667 réponses à ce sujet

[Siegdrifa]

The Spamming Troll wrote...
what doesnt make sense is shields/barrier/armor blocking 90% of the abilities in this game. shields/barrier/armor that takes away 90% of the game. insanity takes away the adepts very soul. i STILL honestly dont know how you cant see it that way, because thats exactly what insanity represents for the adept.

if i payed IGN enough id win game of the year as well.

While i agree that adept should have some capacity against ennemy with defence, because exept warp, we don't have much option (stasis can be a good answer), but i don't see the need for it in ME2.

You think "ahh, my adept  is effective only against ennemy without defence", but me i think "ennemy with defence = armless target for shooting practice".
With other classe i think about: first  deal with de defence, seconde deal with his life; but adept is the master of cc, no place to hide, no way to avoid it.
In the end, if feel like ennemy have just 1 bar to deal with, not two, and the defence is gone with a few shot, so no need for extra power in ME2 to destroy the defence more quicly.

But i hope it will be a little more complex in ME3.

Modifié par Siegdrifa, 16 janvier 2011 - 03:31 .

[Zahe]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

i think your mixing up games here. ME1s only gimmicky abilities were singularity and immunity. singularity could be taken for any class so theres no complaint about not having it in your arsenal, but give a soldier singularity and its goodbye challenge. but on the other hand ME2s entire combat system revolves around one skill for each class. if your not constantly hitting Y, your playing your character wrong(im talking about insanity by the way).

This is proof why Insanity is too ****ing easy. You know the example I took earlier, where people could play ME2 in ME1 mode just wittling down everything. You are doing it. Stop thinking you are doing it right, the only class that should spam one ability is Soldier.

Also ME1 is just like GTA except the different setting, different age, different story and different combat. Other then that it is exactly the same, what a ripoff.

LMAO.

[The Spamming Troll]

i shouldnt have said "your doing it wrong." i should have said theres only one ability thats functional for each class, so your using one ability for 40 hours of gameplay. if your trying to convince me using pull on a protected enemy in order to get a half second stagger resembles playing an adept, then yes, i think your being forced to play the game wrong.

nobodys reminded of GTA when they play ME2. although GTA does have more or just as many RPG elements asME2 does, so i guess we can compare those two games as well.

Siegdrifa wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...
what
doesnt make sense is shields/barrier/armor blocking 90% of the
abilities in this game. shields/barrier/armor that takes away 90% of the
game. insanity takes away the adepts very soul. i STILL honestly dont
know how you cant see it that way, because thats exactly what insanity
represents for the adept.

if i payed IGN enough id win game of the year as well.

While
i agree that adept should have some capacity against ennemy with
defence, because exept warp, we don't have much option (stasis can be a
good answer), but i don't see the need for it in ME2.

any class can have stasis, so essentially every class is equally as capable as an adept at CC. so whats the point in playing a class that only has pistols and SMGs, disfunctional abilities, and repetetive gameplay, when i can play an infiltator with stasis and totally negate the reason to play an adept. unless you like RPing ,which is essentially the only reason why i play an adept anymore. and i friggin hate it.

Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 16 janvier 2011 - 04:21 .

[tangmcgame]

I was an Adept player in ME1 and have been so far in ME2 as well. I think the soul is still very much there. I can't properly describe it, but suffice to say I find the Adept easier to play on Insanity than any of the other classes I've tried (Soldier, Infiltrator, Sentinel). It's not that they're bad, it's just the Adept makes sense to me and I play it well. And, well, it's a lot of fun to play.



Maybe you've already said it and I missed it, but how would you suggest they "fix" the Adept such that the different types of defenses don't strip out the "soul" of the class, but that the game still retains the level of thought and tactics required that weren't necessary in the first game. In ME2 you've got to be deliberate. In ME1, you had to press your Singularity hotkey. I call that an improvement, myself.

[Teknor]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

nobodys reminded of GTA when they play ME2. although GTA does have more or just as many RPG elements asME2 does, so i guess we can compare those two games as well.

