 'rapid fire weapons'. Obviously Warp Ammo's advantages over AP waver somewhat on guns that have a 75% - 100% extra damage against Barriers. You were the one, however, that claimed practicality trumps numbers, so hence I'm not sure why you consider the mere 20% damage extra against armour on a gun that isn't that good at dealing with armour *that* significant. By your logic above you shouldn't even be using an SMG on armour.

Even on rapid fire assault rifles this is the case, just maybe not the mattock on a non soldier since it's semi auto
The point was using AP on an SMG against Armor and healh is better than warp. Most enemies have stronger armor than barrier.  As I mentioned above. I don't even use that. Squad incindiary is good enough and I have 10 points to invest in something more useful.

A lot of this is anecdotal, mosor - I don't doubt that Inferno ammo is a very good ammo. That doesn't somehow mean Warp Ammo is a 'garbage' or 'only good on a Widow' or whatever the offhand comment you made was pointing out. Ultimately, once all the big upgrades are brrought in and AR is maxed out, it becomes a question what purpose *any* ammo power gives. Inferno only gets some press because it effects multiple enemies.

It affects multiple enemies and offers some CC is exactly why it's useful. As is squad cryo. As is disruptor on geth. A soldier with a mattock will kill almost enemy in 1 or 2 rushes even without an ammo power.

[sinosleep]

JaegerBane wrote...

The problem is that you're on a rickety raft when you start requesting certain exploits/tricks/'advanced techniques' not be discussed, but others are kosher. Conceptually there's nothing different between taking advantage of Stasis' wtfpwnage and using the reload trick on the claymore - if one's ok, there isn't really any good reason to claim the other is not.

Except I'm not requesting they not be discussed, I'm requesting they be clearly labled as what they are so that those of us that don't want to exploit the game don't unwittingly do so. Simply saying "take X bonus power cause it does obscene damage and makes others irrilevant" is misleading when it's not made clear that X bonus power only does that if you exploit the game.

That and like Kronner said, one is a tactic that applies to every weapon in the game and is dev approved while the other has been labled as a flat out bug.

[JaegerBane]

Kronner wrote...

JaegerBane wrote...

The problem is that you're on a rickety raft when you start requesting certain exploits/tricks/'advanced techniques' not be discussed, but others are kosher. Conceptually there's nothing different between taking advantage of Stasis' wtfpwnage and using the reload trick on the claymore - if one's ok, there isn't really any good reason to claim the other is not.

Except that one (reload trick) is a feature recommended by lead gameplay designer, the other (stasis' fall of death) is said to be a bug/exploit by the very same person.

Oh please Kronner, let's not get into this whole 'Christina recommends this!' saga again. She explained how the reload trick worked. That's all. She didn't give it some magic stamp of approval and then cast out the Stasis damage like Cain after Abel.

Hell, in the post you mention she made it pretty clear a lot of the contributory factors were actually expected affects (ragdolls etc) and also said it was up to the player to use or stay away from as they saw fit.

[Kronner]

JaegerBane wrote...

Oh please Kronner, let's not get into this whole 'Christina recommends this!' saga again. She explained how the reload trick worked. That's all. She didn't give it some magic stamp of approval and then cast out the Stasis damage like Cain after Abel.

Hell, in the post you mention she made it pretty clear a lot of the contributory factors were actually expected affects (ragdolls etc) and also said it was up to the player to use or stay away from as they saw fit.

No she came to the forums by herself and said there is a reload trick and how to do it, called it an advanced tip and said that she uses it herself. If you do not see the difference between that and her saying Stasis fall of death is a bug, then I am not gonna convince you anyways since last time I tried you said Christina lied because it was convenient not to admit there is a bug..which now looks incredibly stupid considering she did just that later when there actually was a bug found. So I do not really care what you think about that anymore. Not worth my time.

Modifié par Kronner, 19 septembre 2010 - 06:30 .

[sinosleep]

Here are the actual quotes

When stasis wears off, there is a brief window during which the enemy is considered non-hostile. If the player damages the enemy during this time, damage will not be correctly scaled for difficulty or other factors.



While not 100% accurate, a good way of describing it is the enemy takes damage as if it was a "casual difficulty" enemy.



