667 réponses à ce sujet

[tonnactus]

Zahe wrote...
 The difference is that I cannot just rightclick to win in ME2, which I can do in DA.

?
I could keep harbinger and scions as long in a singularity as needed until they died from gunshots.They couldnt shoot back. Thats the purpose of crowd control.Making otherwise difficult/tedious encounters easy. Sadly thats the role of heavy weapons now...

ME doesn't have heals

Wrong.

ME doesn't have companions with easy access to defensive spells

What do you mean with easy access? The stupid thing that they used their their third talent only after the daddy issues missions?
Otherwise,jacob have barrier.Grunt has fortification and an insane amount of health regeration early on. Tali has energy drain and samara has reave that could restores her health. Legion has geth shield boost.

I agree that the enemies should have more abilities, but making them CC heavy is dumb since you cannot do anything about it except kill them before they get a chance to blow their load all over you.

Yes,thats tactical combat too.Make priorities and decide to take out those enemies first.Additional,some abilities like damping to prevent and free someone from the enemies crowd control.

Something among the lines of disabling your gun

You mean like sabotage ?

Modifié par tonnactus, 17 janvier 2011 - 12:18 .

[tonnactus]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

say what you want about health vs armor/shields/barrier, but an enemy with only health isnt a worry to me. its the ones with protections im worried about.

I dont count ammo powers as a powers at all(and with a stupid 1,5 cooldown for shepardt and squadmates its also not really handled as such a thing by the game).Regarding health,warp ammo,inferno and armor piercing do all additional damage to health.

Modifié par tonnactus, 17 janvier 2011 - 12:23 .

[tonnactus]

Zahe wrote...
Knocking out of cover and keeping you out of combat long enough for the enemies to shoot you to bits is not. Preventing

So you dont like it when enemies use the flashbang grenade...

[Zahe]

I could keep harbinger and scions as long in a singularity as needed until they died from gunshots.They couldnt shoot back. Thats the purpose of crowd control.Making otherwise difficult/tedious encounters easy. Sadly thats the role of heavy weapons now...

CC should help, it shouldn't trivialize. Those things are dumb too.

Wrong.For both games.

Read what I say in context. ME doesn't have heals you can use while being flailed around. One could make a point for Barrier, but it doesn't even come close to the power of heals in DA which made the fact that enemies could CC you acceptable.

What do you mean with easy access? The stupid thing that they used their their third talent only after the daddy issues missions?
Otherwise,jacob have barrier.Grunt has fortification and an insane amount of health regeration early on. Tali has energy drain and samara has reave that could restores her health. Legion has geth shield boost.

Defensive spells they could use to keep the main character alive if he gets CCed. Glyph of Warding/Repulsion for example.

Yes,thats tactical combat too.Make priorities and decide to take out those enemies first.Additional,some abilities like damping to prevent and free someone from the enemies crowd control.

As I said earlier, preventing bad stuff from happening should be a part of the game. Making it the only viable way to play is dumb since it punishes small screw-ups way harder then deserved and relies on the fact that you know the level layout beforehand. The enemy getting off one ability shouldn't result in an instadeath.

You mean like sabotage ?

Yep. Abilities that prevent you from doing something specific is fine in general, abilities that prevent you from doing anything isn't.

So you dont like it when enemies use the flashbang grenade...

That ability was fine, it didn't hold you long enough to be an instakill. ME1 is far worse in that regard.

Modifié par Zahe, 17 janvier 2011 - 12:28 .

[The Spamming Troll]

Zahe wrote...

Having abilities that practically instakills you whose only counter is "not getting hit" is dumb. Knocking out of cover is fine, we already have that. Knocking out of cover and keeping you out of combat long enough for the enemies to shoot you to bits is not. Preventing bad stuff from happening should be a tactical option in the game, absolutely. Having it be the only option is bad.

On high difficulty, you should be worried about all enemies. The fact that you don't worry about the ones on health is basically proof of job well done on designing the Adept class, considering the fact that they are somewhat supbar vs defenses.

i liked playing BDtS becasue engineers were plentifull and it peaked my combat awareness because i had to keep track of where the engineers were. i wouldnt mind getting hit by throws or sabotages like ME1, but as a minor complaint, i absolutely hate the little head shake shepard does after getting knocked out of cover. why do i have to shake the dust out of my hair after harbinger knocks me out of cover?

getting hit by throw isnt an intsa death either. it might be, but thatd be the challenge of it. i dont think anyone has ever complained about ME1s enemies using throw or sabotage. also, in ME2 harbinger can use biotics that knock you out of cover, so why cant an eclipse vangaurd? its weird harbingers biotics work on shepard, becasue i thought barrier/armor/shields stopped biotics from working, but apparently harbinger didnt know the rules.

Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 17 janvier 2011 - 12:40 .

[tonnactus]

Zahe wrote...

CC should help, it shouldn't trivialize.

Example? How crowd control would help without "trivializing" a fight?

Glyph of Warding/Repulsion for example.

What? The only talents and spells that remove negative status effect in Dragon Age where dispel magic and cleanse aura.And only antimagic ward protects allies from beeing damaged by offensive spells like fireball.

As I said earlier, preventing bad stuff from happening should be a part of the game. Making it the only viable way to play is dumb since it punishes small screw-ups way harder then deserved and relies on the fact that you know the level layout beforehand. The enemy getting off one ability shouldn't result in an instadeath.

Exactly this should happen and should be the purpose of the highest diffculty.
Otherwise,why playing on it?
And no,its not necessarily to know maps when the game itself actually give the enemies names like eclipse vanguard or commando.

[Zahe]

i liked playing BDtS becasue engineers were plentifull and it
peaked my combat awareness because i had to keep track of where the
engineers were. i wouldnt mind getting hit by throws or sabotages like
ME1, but as a minor complaint, i absolutely hate the little head shake
shepard does after getting knocked out of cover. why do i have to shake
the dust out of my hair after harbinger knocks me out of cover?

getting
hit by throw isnt an intsa death either. it might be, but thatd be the
challenge of it. i dont think anyone has ever complained about ME1s
enemies using throw or sabotage. also, in ME2 harbinger can use biotics
that knock you out of cover, so why cant an eclipse vangaurd? its weird
harbingers biotics work on shepard, becasue i thought
barrier/armor/shields stopped biotics from working, but apparently
harbinger didnt know the rules.

I have to agree with that. The abilities should be dangerous, for sure. What I am arguing is that they shouldn't be an instakill the way ME1 could be at times. Getting hit by an ability in a bad position should kill you, no doubt about that. Getting hit by an ability while behind cover with full shields shouldn't.

I also agree that more vanilla enemies should have more threatening abilities the way the collectors do. Throw for example, would be fine if they threw you a short distance without a long incapacitation effect when you land. That way it would still be dangerous, you would still be out of cover but being clever can still save you. Having Throw either making you fly around for too long/too far or making it stun you would be bad since in that case you are most likely dead no matter what you do.

Example? How crowd control would help without "trivializing" a fight?

Not making it spamable, not making it last a ****load of time for example.

What? The only talents and spells that remove negative status
effect in Dragon Age where dispel magic and cleanse aura.And only
antimagic ward protects allies from beeing damaged by offensive spells
like fireball.

Didn't say the removed anything, they can still be used to keep someone alive while he is CCd.

Exactly this should happen and should be the purpose of the highest diffculty.
Otherwise,why playing on it?
And no,its not necessarily to know maps when the game itself actually give the enemies names like eclipse vanguard or commando.

Games can be hard without it instakilling you due to the enemy getting off one instant abilty. Being able to adapt should be just as important as planning ahead, thus giving the foes abilities that you can recover from but still threatens you is good. Countering one stupid gimmik by using another stupid gimmik like in ME1 if ****ing awful gamedesign.

Since you are so keen on comparing to totally unrelated games, have you ever played Ninja Gaiden on XBox? That was a challenging game, that didn't rely on stupid as **** gimmiks. Why are you so deadbent on playing games with bad design? 

Modifié par Zahe, 17 janvier 2011 - 12:59 .

[The Spamming Troll]

ha imagine if enemies had dominate!!!

i dont think you should add a longer cooldown time to the CC abilities considering AR has a 3 second cooldown. soldiers virtually are playing the entire game in slow mo. id just like to use pull or throw more often and actually pull or throw someone instead of an arbitrary stagger effect.

Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 17 janvier 2011 - 12:56 .

[Zahe]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

ha imagine if enemies had dominate!!!

i dont think you should add a longer cooldown time to the CC abilities considering AR has a 3 second cooldown. soldiers virtually are playing the entire game in slow mo. id just like to use pull or throw more often and actually pull or throw someone instead of an arbitrary stagger effect.