I played GTA and encountered no RPG elements. Cutscenes don't make a RPG alone.

[Siegdrifa]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

any class can have stasis, so essentially every class is equally as capable as an adept at CC. so whats the point in playing a class that only has pistols and SMGs, disfunctional abilities, and repetetive gameplay, when i can play an infiltator with stasis and totally negate the reason to play an adept. unless you like RPing ,which is essentially the only reason why i play an adept anymore. and i friggin hate it.

Thats is not the point i tired to make.
If you include stasis as your sub power, it allow you to have an effective power against ennemy with defence, because warp alone can be a little boring, i don't care that stasis can be taken by any class, i was discussing about how to add some deph in the game play (at least for certein people).

For infiltrator, i personnaly wouldn't take stasis, because if an ennemy is anoying, i just one shot him with the widow, i don't need to paralyse him for a shot time since he is "paralysed" once and for all.
Stasis do not add gameplay at the same level to every classe.

Every classe have a core mechanics (their unique skill), the adep is meant to force any ennemy without defence to come armless like a new born baby (singlurity / pull / shockwave) from their cover.
And there is much more to do with an adept than just spaming warp and singularity even if it is the main combo of the classe.

If you feel like spaming, it's not my case, because i don't spam one or two skill.
This boring feeling can be felt with many classe, it doesn't mean it come from the game, but the way you play it.



In ME2 there is a great difference between playng effectively, and playing with style.
You can play effectively by spaming one or two skill, but this is not the limitation of how to play it.

Modifié par Siegdrifa, 16 janvier 2011 - 04:53 .

[The Spamming Troll]

Siegdrifa wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

any class can have stasis, so essentially every class is equally as capable as an adept at CC. so whats the point in playing a class that only has pistols and SMGs, disfunctional abilities, and repetetive gameplay, when i can play an infiltator with stasis and totally negate the reason to play an adept. unless you like RPing ,which is essentially the only reason why i play an adept anymore. and i friggin hate it.

Stasis do not add gameplay at the same level to every classe.

Every classe have a core mechanics (their unique skill), the adep is meant to force any ennemy without defence to come armless like a new born baby (singlurity / pull / shockwave) from their cover.
And there is much more to do with an adept than just spaming warp and singularity even if it is the main combo of the classe.

If you feel like spaming, it's not my case, because i don't spam one or two skill.
This boring feeling can be felt with many classe, it doesn't mean it come from the game, but the way you play it.

stasis doesnt change with the class you choose. its still equally as effective for a soldier as it is for an adept. please point out the difference in CC capabilities between a fully loaded adept, and a soldier with one point in stasis.

singularity and warp are the only adept abiliteis that are functional, for the most part. so again, a half second stager is not being an effective biotic, and its certainly not the feeling i want when i am playing an adept, a cclass desinged to take out enemies without the use of weapons.

Teknor wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

nobodys
reminded of GTA when they play ME2. although GTA does have more or just
as many RPG elements asME2 does, so i guess we can compare those two
games as well.

I played GTA and encountered no RPG elements. Cutscenes don't make a RPG alone.

im
not an expert on what an RPG is nor do i care to define it but in GTA i
pick my weapon loadout, i choose the clothes i want to wear, certain
times i choose which NPC to kill or help which can change the entire
story, the only thing GTA is missing is leveling up abilities. take away
leveling up your character in ME2 and i really dont see much of an RPG
there at all. much like when you take away the squadmate stories, thers
not much of a ME-related story either.

[Siegdrifa]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

stasis doesnt change with the class you choose. its still equally as effective for a soldier as it is for an adept. please point out the difference in CC capabilities between a fully loaded adept, and a soldier with one point in stasis.

singularity and warp are the only adept abiliteis that are functional, for the most part. so again, a half second stager is not being an effective biotic, and its certainly not the feeling i want when i am playing an adept, a cclass desinged to take out enemies without the use of weapons.

I never said stasis change with classe.... i said it doesn't add the same level of game play for every classe.

