71 réponses à ce sujet

[JaegerBane]

sinosleep wrote...
If that's subjective land please tell me where in objective land it is that adepts and infiltrators play in wildly different ways that don't largely revolve around bonus weapon selection. Cause otherwise my post was a subjective reply to your own subjective reply and so bringing up the fact that it was subjective doesn't really acomplish anything.

I'm not looking for an argument, sino - I'm just pointing out that the difference between shooting at long range and shooting at short range can't realistically be considered to be similar to the difference between playing, for instance, an engineer and a vanguard.

[sinosleep]

JaegerBane wrote...

To be fair, it's not like there's ever a situation where that goes unexplained. If you can harden your skin to the consistency of stone or prevent the archer from ever shooting in the first place, why would you bother lugging around 30+ kg of steel plate which would make said casting harder?

Though yeah, this is why I prefer playing Eldritch Knights and Arcane Warriors...

How is that any different than shields and barriers making armor largely useless other than for protection against melee attacks which support classes would rarely be dealing with? It's the same thing IMO. Why would support classes bother lugging around heavy armor when they have shields and barriers that can stop enemy weaponry and can also stop enemies from shooting in the first place? 

Modifié par sinosleep, 24 octobre 2010 - 08:56 .

[sinosleep]

JaegerBane wrote...

I'm not looking for an argument, sino - I'm just pointing out that the difference between shooting at long range and shooting at short range can't realistically be considered to be similar to the difference between playing, for instance, an engineer and a vanguard.

That's not what I compared to though is it? It was a reply to the statement that the infiltrator and adept were the only classes in the game not forced into one style of play without gimping themselves. And I consider cqc and straight casters different ways to play since playing cqc often requires you to use what seems like largely the same powers in different ways.

[JaegerBane]

sinosleep wrote...

JaegerBane wrote...

To be fair, it's not like there's ever a situation where that goes unexplained. If you can harden your skin to the consistency of stone or prevent the archer from ever shooting in the first place, why would you bother lugging around 30+ kg of steel plate which would make said casting harder?

Though yeah, this is why I prefer playing Eldritch Knights and Arcane Warriors...

How is that any different than shields and barriers making armor largely useless other than for protection against melee attacks? It's the same thing IMO. Why would biotics bother lugging around heavy armor when they have shields and barriers and can stop people shooting at them from shooting in the first place? 

It's different in that, the last time I checked, a biotic does not incur any penalty for wearing a full suit of powered armour in comparison to a skin-tight catsuit i.e. there's no reason not to wear thick armour. Generally, mages do have a penalty to their casting when wearing steel plate or similar.

[davidshooter]

sinosleep wrote...

JaegerBane wrote...

To be fair, it's not like there's ever a situation where that goes unexplained. If you can harden your skin to the consistency of stone or prevent the archer from ever shooting in the first place, why would you bother lugging around 30+ kg of steel plate which would make said casting harder?

Though yeah, this is why I prefer playing Eldritch Knights and Arcane Warriors...

How is that any different than shields and barriers making armor largely useless other than for protection against melee attacks? It's the same thing IMO. Why would biotics bother lugging around heavy armor when they have shields and barriers and can stop people shooting at them from shooting in the first place? 

You're bending over backwards to justify something in game when the explanation is very simple.  The chicks are half naked for the boy gamers.  That's why Shep as an Adept still wears armor as do the Asari you fight.   I hope they've learned their lesson though as Liara in the DLC (also a biotic wearing light armor) looks fine.

Modifié par davidshooter, 24 octobre 2010 - 08:59 .

[Hader102]

rozpocet1 wrote...

 I think this would be the ultimate RPG feature:
(I use ME2 powers for all my examples)

Let's say every class has 5 active powers and only 1 of them is predefined. That's the class specific power and is not selectable for other classes. This means you can choose 4 additional powers. They only have to correspond to your class.

EXAMPLES:

SOLDIER - Combat Specialist
Adrenaline Rush (class Power)
+
4 Combat Powers

ADEPT - Biotic Specialist
Singularity (class Power)
+
4 Biotic Powers

ENGINEER - Tech Specialist
Combat Drone (class Power)
+
4 Tech Powers

VANGUARD - Biotic & Combat
Charge (class Power)
+
2 Biotic Powers
+
2 Combat Powers

SENTINEL - Biotic & Tech
Tech Armor (class Power)
+
2 Biotic Powers
+
2 Tech Powers

INFILTRATOR - Combat & Tech
Tactical Cloak (class Power)
+
2 Combat Powers
+
2 Tech Powers

The one specific power defines the class. Beyond that every player can choose and make their own character.
A Vanguard with Charge chooses Pull and Throw as his Biotic Powers and Fortification and Incendiary Ammo as his Combat Powers. 
There are so many possible combinations it never gets boring!!!

