141 réponses à ce sujet

[Kronner]

Ahglock wrote...

I don't know what or if it should be fixed. But it doesn't seem right to me that 3 classes are at their optimum by spamming one power. Being able to struggle through the game using one power is one thing, but being at your best doesn't sit well with me. All of the classes can be played in a variety of ways, but you get through the levels better just with TA. I happen to like area pull on my vanguard, I strip defenses with a squadmate, pull, then charge in and point blank range floating foes. I think it is fun. But just charge spamming would have been quicker and easier.

On Insanity, yes. On Normal or Veteran it is a completly different story. It is safe to say most players play on Veteran or lower.

Considering Soldier has only 2 active powers, and one of them is quite bad, what can you expect? Soldier should be about shooting stuff, it was the same in ME1. What are you gonna do? Make Soldier throw fire grenades in between bullet time spam?
Sentinel with Assault Armot is pretty much invincible, but again, on difficulties other than Insanity/Hardcore, you can do whatever you like, freeze, throw, whatever.
Vanguard has Charge, which is the best power he has. Pull is good even on Insanity. Shockwave sucks.
Infiltrator's best power is arguably time slowdown when you are using SR. Other than that Cloak is clearly the best active power he has.

And even on Insanity, you CAN play any way you like. It may not be the most effective, but then again, there always are best/most effective powers in ANY game.

But look at Adept, Singularity + Pull, other powers are clearly worse. Shockwave sucks, Throw and Warp are ok I guess. Using squad Warp is much better though.

Engineer has Drone, other powers are clearly worse.

(excluding ALL bonus powers)
How are Engineer and Adept so different? They may "spam" 2 powers (at best) and they probably need squad more than the other classes. The fact is that you "spam" 1 or 2 powers with any class, with occasional "extra" power thrown in.

Also according to the in-game descriptions, Engineer and Adept ARE the only casters in the game, they SHOULD use more powers than the combat or hybrid classes. The other 4 classes SHOULD use weapons more often than Adept or Engineer.

Why should all classes use X powers? Why not Y? You don't like a class, play another. Simple as that. Changing all classes to be the same (so they all spam X powers on separate cooldowns) is a bad idea, does not account for average difficulty and players skill. In short, it sucks. My $0.02.

They don't need to abandon global cooldown to encourage you to use more powers. Simply add more powers and power evolutions (that improve certain style of play), and let us build our Shepard (with only the signature and passive power firmly set).

Modifié par Kronner, 16 avril 2011 - 07:50 .

[Bozorgmehr]

Internet discussions - who doesn't love em

Kronner wrote...

Well, we will have to agree to disagree. I mean, you basically say Vanguard's Charge wins the game by default, there is no risk and it is incredibly easy. Well, to be honest, I will rather stop now because I really do not want to throw strong/curse words at you..I mean when I look back at all the deaths I experienced while playing Vanguard..I rarely die now, but given how much time I've spent with the game, it is no surprise. In any case, you saying that Charge = I WIN button/Vanguard can't die is f***ing ridiculous. I even thought it was a joke for a second.

Well, to me, the difference between 'multiplication and addition' AND this is about the same. Either way, it is so simple combination that putting "complexity" into the same sentence is hilarious. Charge is arguably more difficult to use because you must be precise and react quickly. With Singularity or whatever you can sit behind cover and if you screw it up, you just stay where you are and try again in 4 seconds. This is not really possible to compare directly, different people will see it differently.

First you say Vanguard play is very tactical and now it's hilarious when I argue using multiple powers (instead of one) is more complex? And yes, Charge is not at all a difficult power to use. The first time I played Vanguard, I charged - killed the target - got into cover - charged again. You won't die often playing like this (at least I didn't) and you can find cover everywhere (plus enemies never flank you).

People simply expected Adept to be the bioticGod (ala ME1) and that is not the case in ME2. People like to b1tch and moan. I personally find Adept to be easier to play than Vanguard. Not as fast, but nowhere near as risky either.

I disagree - the Charge-Shoot-Cover playstyle (which basically equals the cautious Adept playstyle) isn't very risky. It will be harder if you try to ignore cover whenever possible; but trying the same thing with an Adept is a lot harder and likely results in more critical mission failures (again, my experience).

So first you say Vanguard is I-WIN class, and adding more power to them is gonna make the game more challenging? If you mean more challenge = enemies with more DP and HP, then, as I said above, you'd use 2 gimped powers instead of one powerful power in the same timeframe..this is not any better, it is actually much worse. Better AI would not change much given the time dilatation effect.