I'll explain a little more about the game design to make my point.


Lot of classe use skill as a good offence and defence in order to get out of a bad situation.
_Vanguard :  charge, it is at the same time an offensive / strategic skill because it allow instant deplacement, AND since it replanish the shield, when i just have my life left, i often charge a target  so i'm rarely out of shield (this is why using a shield power wouldn't add much).

_infiltrator : the tactical cloak, very good for offence and changing placement, and great defence since ennemy ignore you as soon as you use it.

_sentinel: the armor, offering passif defence enforcement agains damage and, event when broke, pulsing everything letting you go under cover.

_engeener: the drone, can be used as a great distraction when someone is getting too close or anoying.

_adept: none, no defence unless the ennemy have no defence. and it can be a real problem unless you have enough experience to know how to avoid danger with this class.

That is why stasis add more depth to the adept than other class.

I don't talk about the soldier, because i never finished a walkthrough with it, his set of skill is not appealing to me and i'm not fan of AR. Because i don't like it doesn't mean it's bad or have a problem.

singularity and warp are the only adept abiliteis that are functional, for the most part. so again, a half second stager is not being an effective biotic, and its certainly not the feeling i want when i am playing an adept, a cclass desinged to take out enemies without the use of weapons.

With a little experience, taking out the defence of the target is very quick, so i don't spam warp.
But it seem that the problem is, you don't want to use weapons with the adept, so may be your interpretation of the classe is not what was intended by the designer, it doesn't mean using weapon with adept is wrong.
I always enjoy making an ennemy fly to the sky with a shockwave while he was under cover, and head shot him with a pistol while jumping high, or when he fall before he touch the groud.

That's why i said their is a difference between playing effectively and playing with style.
But it wouldn't be possible without combining power + weapon.

Modifié par Siegdrifa, 16 janvier 2011 - 05:56 .

[kstarler]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

singularity and warp are the only adept abiliteis that are functional, for the most part. so again, a half second stager is not being an effective biotic, and its certainly not the feeling i want when i am playing an adept, a cclass desinged to take out enemies without the use of weapons.

I am loathe to respond to any of the silly comments that you post Spamming, but I want to point out yet another gross inaccuracy about ME1 that you've put forward. Aside from a few specific missions in ME1 where you could throw enemies to their death, where was it possible to kill enemies without using any weapons at all? And before you say you could use Warp to do that, I'm asking for a realistic approach to the game, not taking 60+ seconds to kill each enemy, one by one. I'm also referring to Insanity difficulty, since you only want to talk about Adepts at Insanity difficulty in ME2, not Adepts on Normal, which is the level that BioWare balanced them for.

How about you show us all some gameplay video (yours or someone elses) where enemies are killed only with biotics, and neither Shepard nor his/her squad ever fire their weapon in ME1. I would love to up my gameplay in ME1, and I think this might help me do so, because I'm always using Singularity/Lift to disable enemies and then putting an average of twenty rounds into each enemy to kill them while they're entirely defenseless. I would love to see what I'm doing wrong.

Modifié par kstarler, 16 janvier 2011 - 06:01 .

[The Spamming Troll]

siegdrifa,

i dont get what your talking about with stasis. stasis works in the exact same way for any class. adding stasis to an adept allows the adept to become more effective at CCing , but it does the same thing for an infiltrator or a soldier as well. your forgetting stasis makes an adept a much more capable adept, but it also makes the soldier a capable CCer as well as having all things soldier to boot.

concentrating on taking out enemy protections isnt playing an adept. you cant play an adept with style because you cant combo your powers, you cant use abilities on protected enemies, and global cooldowns means i really dont need slam, throw or shockwave, when i can simply use pull. most of the abilites the adept starts out wiht are crap on insanity, its too bad adepts cant be something along the lines of a class that has singularity, warp, warp ammo, pull, stasis, barrier and dominate. becasue to me, thatd be an acceptable adept on insanity. but the way the adepts abilites are already locked in, other then 1 bonus power, really takes away from the point of being a biotic specialist, atleast in my opinion.

Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 16 janvier 2011 - 06:14 .

[The Spamming Troll]

kstarler wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

singularity and warp are the only adept abiliteis that are functional, for the most part. so again, a half second stager is not being an effective biotic, and its certainly not the feeling i want when i am playing an adept, a cclass desinged to take out enemies without the use of weapons.

I am loathe to respond to any of the silly comments that you post Spamming, but I want to point out yet another gross inaccuracy about ME1 that you've put forward. Aside from a few specific missions in ME1 where you could throw enemies to their death, where was it possible to kill enemies without using any weapons at all? And before you say you could use Warp to do that, I'm asking for a realistic approach to the game, not taking 60+ seconds to kill each enemy, one by one. I'm also referring to Insanity difficulty, since you only want to talk about Adepts at Insanity difficulty in ME2, not Adepts on Normal, which is the level that BioWare balanced them for.

How about you show us all some gameplay video (yours or someone elses) where enemies are killed only with biotics, and neither Shepard nor his/her squad ever fire their weapon in ME1. I would love to up my gameplay in ME1, and I think this might help me do so, because I'm always using Singularity/Lift to disable enemies and then putting an average of twenty rounds into each enemy to kill them while they're entirely defenseless. I would love to see what I'm doing wrong.

yeah right, you love arguing with me.

why even label a class "a class most capable at defeating enemies without the use of weapons" when its not the case at all. but your absolutely right an ME1 adept cant kill enemies without weapons(sometimes i post with my heart instead of my head). although playing an adept in ME1, it never felt like i was forced to use my weapons tho. in ME2 i have no other choice but to use my crappy sidearms. ME1s insnaity is completely differnet to ME2s so we cant compare the two. even in ME2 you cant compare veteran to hardcore becasue they are very much differnt types of gameplay. 

im not trying to convince you ME2s gameplay is wrong and stupid. im trying to convey that not every adept player apreciates the changes made to ME2.

Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 16 janvier 2011 - 06:17 .

[kstarler]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

yeah right, you love arguing with me.

why even label a class "a class most capable at defeating enemies without the use of weapons" when its not the case at all. but your absolutely right an ME1 adept cant kill enemies without weapons(sometimes i post with my heart instead of my head). although playing an adept in ME1, it never felt like i was forced to use my weapons tho. in ME2 i have no other choice but to use my crappy sidearms. ME1s insnaity is completely differnet to ME2s so we cant compare the two. even in ME2 you cant compare veteran to hardcore becasue they are very much differnt types of gameplay.

im not trying to convince you ME2s gameplay is wrong and stupid. im trying to convey that not everyone apreciates the changes made to ME2.

Hey, if more of your posts were like this, I think I really would like arguing with you.   I do understand that not all of the changes were appreciated. I don't like all of the changes either, though I get the impression that I like more of them than you do. The one place where I think we both agree is hoping that Adepts will be more awesome than they were in either game in ME3.

[Siegdrifa]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

i dont get what your talking about with stasis. stasis works in the exact same way for any class. adding stasis to an adept allows the adept to become more effective at CCing , but it does the same thing for an infiltrator or a soldier as well.

concentrating on taking out enemy protections isnt playing an adept. you cant play an adept with style because you cant combo your powers, you cant use abilities on protected enemies, and global cooldowns means i really dont need slam, throw or shockwave, when i can simply use pull. most of the abilites the adept starts out wiht are crap on insanity, its too bad adepts cant be something along the lines of a class that has singularity, warp, warp ammo, pull, stasis, barrier and dominate. becasue to me, thatd be an acceptable adept on insanity. but the way the adepts abilites are already locked in other then 1 bonus power, really takes away from the point of being a biotic specialist, atleast in my opinion.

Adept, especialy on insanity have a big problem that other classe don't have.
Because :
1) most of his power set doesn't work on new fresh ennemy
2) if he get in trouble, since none of his power is granted to work on the mennace, it can be a pain.