That's where your squadmates come into play. Focusing on one enemy rips their defenses really fast, which will allow you to either throw their ass into orbit or blowing them up with a Warp-explosion. Adepts rely a lot on their squadmates at HC/Insanity, but in my mind it is a small price to pay to gain the amount of destructive potential they have. Also if it really bugs you that you cannot use biotics to great effect on foes with protection you can always pick up Statis or Reave to allieviate that issue somewhat.

[The Spamming Troll]

alot of my problems with ME2 could be remedied if i could create my own grouping of biotic abilities within the adept class. id be 100% content playing an adept that wasnt forced to choose between warp ammo, stasis, barrier or dominate. id gladdly drop throw, pull, and shockwave in order to take stasis and warp ammo for instance. hell id gladly drop my pistol, SMG and heavy weapon to carry the revenant as well.



i really should just mod my game.

[tonnactus]

Zahe wrote...

Games can be hard without it instakilling you due to the enemy getting off one instant abilty. Being able to adapt should be just as important as planning ahead, thus giving the foes abilities that you can recover from but still threatens you is good. Countering one stupid gimmik by using another stupid gimmik like in ME1 if ****ing awful gamedesign.

Not many would agree that Halflife 2 or the Fallout 3/New Vegas are games with bad game design.Both have enemies that could kill the player with one shot or attack.

[The Spamming Troll]

ah fallout3. now theres a game with terrible shooter gameplay.

[Lycidas]

Its funny how every time someone finds the adept to be not on par with the other classes the responses come down to:
- Learn to play / use your teammates
- You're just want the OP ME1 adept back
- Video X porves you're wrong (most of the time one of AverageGatsbys videos even though he himself found the adept to be missing something in comparison)
Even more funny is that these comments are quite often made by regulars of these forums who committed themselfs more or less open to other classes...

IMHO there is more to it than that

• Cooldowns:
  Early in the game its cooldowns. Nothing hurts the class more than waiting for your powers to cool down it breaks the flow of the game. The change from individual cooldowns (ME) to a global cooldown only (ME2) was a mistake. It hurts power heavy classes way more than the others. A combination of global and individual cooldowns would have worked way better.
• Defenses:
  The adept is brutal fun to play against anything that uses barriers and armor but way less against shields. Why is that? Removing shields requires you to use the powers of your teammates. Those take way longer to recharge than your own and thus again the game flow is broken. IMHO shields having no kind of effect on biotic powers would improve the adept game play a lot and make actually sense lore wise. On the other side barriers sould not protect against tech powers.
• Enemy health:
  As soon is defences are down the enemy is as good as dead using powers at this point feels a bit silly shooting does the job just as quick. This got countered by Krogan and Vorcha that regen fast and then got countered again by incendiary ammo... So just cut the regen stopping effect of incendiary ammo. If adepts and engineers are suppost to use their teammates so are soldiers and vanguards.

[Bozorgmehr]

Gatsby didn't know about half the things Adepts are capable of - not the best and most recent benchmark IMHO

1. Cooldowns are not an issue and they certainly don't break the "flow" - it's the duration that's making the early missions a little harder. If you could get the first 2 biotic upgrades very fast this wouldn't be an issue either. Main difference is the lack of decent firepower (idem for Sentinel and Engineer) - if casters could use bonus weapon straight away they can easily keep up with the combat classes in terms of speed and killing power.

Individual CD system would mess with the "flow" - to much micro management and pausing. The global CD system only works well for the Adept and Engineer - the other classes are spamming their unique power all (or most of) the time - hence making the other powers rather redundant.

2. That is the case with all classes; Soldiers and Vanguards have nothing to strip shields instantly, neither does the Infiltrator. Only Sentinels and Adepts have something to strip barriers - does that make the other classes weak or gimped? This argument has nothing to do with the Adept class.

3. It takes more time to kill enemies down to health than it takes to remove defense - there isn't a single power that can kill a normal enemy down to health in one go (powers can strip defenses in one go btw)

All your points are invalid and not directly related to the Adept

[Lycidas]

See your not discussing anything here your are trying to make your opinion look like a fact.

Bozorgmehr wrote...
...
1. Cooldowns are not an issue and they certainly don't break the "flow"

Okay I'm wrong here because you say so. Got it...

Bozorgmehr wrote...
...
- if casters could use bonus weapon straight away they can easily keep up with the combat classes in terms of speed and killing power.