In addition in most cases when playersdemonstate this behavior they are dealing point blank damage to a ragdolled creature. As has been discussed, this in itself is enough to cause x3-x4 damage to the enemy. Multiplied with the fact that difficulty scaling code is not applied, you end up with effectively a tremendous damage multiplier, particularly if you are playing on a harder difficulty like insanity.



So in summary:


- It is intended if you shoot a ragdolled enemy at point blank you geta tremendous damage bonus (x3-x4)

- But there is a bug that further increases your effective damage, particularly on higher difficulty levels where enemies are usually very tough

One advanced tip I can give for vanguard players is, you can cancel out of a reload animation to melee an enemy and you will still reload as long as you've completed 60% of the reload animation. It's tricky to master, definitely for more twitchy players, but it really helps with the claymore.

You can do it with any class and any weapon. In addition to melee, any power works to cancel out of a reload.  For example, on my adept I oftenuse pull or warp to cancel out of a reload.

There is a WORLD of difference between those three quotes.

[edited cause I forgot a quote]

Modifié par sinosleep, 19 septembre 2010 - 06:43 .

[JaegerBane]

sinosleep wrote...
Except I'm not requesting they not be discussed, I'm requesting they be clearly labled as what they are so that those of us that don't want to exploit the game don't unwittingly do so. Simply saying "take X bonus power cause it does obscene damage and makes others irrilevant" is misleading when it's not made clear that X bonus power only does that if you exploit the game.

It's still a *very* fine line, Sino. The fact that the devs explained how the reload trick works does not somehow exempt it from being a sly trick (evidence by the fact that it requires melee'ing at nothing while shooting - does that sound like a likely combo to you?), and furthermore, what exactly does 'developer approved' even mean? How does whether the developer approves or not magically change the nature of the trick? What *possible* reason would there have been, if this was a basic aspect of gameplay, to have weapons that balance their punch with 1-shot-then-reload?

I've always found the sheer fanaticism over the reload trick's legitimacy to be one of the more amusing issues displayed on these forums, and one which I wouldn't normally care about either way. The only reason I posted here is I find it absurd that people start going beyond the difference between cheating and exploiting and actually start trying to define different levels of exploits, ranked by 'developer approval' - this level of granularity just gets absolutely silly.

It's in the game. Use it or don't use it - but let's not start trying to grade the things for public exposure, shall we?

That and like Kronner said, one is a tactic that applies to every weapon in the game and is dev approved while the other has been labled as a flat out bug.

I'd love to see this regurlarly referenced post where Christina signed her signature in blood and laid down her soul in the oath that the players were supposed to use the reload trick. That's pretty much the only thing I can think that she did to elicit such fanatical adherence to the trick's 'kosher' status.

[sinosleep]

There's nothing fanatical about it, I just posted both quotes one after the other. If you can't see that they are SUBSTANTIALLY different I don't know what to tell you. If you want to continue this conversation you can take it up with somebody else.

Modifié par sinosleep, 19 septembre 2010 - 06:39 .

[JaegerBane]

Kronner wrote...
No she came to the forums by herself and said there is a reload trick and how to do it, called it an advanced tip and said that she uses it herself. If you do not see the difference between that and her saying Stasis fall of death is a bug, then I am not gonna convince you anyways since last time I tried you said Christina lied because it was convenient not to admit there is a bug..which now looks incredibly stupid considering she did just that later when there actually was a bug found. So I do not really care what you think about that anymore. Not worth my time.

All I can say is Kronner, if I had a quid for every time a developer billed an exploit/bug/fortuitous operation as an 'advanced tip', or 'a little trick', or 'it's not a bug, it's a feature!', I'd be able to retire from software development already

[Kronner]

JaegerBane wrote...

All I can say is Kronner, if I had a quid for every time a developer billed an exploit/bug/fortuitous operation as an 'advanced tip', or 'a little trick', or 'it's not a bug, it's a feature!', I'd be able to retire from software development already

All I can say...who cares about your job and what does it have to do with a BioWare game? Just because I can write SNTP client in C++ does not mean I am eligible to say what is and what is not a bug in other SW. Your thinking is seriously flawed man. You somehow think you know more about the gameplay of ME2 than lead gameplay designer of the game. There are no words for that.

(wondering if you are gonna call Christina a liar this time)

Modifié par Kronner, 19 septembre 2010 - 06:41 .