Some might say this would make things to easy for everyone. It partly could, but there are ways to make it difficult again:

1. Player classes have acces to fewer weapons.

• Infiltrators use only Sniper Rifles and maybe Pistols.
• Vanguards use only Shotguns and maybe Pistols.
• Adepts, Engineers and Sentinels use only SMGs and maybe Pistols .
• Soldiers use Assault Rifles and maybe 2 additional weapons.

2. Enemy protection layers should work differently in general. I don't want to shoot them down just like that in one order.

• Enemy shields recharge after some time behind cover. (Just like Shepard's shields)

This means an enemy with no shields left and only 50% health takes cover. Shields regenerate and he has 50% health and 100% shields again.

• Barrier could be used only for a limited amount of time but the enemy wouldn't take any damage.

Enemy has a barrier. You have to wait until it's gone and then you can take down his health until he uses the barrier again. (Of course with recharge time etc.)

Thank you for reading!
Your thoughts?

I had similar ideas myself. A bit of fine tuning to the system like that would work well I think. I would make a couple tweaks though. Firstly, biotic attacks like throw, lift (if brought back), slam, singularity, etc., i.e. the ones that manipulate physics, should ignore shields and armor (barriers, being a biotic thing, could resist biotic attacks but perhaps take more damage from them than normal attacks). Kinda sucks to have such awesome powers like those leveled up only to be able to use them when you've taken out the enemies actual protection. Taking down ANY enemies health even on insanity mode was easy, and it kinda made those biotic powers useless for most of the fight. They should at least do something...

Also don't forget about the 5th power, or the special ones, like you get for unlocking someone's loyalty and subsequent power. I think, for variety's sake, those should remain a freebee, meaning class specializations are not strict on them. Obviously, a non biotic couldn't use a biotic special power, but that shouldn't keep a biotic from choosing a combat power too. Just one example.

[JaegerBane]

sinosleep wrote...
That's not what I compared to though is it? It was a reply to the statement that the infiltrator and adept were the only classes in the game not forced into one style of play without gimping themselves. And I consider cqc and straight casters different ways to play since playing cqc often requires you to use what seems like largely the same powers in different ways.

I wasn't aware that you were making a comparison at all, sino - you appeared to be claiming that weapons alone were enough to vary the style of play. As I said, it gets subjective when the definition of 'style of play' varies from player to player.

Regarding the Infiiltrator, my reasons behind that are the fact that it's a class that packs nukes, CC, stealth and mind control into a single character - the potential for varied play there is pretty high compared to the other combat-focused classes. As for the Adept, the differences are best illustrated by how AverageGatsby plays Adepts and how Bozorg and thisisme8 play adepts.

[kstarler]

JaegerBane wrote...

I wasn't aware that you were making a comparison at all, sino - you appeared to be claiming that weapons alone were enough to vary the style of play. As I said, it gets subjective when the definition of 'style of play' varies from player to player.

Regarding the Infiiltrator, my reasons behind that are the fact that it's a class that packs nukes, CC, stealth and mind control into a single character - the potential for varied play there is pretty high compared to the other combat-focused classes. As for the Adept, the differences are best illustrated by how AverageGatsby plays Adepts and how Bozorg and thisisme8 play adepts.

I don't know if it counts for anything, but I do think there is a difference between a widow soldier and a revenant soldier. My reasoning is along the lines that I tried a CQC revenant soldier my last time through as that particular class and died about 10 times during the CS mission. In contrast, I decided to see how I would do as a Mattock/Widow soldier with Heightened AR instead of Hardened, and I didn't die once the entire mission. So there must be some difference in the way the class is played, else why would I have such a hard time one way and such an easy time the other way?

As a side note, I have played the game through before as a revenant soldier, but as a mid-range, burst fire type, not a CQC type. Anyway, while there may not be as large a difference between the two builds as, say, a dominate engineer and a cryo engineer, there is still a difference.