Using bonus objects to ballance out the class design is IMHO stupid.

Bozorgmehr wrote...
Individual CD system would mess with the "flow" - to much micro management and pausing.

You might have a point here I did not think about that. Maby we should have a shorter cooldown at the beginning and less upgrades.

Bozorgmehr wrote...
2. That is the case with all classes; Soldiers and Vanguards have nothing to strip shields instantly, neither does the Infiltrator. Only Sentinels and Adepts have something to strip barriers - does that make the other classes weak or gimped? This argument has nothing to do with the Adept class.

Soldies, Infilitrators and Vanguards could care less about shields they do what the do whatever defence there is. So IMHO it has something to do with the Adept class.

Bozorgmehr wrote...
3. It takes more time to kill enemies down to health than it takes to remove defense - there isn't a single power that can kill a normal enemy down to health in one go (powers can strip defenses in one go btw)

Thats my point. You use powers to strip defences and after that there is little benefit in using powers over just shooting.

Bozorgmehr wrote...
All your points are invalid and not directly related to the Adept

My points show only my humble opinion if its valid or not is certainly not your decision...

Modifié par Lycidas, 18 janvier 2011 - 01:43 .

[SirValeq]

As soon is defences are down the enemy is as good as dead using powers at this point feels a bit silly shooting does the job just as quick.

I guess you haven't seen this video by sinosleep then: www.youtube.com/watch

[Lycidas]

iLikeBWgames wrote...

As soon is defences are down the enemy is as good as dead using powers at this point feels a bit silly shooting does the job just as quick.

I guess you haven't seen this video by sinosleep then: www.youtube.com/watch

Sorry seems like I did not make myself clear enough. I was not goint to say that it is harder to strip defences than to kill the healthbar.

[Roxlimn]

Lycidas:



If shields had no effect whatsoever on biotic powers, then any enemy with only shields as defense is open to Warp Explosion, which is almost certain to kill it and damage every nearby enemy to boot. Said enemy might as be represented by a mobile bomb graphic, because that's essentially what they turn into.



There are specific reasons why the Adept works, and I can't imagine how you don't know this by now since it's been proven over and over, and you've been around long enough to have had this discussion with me last year.

Cooldowns:

Early in the game its cooldowns. Nothing hurts the class more than waiting for your powers to cool down it breaks the flow of the game. The change from individual cooldowns (ME) to a global cooldown only (ME2) was a mistake. It hurts power heavy classes way more than the others. A combination of global and individual cooldowns would have worked way better.

Global and individual cycles would take too much management. Besides that, at the start of the game, Adept shutdowns are more powerful than the Soldier's short ARush alone. An Adept can still use his weapons or mate powers to strip defenses, and then use his powers to lock down or insta-kill the enemy - better than ARush alone, about on par with ARush + weapons.

Defenses:

The adept is brutal fun to play against anything that uses barriers and armor but way less against shields. Why is that? Removing shields requires you to use the powers of your teammates. Those take way longer to recharge than your own and thus again the game flow is broken. IMHO shields having no kind of effect on biotic powers would improve the adept game play a lot and make actually sense lore wise. On the other side barriers sould not protect against tech powers.

You can use guns to strip the shields of the first target, and Warp Explosion to mass-strip everything else in a large radius. Follow up with second WE to wipe the encounter. Game flow should not be a problem here. If all else fails, you can always take Energy Drain, which many Adepts do, to shore up your play weaknesses.

Enemy health:

As soon is defences are down the enemy is as good as dead using powers at this point feels a bit silly shooting does the job just as quick. This got countered by Krogan and Vorcha that regen fast and then got countered again by incendiary ammo... So just cut the regen stopping effect of incendiary ammo. If adepts and engineers are suppost to use their teammates so are soldiers and vanguards.

No. Powers can instakill enemies. Powers can even instakill multiple enemies in a clump, and they disable enemy fire to boot, allowing power users to fire more shots in the same time period. Some of the fastest speed runs in the game are facilitated by power use.



An enemy down to health is NOT "as good as dead." The vids show that most mobs have more health than defenses, and defenses go down extra fast because both weapons and powers usually have bonuses against defenses. FOR A POWER USER, an enemy down to health is as good as dead, but that's because of power usage.

[Bozorgmehr]

Lycidas wrote...

See your not discussing anything here your are trying to make your opinion look like a fact.

What are you doing then? I give my opinion, that's all.

Okay I'm wrong here because you say so. Got it...