Vanguard / infiltrator / engineer don't care about the insanity difficulty, because tactical cloak, charge, drone will work the same as a defence.

This is why stasis can help more adept than it can help other.
Because adept have no defence against ennemy with defence, stasis can save his ass.

For exemple, if i choose stasis for my infiltrator, an ennemy is getting near me and can kill me, i can
1) tactical cloak and go way with no stress
2) use stasis in order to find a better place to cover from this guy
3) one shot him in the head with the widow (my favorit lol) because.... this 39 kilo rifle is not only for show
So, even if i don't take stasis, i still have options to avoid danger.

With adept, you can defend yourself only against enemy without defence, wich is why it is important to focus on striping defence in the first place or at best, you interup them for 0.5 second but it won't save you usualy.
Ennemy with no defence in the battle field is as dangerous as small kitten for the adept.

This where you don't need to spam:
Here is usualy how i use my power:
1) i often have an active singularity on the field (well placed), it takes out ennemy from their cover like vacume
    i also use singularity to interupt some ennemy with defence up, like Ymir mech firing, colector beam etc
2) i use throw when someone is getting near, the cd is really sort, especialy if i won't deal with him just now
3) i use pull for a specific ennemy that i want to take out of his cover while my singularity is active elsewhere (singularity can last a long time, that's why i don't need to spam it)
4) i use shockwave (rarely) when wide singularity can't reach them, or when i'm pissed off and just want to make the ennemy fly like trash.

I rarely use warp bomb, because it kill too quicly, but i use heavy warp to strip ennemy defence, even shield, so i use a heavy pistol very often (even against a shield, the phalanx is good, 3/4 shot is enough even without warp before).
Sometimes i also use throw after i pulled an ennemy with pull or singularity, because it's fun and deal some good damage.
As a sub power, since i was used to play in insanity without stasis, i choose biotic shield instead of warp ammo.
I lost some fire power but i gain much more time firing and less about being cover waiting for my shiel to regenerate, so in the end, i'm more satisfied.

So, i don't play by spaming warp and singularity, BUT i play my adept the ways it was mean to be in the first time, forcing ennemy without defence to uncover and become armless.
And the quickest way to take off their defences is the good use of your weapon, i could use only warp.... but me don't like spaming.

im not trying to convince you ME2s gameplay is wrong and stupid. im trying to convey that not everyone apreciates the changes made to ME2.

When it come to taste, it can't be argued, it's your right to prefer something over something else and everybody should respect it (especialy when said in this manner).

Modifié par Siegdrifa, 16 janvier 2011 - 06:59 .

[tonnactus]

Bozorgmehr wrote...
You and Tonactus like no oppossition at all

What opposition? Asari commandos that fire their shotguns at all meters ranges? Bossfights in Mass Effect were neither interesting nor challenging aside from one boss in a Dlc.(Tela Vasir)
Interesting bossfights are something they fail to copy from gears of war.
Or maybee you like it more to duck in cover and wait when an ymir stop to shoot the machine cannon so you could wittle down the "protection" of the thing in the little break...
Good that with stasis i could skip this crap fast without the need to play an engineer.

Well, in ME1 Geth Primes can't do sh-t,

Damping and overload is a little more then just "sh-t".

Modifié par tonnactus, 16 janvier 2011 - 07:40 .

[tonnactus]

Siegdrifa wrote...


You think "ahh, my adept  is effective only against ennemy without defence", but me i think "ennemy with defence = armless target for shooting practice".

Not necessarily if that comes with penalties. Like increased cooldowns for biotics after used on a "protected" enemy or the breakdown of the shields the player have. Because there arent much situation where the players fights one enemy alone anyway(so had to think if that was worth it).This would be far better.Less cheap and uninspired then what we have now.

Modifié par tonnactus, 16 janvier 2011 - 07:48 .

[tonnactus]

The Spamming Troll wrote...


stasis doesnt change with the class you choose. its still equally as effective for a soldier as it is for an adept.