[Bozorgmehr]

JaegerBane wrote...

At the end of the day, any system that permits the player to customise to a good degree is open to abuse. You can't really avoid this.

True, but the question is to what limit you allow customization. I like the unique class powers, but they are not balanced enough to allow the freedom to pick combat/tech/biotic powers randomly. I think Soldier, Sentinel, Vanguard and Infiltrator are good enough for what you're proposing. But the Adept and Engineer are somewhat behind. Singularity and Combat Drones are in a different league compared to AR, Tech Armor, Charge and Cloak. If Bioware improves their unique abilities to get them on par with the others, you have my vote.

The Vanguard is probably the best example of where this kind of strategy falls apart. Charge is a cracking power, true, but the class is so ruthlessly intolerant of customisation that it essentially plays only one tactic. You can try other styles of play with the Vanguard but all you'll achieve is a view of how other class would play if they were crap. For a game as long as ME2, I'm not sure intentionally producing such single-minded classes is wise.

The Vanguard is perhaps the best example of the good and the bad. Yes they are one dimensional, but I like the dimension they charge into a lot. The Charge experience alone is good enough to please most players a full playthrough (3 for me so far). Vanguards (and other classes) have one super-power they will use >90% of the time. They only need some gear to improve their main power without getting in the way (cooldown wise). I don't think power customization will change much in terms of gameplay (Vanguards will still be Charging all day), but it will weaken classes already behind even more.

[JaegerBane]

kstarler wrote...
I don't know if it counts for anything, but I do think there is a difference between a widow soldier and a revenant soldier. My reasoning is along the lines that I tried a CQC revenant soldier my last time through as that particular class and died about 10 times during the CS mission. In contrast, I decided to see how I would do as a Mattock/Widow soldier with Heightened AR instead of Hardened, and I didn't die once the entire mission. So there must be some difference in the way the class is played, else why would I have such a hard time one way and such an easy time the other way?

Fighting at long range is inherently safer than fighting at short range, so I'm not surprised one felt easier. By 'style' I wouldn't normally consider standing back and taking safe shots to be particularly different to fighting up close... I mean, realistically you have the option to do this with every class in the game, guns or no guns - hell, you can do this in virtually any action game which don't even have classes. Yes, there is a difference in terms of how dangerous it is but it's not like it's a new experience.

As a side note, I have played the game through before as a revenant soldier, but as a mid-range, burst fire type, not a CQC type. Anyway, while there may not be as large a difference between the two builds as, say, a dominate engineer and a cryo engineer, there is still a difference.

Never said there was no difference. All I was saying is that I personally felt shooting generally feels like I'm playing an FPS/TPS, no matter what range I'm fighting at. I can't say the same for playing an infiltrator

[Bozorgmehr]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

man i can argue with you all day bozo. is that alright i call you bozo?!?

I would appreciate Sir Bozo 

anyways the vangaurd might be able to pick a few biotics, but your forgetting they get combat abilities too. so yeah you can have pull/warp like an adept, but youll have weapons/ ammo mods as well. the difference between vangaurds and adepts is very clear compared to what we had ion ME1.

Yes, but that system would be make Vanguard even stronger and Adepts weaker.

a pull/warp, inferno/disruptor ammo, AR vangaurd isnt any more powerfull then a throw/shockwave, inferno/cryo ammo, shotgun vangaurd. so i dont see how that small of a change would completely throw the balance, or so called balance, of what ME3 could offer. it offers variety, and replayability which are things you seem to enjoy. so whats the problem?

Adepts will be less interesting; Vanguards will be almost equally skilled casters plus Charge and firepower. Adepts have what they have now. Singularity on its own isn't enough to experience something different; playing an Adept instead of a Vanguard.

[kstarler]

JaegerBane wrote...

kstarler wrote...
I don't know if it counts for anything, but I do think there is a difference between a widow soldier and a revenant soldier. My reasoning is along the lines that I tried a CQC revenant soldier my last time through as that particular class and died about 10 times during the CS mission. In contrast, I decided to see how I would do as a Mattock/Widow soldier with Heightened AR instead of Hardened, and I didn't die once the entire mission. So there must be some difference in the way the class is played, else why would I have such a hard time one way and such an easy time the other way?