No I disagree and explain why.

Using bonus objects to ballance out the class design is IMHO stupid.

They're not bonus objects - every class get something at the DCS and it doesn't apply starting a NG+, Adept does have bonus weapon straight away then. The only reason I play Soldier is to use the Revenant - the DCS bonus weapon. I don't see the difference, Adept can pick AR/SR/SG training, Soldier can get an unique version.

It's like saying Cryo Ammo isn't available at level one for a Soldier making it a bonus object.

You might have a point here I did not think about that. Maby we should have a shorter cooldown at the beginning and less upgrades.

That would make life a little easier for the Adept I think. Never understood why you can get 3 tech (plus the important bonus) upgrades completing 3 missions, whereas biotics have to wait til after Horizon to get extra duration and cd reduction upgrades. Would be better for balance between classes the other way around.

Ilitrators and Vanguards could care less about shields they do what the do whatever defence there is. So IMHO it has something to do with the Adept class.

You mean shooting? Adept have guns too and the SMG is among the best anti-shield weapons around. Adepts are also the only class capable of setting up Warp bombs by them selves and they're quite good at defense stripping. Adepts have no issues with shielded enemies, at least no more than the other classes. Even if they had access to Overload wouldn't change a thing how I play my Adept (I would never use it coz it's not needed and would only slow me down)

Thats my point. You use powers to strip defences and after that there is little benefit in using powers over just shooting.

Not exactly, you can insta-strip defenses and follow with Pull, Throw or Singularity (or better, time them to hit target exactly at the right moment). This will disable enemy completely. If you choose to kill with weapons, enemies are still shooting and potentially kill Shep.

One of the great strengths of the Adept is the ability to control the field, disable a couple of enemies and focus weapon fire on the remaining ones. The temporally disabled enemies can be dealt with later. Adepts can also use enemies as a weapon. Stripping one and warp detonate him/her can and will damage/knockdown all enemies within a 7 m (max) radius).

My points show only my humble opinion if its valid or not is certainly not your decision...

Point one is about personal preference, but 2 and 3 are not correct; Adepts are not weak or whatever versus shields and enemies have (relatively) more health than defenses.

[tangmcgame]

On the issue of defenses, I've always found shields the easiest defense to strip by weapon fire alone. The SMG, especially the Tempest with the shield damage upgrade, wipe out shields incredibly fast. I've also picked shotgun training for this run and the GPS also does a remarkable job of removing shields.
Furthermore, I fail to see the problem with relying on squadmate abilities. Shouldn't effective squad management and usage make the game easier? That's all it does, really. There are very few encounters where you actually NEED your squadmates, but every single battle goes more quickly and efficiently if you have them around and use them right. They should fill in your weaknesses, and classes should have weaknesses else why have a class-based system at all?  If the Adept has weaknesses while some other classes don't, well, I'd say that's a point in favor of the Adept class design and a point against the others.

Modifié par tangmcgame, 18 janvier 2011 - 03:18 .

[JaegerBane]

tangmcgame wrote...

On the issue of defenses, I've always found shields the easiest defense to strip by weapon fire alone. The SMG, especially the Tempest with the shield damage upgrade, wipe out shields incredibly fast. I've also picked shotgun training for this run and the GPS also does a remarkable job of removing shields.

I gotta admit that this is something I've noticed too - Barriers and Shields never seem to last as long as equivalent armour. I'm guessing that's because most enemies who have both seem to mount thicker armour than the initial Barrier/Shield they have (YMIRs, Harby etc).

Furthermore, I fail to see the problem with relying on squadmate abilities. Shouldn't effective squad management and usage make the game easier? That's all it does, really. There are very few encounters where you actually NEED your squadmates, but every single battle goes more quickly and efficiently if you have them around and use them right.

The issue that is always brought up here is that some classes are in this situation and some are not. The general feeling that players get is that a class that can solo tasks feels a lot more powerful than ones that can't, and to be fair, this is true of all RPGs. While this isn't inherently 'wrong' it doesn't help that the distinction betwee classes that can solo with no squadmates and those that effectively can't doesn't appear to make sense with regards to what the class does. Obviously it's not a surprise that the jack of all trades sentinel can solo stuff because that's his forte - it's when you see bizarre situations like the combat 'specialist' and the stealthy class having the same solo capability with no real justification for it.