Yes,its retarded. In the first game,only adepts,vanguards and sentinels could use bioamps(and specs like bastion) so there was a big difference regarding the cooldowns even if a soldier took singularity.This is gone completly.

Modifié par tonnactus, 16 janvier 2011 - 07:38 .

[Siegdrifa]

tonnactus wrote...

Siegdrifa wrote...


You think "ahh, my adept  is effective only against ennemy without defence", but me i think "ennemy with defence = armless target for shooting practice".

Not necessarily if that comes with penalties. Like increased cooldowns for biotics after used on a "protected" enemy or the breakdown of the shields the player have. Because there arent much situation where the players fights one enemy alone anyway.This would be far.Less cheap and uninspired then what we have now.

Sorry, i meant ennemys without defence is armless

[The Spamming Troll]

Siegdrifa wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

i dont get what your talking about with stasis. stasis works in the exact same way for any class. adding stasis to an adept allows the adept to become more effective at CCing , but it does the same thing for an infiltrator or a soldier as well.

concentrating on taking out enemy protections isnt playing an adept. you cant play an adept with style because you cant combo your powers, you cant use abilities on protected enemies, and global cooldowns means i really dont need slam, throw or shockwave, when i can simply use pull. most of the abilites the adept starts out wiht are crap on insanity, its too bad adepts cant be something along the lines of a class that has singularity, warp, warp ammo, pull, stasis, barrier and dominate. becasue to me, thatd be an acceptable adept on insanity. but the way the adepts abilites are already locked in other then 1 bonus power, really takes away from the point of being a biotic specialist, atleast in my opinion.

Adept, especialy on insanity have a big problem that other classe don't have.
Because :
1) most of his power set doesn't work on new fresh ennemy
2) if he get in trouble, since none of his power is granted to work on the mennace, it can be a pain.

Vanguard / infiltrator / engineer don't care about the insanity difficulty, because tactical cloak, charge, drone will work the same as a defence.

This is why stasis can help more adept than it can help other.
Because adept have no defence against ennemy with defence, stasis can save his ass.

With adept, you can defend yourself only against enemy without defence, wich is why it is important to focus on striping defence in the first place or at best, you interup them for 0.5 second but it won't save you usualy.
Ennemy with no defence in the battle field is as dangerous as small kitten for the adept.

So, i don't play by spaming warp and singularity, BUT i play my adept the ways it was mean to be in the first time, forcing ennemy without defence to uncover and become armless.
And the quickest way to take off their defences is the good use of your weapon, i could use only warp.... but me don't like spaming.

so essentially your saying before LotSB, the adept was a very underpowered class. not only because of its lack of desirable and effective abilities, but also because of its lack of decent firearms. its almost like your saying the adept needs stasis in order to be comparable to another class, which is is exactly what im trying to point out. i dont know if your in agreement with me or not, but it seems like you dont like adepts gameplay in ME2 either.

tonnactus wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...


stasis doesnt change with the class you choose. its still equally as effective for a soldier as it is for an adept.

Yes,its
retarded. In the first game,only adepts,vanguards and sentinels could
use bioamps(and specs like bastion) so there was a big difference
regarding the cooldowns even if a soldier took singularity.This is gone
completly.

i know! honestly, theres very little reason to play an adept at all, when any other class can do the adepts job with one stupid bonus power. no to mention the adept doesnt even get a decent firearm. after playing so much of the greatness that is ME1, sometimes i think ME2 was made by a bunch of booger nosed grade school children. thers just not a whole lot that makes sense to me when im playing ME2. it should just be called "mass effect: the OTHER mass effect game."

Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 16 janvier 2011 - 07:56 .

[The Spamming Troll]

kstarler wrote...

The one place where I think we both agree is hoping that Adepts will be more awesome than they were in either game in ME3.

yes, please! how about an adept in ME3 that uses biotics to tear off limbs, crush skulls, and help with my love making with liara. i think a class that could do more then just pull and push would be a much better representation of a class designed to take out enemies without the use of weapons. its too bad bioware has a huge boner for its ripoff-gunplay instead of its amazingly awesome abilities.

Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 16 janvier 2011 - 08:02 .

[Kronner]

Oh cmon TST, Adept has no problems with defenses. Use your squad to remove them and they toy with the enemies as you like. What's so hard to understand? The only difference between Casual and Insanity is that you have to pick your squad correctly and you can't take as much damage (so you have less time for everything) and enemies have more health (which is no problem since you can disable them easily).
Adept is not gimped, it can even be played really aggressively (Boz has a lot of cool videos).

Modifié par Kronner, 16 janvier 2011 - 08:23 .

[Siegdrifa]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

so essentially your saying before LotSB, the adept was a very underpowered class. not only because of its lack of desirable and effective abilities, but also because of its lack of decent firearms. its almost like your saying the adept needs stasis in order to be comparable to another class, which is is exactly what im trying to point out. i dont know if your in agreement with me or not, but it seems like you dont like adepts gameplay in ME2 either.

Before LOTSB it must have been more difficulte yes, unles you know how to avoid danger with an adept, in that case, stasis is not usefull.

I don't find the adept underpowered even before stasis, because forcing the ennemi to be out of cover letting them no choice but to die, is pretty powerfull as a purpuse on the battle field, i find striping defence no so much to pay in order to let the adept rule over ennemy's squad.

I love the adept, it's like a double edge sword, it's not the easyest to begin with but when you know how to handle it, you turn the battle field anyway you want.

[The Spamming Troll]

kronner,

what other class relies on squadmates, starts with only sidearms, has the majority of its abilities "blocked" and isnt an improvement on the class it was in ME1? i know adepts in your book are perfect, but not for me.

were in a never ending cycle of RAARRRRRRRR here. you like adepts that are a bit limited, while i like adepts that have a little more freedom.

Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 16 janvier 2011 - 08:22 .

[The Spamming Troll]

Siegdrifa wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

so essentially your saying before LotSB, the adept was a very underpowered class. not only because of its lack of desirable and effective abilities, but also because of its lack of decent firearms. its almost like your saying the adept needs stasis in order to be comparable to another class, which is is exactly what im trying to point out. i dont know if your in agreement with me or not, but it seems like you dont like adepts gameplay in ME2 either.

Before LOTSB it must have been more difficulte yes, unles you know how to avoid danger with an adept, in that case, stasis is not usefull.

I don't find the adept underpowered even before stasis, because forcing the ennemi to be out of cover letting them no choice but to die, is pretty powerfull as a purpuse on the battle field, i find striping defence no so much to pay in order to let the adept rule over ennemy's squad.

I love the adept, it's like a double edge sword, it's not the easyest to begin with but when you know how to handle it, you turn the battle field anyway you want.

your confusing.

[Kronner]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

kronner,

what other class relies on squadmates, starts with only sidearms, has the majority of its abilities "blocked" and isnt an improvement on the class it was in ME1? i know adepts in your book are perfect, but not for me.

were in a never ending cycle of RAARRRRRRRR here. you like adepts that are a bit limited, while i like adepts that have a little more freedom.

So why play on Insanity? If you want to be Biotic God, you can easily solo on Normal with one hand behind your back.

While I do see your point (which only revolves around Insanity and Hardcore), I do not agree with you. Adepts do not have superhero power (Charge, Adrenaline Rush, Tech Armor, Cloak), but they have a pool of good and useful talents, well balanced. Spamming Singularity is not very efficient. Engineers are quite similar. Some players like this tactical combat style.

Modifié par Kronner, 16 janvier 2011 - 08:28 .

[The Spamming Troll]

well, i dont want to easily solo casual. i want to fight YMIR mechs and eclipse vanguards, not varren and pistol wielding mercs. im in agreement adepts have alot of abilities, but i certainly dont think they have alot of USEFULL abilities(on insanity).



i wish bioware took a different approach to creating challenge within its game structure, instead of enemy protections. i hope you dont require suggestions on creating more of a challenge, because in my opinion ANYTHING is better then stupid enemy protections (specifically speaking about the adept here).