Fighting at long range is inherently safer than fighting at short range, so I'm not surprised one felt easier. By 'style' I wouldn't normally consider standing back and taking safe shots to be particularly different to fighting up close... I mean, realistically you have the option to do this with every class in the game, guns or no guns - hell, you can do this in virtually any action game which don't even have classes. Yes, there is a difference in terms of how dangerous it is but it's not like it's a new experience.

As a side note, I have played the game through before as a revenant soldier, but as a mid-range, burst fire type, not a CQC type. Anyway, while there may not be as large a difference between the two builds as, say, a dominate engineer and a cryo engineer, there is still a difference.

Never said there was no difference. All I was saying is that I personally felt shooting generally feels like I'm playing an FPS/TPS, no matter what range I'm fighting at. I can't say the same for playing an infiltrator

Fair enough. I think we are in agreement for the most part. I would like to see some additional class abilities for each class, but I always worry that more isn't always better, sometimes it's just more. And, inevitably, more abilities can generate balance issues. Still, more freedom within a class and within the game is usually a good thing, and as with the fact that some people don't use stasis because they feel it's overpowered, I'm happy to be able to drop that scion right off his moving platform.

[The Spamming Troll]

Bozorgmehr wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

man i can argue with you all day bozo. is that alright i call you bozo?!?

I would appreciate Sir Bozo 

anyways the vangaurd might be able to pick a few biotics, but your forgetting they get combat abilities too. so yeah you can have pull/warp like an adept, but youll have weapons/ ammo mods as well. the difference between vangaurds and adepts is very clear compared to what we had ion ME1.

Yes, but that system would be make Vanguard even stronger and Adepts weaker.

a pull/warp, inferno/disruptor ammo, AR vangaurd isnt any more powerfull then a throw/shockwave, inferno/cryo ammo, shotgun vangaurd. so i dont see how that small of a change would completely throw the balance, or so called balance, of what ME3 could offer. it offers variety, and replayability which are things you seem to enjoy. so whats the problem?

Adepts will be less interesting; Vanguards will be almost equally skilled casters plus Charge and firepower. Adepts have what they have now. Singularity on its own isn't enough to experience something different; playing an Adept instead of a Vanguard.

something that you dont seem to notice is that ME3 will NOT be exactly the same as ME2, just the same as ME2 isnt the same as ME1. your comparing a vangaurd from ME2 to an adept in ME3....or something. im not saying the vangaurd should get everything the adept and the soldier can get. for how many times you bring up the balancing issue, id think youd actually have a better understanding of what my intentions are.

the vangaurd shouldnt be able to use stasis, singularity, or even warp, or whatever OP biotic powers bioware creates in ME3. just like an infiltrator wouldnt use drone or maybe even hacking. if you limit the choices available to the hybrid classes you wont have that "ME1 vangaurd being the best biotic" type thing.

[sinosleep]

JaegerBane wrote...
I wasn't aware that you were making a comparison at all, sino - you appeared to be claiming that weapons alone were enough to vary the style of play. As I said, it gets subjective when the definition of 'style of play' varies from player to player.

Regarding the Infiiltrator, my reasons behind that are the fact that it's a class that packs nukes, CC, stealth and mind control into a single character - the potential for varied play there is pretty high compared to the other combat-focused classes. As for the Adept, the differences are best illustrated by how AverageGatsby plays Adepts and how Bozorg and thisisme8 play adepts.

The biggest difference between how Gatsby and Bozorg play is aggresiveness, weapon choice, and bonus powers, which can be applied to any class. The adept and infiltrator aren't inherently more varied than any class other than the vanguard IMO.

[Omega-202]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

something that you dont seem to notice is that ME3 will NOT be exactly the same as ME2, just the same as ME2 isnt the same as ME1. your comparing a vangaurd from ME2 to an adept in ME3....or something. im not saying the vangaurd should get everything the adept and the soldier can get. for how many times you bring up the balancing issue, id think youd actually have a better understanding of what my intentions are.

And you're sure of this how?  
How do you know that they won't just bring over the same system?  They've already said that they're not redoing the engine or the graphics for 3.
I'm not saying they won't, its just not valid to say that they unequivocally will change the system.

The Spamming Troll wrote...
the vangaurd shouldnt be able to use stasis, singularity, or even warp, or whatever OP biotic powers bioware creates in ME3. just like an infiltrator wouldnt use drone or maybe even hacking. if you limit the choices available to the hybrid classes you wont have that "ME1 vangaurd being the best biotic" type thing.