More to the point, the Infiltrator is the cheesiest class in the game when it comes to design. I thought the idea of having a Ghost-like cloaking sniper was great, but it just got silly when 'stealthy killer' can inexplicably hurl fireballs and hack robots. Compared to that range of skills, it's not suprising there's an imbalance in the gameplay.

They should fill in your weaknesses, and classes should have weaknesses else why have a class-based system at all?  If the Adept has weaknesses while some other classes don't, well, I'd say that's a point in favor of the Adept class design and a point against the others.

I'm not sure I'd go so far as to say the Adept's perceived relative 'weakness' is somehow a strength - at best it means it's a class for experts over n00bys - but I get the sense what you really mean is that a class that fits the game (in this case, a squad-based RPG shooter) better is more satisfying to play.

To be honest, while I'm not going to agree the Adept is 'neutered', I can sympathise with the thread OP's position. There clearly wasn't enough playtesting done on insanity difficulty and, as a result, the general class balance is absurd - some classes are best ignoring their squad, some classes are presented with only one truly effective tactic and other classes have to change their entire style as you go up the difficulty levels. I hope Bioware spend a bit more time figuring this out in ME3 as it's one of the main reasons I stick to Normal.

Modifié par JaegerBane, 18 janvier 2011 - 04:32 .

[Lycidas]

Roxlimn wrote...

If shields had no effect whatsoever on biotic powers, then any enemy with only shields as defense is open to Warp Explosion, which is almost certain to kill it and damage every nearby enemy to boot. Said enemy might as be represented by a mobile bomb graphic, because that's essentially what they turn into.

Okay I think it is obvious this could not be done in ME2 the game had to be build around it by making shields less vulnerable agains Warp Explosions for example. Its just bugging me that shields are by design not made to protect against biotics and the gamplay is IMHO less fun for Adepts against shielded enemys.

Roxlimn wrote...
There are specific reasons why the Adept works, and I can't imagine how you don't know this by now since it's been proven over and over, and you've been around long enough to have had this discussion with me last year.

Well I'm not saying the Adept is broken or anything remotely close to that. Actually I think the class is a hell of a lot of fun at high level and against enemys that suit it. I'm just saying the low levels are a bit pale and missions with lot of shielded enemys are less fun overall than the others.

Roxlimn wrote...

Global and individual cycles would take too much management.

Well managing individual cooldowns comes by know kind of naturally to me so this is an oversight on my end. You are right it does not really fit to ME.

Roxlimn wrote...
You can use guns to strip the shields of the first target, and Warp Explosion to mass-strip everything else in a large radius. Follow up with second WE to wipe the encounter. Game flow should not be a problem here. If all else fails, you can always take Energy Drain, which many Adepts do, to shore up your play weaknesses.

Again you're talking to me like I'm saying: "OMG THE ADEPT SUXORS AT KILLING SHIELD STUFF AND IS OF NO USE" I'm not saying that. I'm saying you kind of have do bend your playstyle to fit targets with shields. It differs from killing targets with barriers and armor and is IMHO a bit less fun than it could be.

Roxlimn wrote...
No. Powers can instakill enemies. Powers can even instakill multiple enemies in a clump, and they disable enemy fire to boot, allowing power users to fire more shots in the same time period. Some of the fastest speed runs in the game are facilitated by power use.

An enemy down to health is NOT "as good as dead." The vids show that most mobs have more health than defenses, and defenses go down extra fast because both weapons and powers usually have bonuses against defenses. FOR A POWER USER, an enemy down to health is as good as dead, but that's because of power usage.

Okay by saying "An enemy down to health is as good as dead." I have been overdoing it a bit. I know stripping defences is done quicker than killing health. Still I'd like to spend a little less time doning the fist and more doing the last overall.

I don't know maybe I'm bad at expressing myself. I'm talking about small things that could bring the little bit of fun that is IMHO missing and not a total overhaul of the class.

[Roxlimn]

Lycidas:



I think you're expressing yourself better now. It's important to distinguish yourself from the "OMG, Adept suxxorz!" crowd because there's such a consistent supply of them, and particularly in this thread where the OP said pretty much exactly that.



I'll agree with you that the Adept at the start of the game is a little weaker than the other classes because of the gun advantage Soldiers and Infiltrators have. Sentinels have similar guns but Tech Armor and the early Tech upgrades helps lots. Vanguards... ...well, they die an awful lot, too, but this seems to be acceptable given what the class is supposed to be.



A little love in terms of biotic upgrades at the start wouldn't be out of the question, IMO, but I think overall that the Adept's gameplay is the best designed. It's balanced, it's fun, it's bombastic, and it has character.



I think a little more attention to that kind of gameplay would have made the Soldier more interesting. For instance, he's got two powers that are non-ammo. Why not weaken ARush a bit in terms of damage and make Concussive Blast absolutely devastating against Armored and Undefended opponents? This might actually make Soldier more powerful, but at least it gives Soldiers a little more character. Maybe make Assault Rifles less effective against Shields?

[Bozorgmehr]

Roxlimn wrote...

I think you're expressing yourself better now. It's important to distinguish yourself from the "OMG, Adept suxxorz!" crowd because there's such a consistent supply of them, and particularly in this thread where the OP said pretty much exactly that.

Seconded. I do get a little annoyed by people claiming things that have been dismissed long ago.

I'll agree with you that the Adept at the start of the game is a little weaker than the other classes because of the gun advantage Soldiers and Infiltrators have. Sentinels have similar guns but Tech Armor and the early Tech upgrades helps lots. Vanguards... ...well, they die an awful lot, too, but this seems to be acceptable given what the class is supposed to be.

But is that a bad thing? Adepts are getting stronger all the time (best RP class IMHO), whereas Soldiers, Vanguards and Sentinels are at 80-90% of their potential at level 6-10 (maxed class power and passive). Soldiers and Vanguards are actually getting weaker beyond that point; enemies get more health and defenses while leveling, but the extra skill points are wasted on powers that are not used much if at all.

A little love in terms of biotic upgrades at the start wouldn't be out of the question, IMO, but I think overall that the Adept's gameplay is the best designed. It's balanced, it's fun, it's bombastic, and it has character.

Indeed, and it is one of the most challenging classes to play on Insanity - like it's supposed too.

I think a little more attention to that kind of gameplay would have made the Soldier more interesting. For instance, he's got two powers that are non-ammo. Why not weaken ARush a bit in terms of damage and make Concussive Blast absolutely devastating against Armored and Undefended opponents? This might actually make Soldier more powerful, but at least it gives Soldiers a little more character. Maybe make Assault Rifles less effective against Shields?

I think this is the main thing; Adepts don't have a super-power like some other classes. Stuff like ARush and Assault Armor break the game - they're way too powerful and because of the global CD system, players have to chose between an "I Win"-button or a vastly inferior power - not really a choice IMHO.

Being used to something like ARush and then start an Insanity Adept does make Adept look weak. But is that a problem of the Adept or the Soldier. I'll say the latter - I don't see the point in having multiple abilities and use only one no matter the situation. Adepts have to think a little before acting, while Soldiers only need to remember where the ARush button is located

[Lycidas]

Bozorgmehr wrote...

Lycidas wrote...

See your not discussing anything here your are trying to make your opinion look like a fact.

What are you doing then? I give my opinion, that's all.

Well to me there is a difference between saying something like: "In my opionion..." and "No, you're wrong..."
But maby I made up a tone in your reply that you did not inted to give me. If thats the case I'm sorry.

Bozorgmehr wrote...

Okay I'm wrong here because you say so. Got it...

No I disagree and explain why.

Sorry no you said cooldowns are not the issue but did not give a reason why you think that.

Bozorgmehr wrote...

Using bonus objects to ballance out the class design is IMHO stupid.

They're not bonus objects - every class get something at the DCS and it doesn't apply starting a NG+, Adept does have bonus weapon straight away then. The only reason I play Soldier is to use the Revenant - the DCS bonus weapon. I don't see the difference, Adept can pick AR/SR/SG training, Soldier can get an unique version.

Ah I see for me bonus weapons meant DLC weapons. You might actually have a point there.

Bozorgmehr wrote...
Adepts have no issues with shielded enemies, at least no more than the other classes.

I don't think Adepts have issues with shielded targets if you see "issue" as something big or even game breaking. But I find fighting shielded targets less fun than any other and think there is room for improvement.

Bozorgmehr wrote...

Thats my point. You use powers to strip defences and after that there is little benefit in using powers over just shooting.

Not exactly, you can insta-strip defenses and follow with Pull, Throw or Singularity (or better, time them to hit target exactly at the right moment). This will disable enemy completely. If you choose to kill with weapons, enemies are still shooting and potentially kill Shep...

See my reply to Roxlimn above. I think I did a bad job at expressing myself here.