This is where I get lost on your arguments.  You argue for a more open system to increase the flexibility of the classes, yet you make arbitrary restrictions that are completely self defeating.  
Why shouldn't Vanguards get Warp in this new system? You ask for more choices, then you go and limit them to just YOUR vision.  

If you're going to open the power choice system, then figure out another way to balance the Adepts vs Vanguards.  

[The Spamming Troll]

i thought thats what i have been doing.

more open as in vanguards that dont ONLY have pull and shockwave as biotics to choose from. a vanguard that can choose between pull, lift, slam, throw, or shockwave or even including choosing between reave or warp, as well as being able to choose their own set of ammo weapons like disruptor and shredder instead of only using inferno and cryo ammo mods. how am i supposed to spell it out for you when no one has any idea what powers will be in ME3. all i can go with is what i have from ME1 and ME2.

how is deligating singularity and stasis to an adept an arbitrary restriction? adepts are pure CCers and singularity and stasis are the definition of CC in ME2. are you proposing the vanguard should get singularity and AR too?

i dont have to see how your level 30 vanguard was leveled but i guarantee theres no difference between your vanguard and my vanguard. well other then the bonus weapon, but that doesnt have to do with what the vangaurd is. that specifically right there is what i see needs a change in ME3. im not expecting bioware to give me a ME3 vangaurd with pull, shockwave, inferno, and cryo. atleast i hope thats not what my ME3 vangaurd will look like.

Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 25 octobre 2010 - 02:15 .

[Omega-202]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

i thought thats what i have been doing.

more open as in vanguards that dont ONLY have pull and shockwave as biotics to choose from. a vanguard that can choose between pull, lift, slam, throw, or shockwave or even including choosing between reave or warp, as well as being able to choose their own set of ammo weapons like disruptor and shredder instead of only using inferno and cryo ammo mods. how am i supposed to spell it out for you when no one has any idea what powers will be in ME3. all i can go with is what i have from ME1 and ME2.

how is deligating singularity and stasis to an adept an arbitrary restriction? adepts are pure CCers and singularity and stasis are the definition of CC in ME2. are you proposing the vanguard should get singularity and AR too?

i dont have to see how your level 30 vanguard was leveled but i guarantee theres no difference between your vanguard and my vanguard. well other then the bonus weapon, but that doesnt have to do with what the vangaurd is. that specifically right there is what i see needs a change in ME3. im not expecting bioware to give me a ME3 vangaurd with pull, shockwave, inferno, and cryo. im expecting them to give me something more.

I understand the idea of restricting Singularity, as that is the class's signature power, but the idea that "Adepts are pure CCers and therefore nobody else should get Stasis" is A) false and counter to your entire original argument.  
Leave 1 power exclusive to each class and give every qualifying class access to the rest or don't.  I don't get where you figure that some should be left out ESPECIALLY since the major caveat is that the entire system is going to need to get re-hauled and rebalanced anyway.  

And in regards to the "pure CC" Adept argument, I'm not seeing it.  Warp explosions make up a huge part of my Adept gameplay as does a large amount of Locust fire.  And on the other side of the coin, Pull was the most used power on my first run through the game as a Vanguard on Veteran.  

No class is pigeonholed completely.  At least not in the game as a whole.  The fact that some are pigeonholed on Insanity difficulty is an entirely different issue.  

Modifié par Omega-202, 25 octobre 2010 - 02:23 .

[The Spamming Troll]

first you said they wont redo the engine or graphics, but then you say they should rehaul or rebalance anyways. were both hypocrits. sometimes its easy.

thats fine if you want stasis to be open to vanguard i have no problem with that. im just giving vague examples.

yeah i use the abilities that are supplied for my class too. we all use pull with a vanguard dont we? is there any other option?

your somewhat right tho, i think engineers might be the real CCers in ME2. but whatever, these arent exactly well thought out statements im making here.

Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 25 octobre 2010 - 02:50 .

[The Spamming Troll]

Omega-202 wrote...

No class is pigeonholed completely.  At least not in the game as a whole.  The fact that some are pigeonholed on Insanity difficulty is an entirely different issue.  

i think i just posted something like this but there should really be a seperate forum for strategy discusion on insanity. because it is a very differnet gameplay experience.

[Angel-Shinkiro]

rozpocet1 wrote...

 I think this would be the ultimate RPG feature:
(I use ME2 powers for all my examples)

Let's say every class has 5 active powers and only 1 of them is predefined. That's the class specific power and is not selectable for other classes. This means you can choose 4 additional powers. They only have to correspond to your class.

EXAMPLES:

SOLDIER - Combat Specialist
Adrenaline Rush (class Power)
+
4 Combat Powers

ADEPT - Biotic Specialist
Singularity (class Power)
+
4 Biotic Powers

ENGINEER - Tech Specialist
Combat Drone (class Power)
+
4 Tech Powers

VANGUARD - Biotic & Combat
Charge (class Power)
+
2 Biotic Powers
+
2 Combat Powers

SENTINEL - Biotic & Tech
Tech Armor (class Power)
+
2 Biotic Powers
+
2 Tech Powers

INFILTRATOR - Combat & Tech
Tactical Cloak (class Power)
+
2 Combat Powers
+
2 Tech Powers

The one specific power defines the class. Beyond that every player can choose and make their own character.
A Vanguard with Charge chooses Pull and Throw as his Biotic Powers and Fortification and Incendiary Ammo as his Combat Powers. 
There are so many possible combinations it never gets boring!!!

Some might say this would make things to easy for everyone. It partly could, but there are ways to make it difficult again:

1. Player classes have acces to fewer weapons.

• Infiltrators use only Sniper Rifles and maybe Pistols.
  
• Vanguards use only Shotguns and maybe Pistols.
  
• Adepts, Engineers and Sentinels use only SMGs and maybe Pistols .
  
• Soldiers use Assault Rifles and maybe 2 additional weapons.

2. Enemy protection layers should work differently in general. I don't want to shoot them down just like that in one order.

• Enemy shields recharge after some time behind cover. (Just like Shepard's shields)

This means an enemy with no shields left and only 50% health takes cover. Shields regenerate and he has 50% health and 100% shields again.

• Barrier could be used only for a limited amount of time but the enemy wouldn't take any damage.

Enemy has a barrier. You have to wait until it's gone and then you can take down his health until he uses the barrier again. (Of course with recharge time etc.)

Thank you for reading!
Your thoughts?

This, this is one of the best ideas I have ever seen on this forum!
You deserve a cookie, so here you go.(:
But I think you should still be able to get advanced training for different weapons.

Modifié par Angel-Shinkiro, 28 octobre 2010 - 07:19 .

[JaegerBane]

sinosleep wrote...

The biggest difference between how Gatsby and Bozorg play is aggresiveness, weapon choice, and bonus powers, which can be applied to any class. The adept and infiltrator aren't inherently more varied than any class other than the vanguard IMO.

While agressiveness is undoubtedly a factor, I'm not sure it accurately covers alone what they're doing. Gatsby tends to use his powers and his team mates as chess pieces to make the enemy and the battlefield do what he wants them to do, while Bozorg tends to play like a battering ram and tends to spear-head whatever action he's doing, quickly rushing up and locking everything down so that it can't counter-attack and wipes them out at close range. While there's definitely a difference in agression, you're glossing over the differences by using agression alone to differentiate their tactics. It's not like gatsby's 'cautious' style is the only way to play cautiously and bozorg's agressive style is the only way to play agressively.

As for weapons and bonus powers, these aren't really relevant. Both Gatsby and Bozorg tend to use assault rifles that have virtually no effect on their style (gatsby even goes so far as to say he uses the GPR because he likes how it sounds) and Gatsby barely touches bonus powers other than ED, while Bozorg uses a variety of bonus powers but uses them all to accomplish the same style, i.e. absorbing damage. Neither aspect has *that* much impact on how they play. Thisisme8 plays equally agressively as bozorg but doesn't use any bonus powers (see sig), so I'm not convinced Bozorg's style is dependent on them any more than gatsby's.

[sinosleep]

How is what Bozorg does with his adept and a shotgun (which is what he used for the vast majority of his earlier vids and why I brought up bonus weapon) in relation to what Gatsby does with his adept and an assault rifle any different to what Gatsby was doing with his engineer and an SMG and what I was doing with my engineer and a shotgun? Nothing that you typed changed the way I feel about what the key differences are between their styles of play and more importantly how I don't feel they make the infiltrator and adept classes any more varied than any other class other than the vanguard.