I explained why I consider Charge an I-WIN button.

Two gimped powers instead of one powerful? I count one powerful and one 'gimped' power instead of one powerful only. I also haven't said anything about enemies (HP, AI etc). What I mean by more challenging is simple; if there would be missions in ME2 when you'd have to deal with a group of enemies (who stay close to each other), including 2-3 elites (anything that cannot be OSOK ed) and a pyro or a couple Varren/Fenris (for CQC / stuns) plus one or two AR wielding foes (total 5-6 enemies) AND without 5 coverspots every square meter = a very unlikely Charge target imo.

More cohesive enemy squads and less opportuneties to get cover would make life for the Vanguard a lot harder without gimping anything or giving enemies more HP.

This is just not true. Vanguard can be played in a number of ways. The fact that you completely ignore this fact is sad. Personally, I play one dimensional, one power Vanguard, because I love it. BUT, it is possible to take AR, play a long range biotic/combat hybrid with occasional Charge, I am sure some people enjoy that.

Sentinels, again, do NOT have to be tanks. You, again, ignore this fact.

I can play an Adept like a Soldier if I want to - will take multiple times longer to complete the game though (tedious & boring). Vanguards can go casting. It's the same thing - you're deliberately gimping yourself. I have never seen a (Insanity) VG vid, in which Pull and Shockwave see regular action, AND fought roughly equally effective compared to a non-stop Charge VG. Shockwave and Pull are like the Soldier's CS - Charge and ARush are (almost) always the best option. I don't think there are many people who like to get behind cover, use the Shuriken to remove shields, Pull enemy and kill him (weapon/shockwave) - when they can also use Charge twice and kill 2-5 enemies in the same time-frame.

And here we go again. You TOTALLY ignore the fact that the game is NOT based around Insanity. Not every power can be viable on ANY difficulty. Achieving that kind of balance in a game is not worth the resources it would take. And you know damn well I like Insanity in ME2. But this is simply a fact. Be realistic.

On Normal it doesn't matter what powers you use - ME2's 'balance' is build around the concept "every power will destoy everything except the occasional elite / boss". Bioware gave each class a cool and unique power et voila.

I'm making it sound really bad which it isn't - but I don't think Bioware used many resources on balance (between difficulty and classes). Anyone who tries to use Shockwave on Insanity will tell it sucks - I find it hard to believe everyone at Bioware failed to see this. Soldiers, Infiltrators and Vanguards can one-shot enemies throughout the game; activate/use power > shoot = death enemy, in 2-3 seconds (less if you take time dilation into account). Adepts cast Singularity (and have to wait before it reaches target), hope target will be trapped, shoot down defenses, kill enemy - which requires 4-5 (likely more) seconds.

If Bioware did put a lot of effort in balance it definitely doesn't show. To me it looks more like they gave every class a cool unique ability which is sufficient to get through the game on Insanity, but BW didn't cared about the rest much. It's enough to make each class feel different and they are all fun to play - but it doesn't allow much variety without severely gimping yourself. My hope for ME3 is that BW looks closely at the other powers and make them more important than "you can use it, but it's not worth it" curiosities.

[Kronner]

Bozorgmehr wrote...

Internet discussions - who doesn't love em

You tell me.

Bozorgmehr wrote...
First you say Vanguard play is very tactical and now it's hilarious when I argue using multiple powers (instead of one) is more complex? And yes, Charge is not at all a difficult power to use. The first time I played Vanguard, I charged - killed the target - got into cover - charged again. You won't die often playing like this (at least I didn't) and you can find cover everywhere (plus enemies never flank you).

I said Charge was tactical power, and it is. You make it sound like setting up a Warp bomb is complex, while Charge is for retards. I have nothing to add to that.

Well, congratulations to you, then.

Enemies do not flank you. True. It is why Adept is so easy to play, by the way. I almost never died as an Adept or Engineer, unless I played recklessly on purpose (read: I made a stupid mvoe). Enemy AI is idiotic when it comes to flanking, so it is impossible to die while in cover.

I disagree - the Charge-Shoot-Cover playstyle (which basically equals the cautious Adept playstyle) isn't very risky. It will be harder if you try to ignore cover whenever possible; but trying the same thing with an Adept is a lot harder and likely results in more critical mission failures (again, my experience).

Because Adept is NOT built for that. Vanguard will not hold anyone in place with a Singularity, Adept will. So I do not see how this is a surprise to you.

Bozorgmehr wrote...
I explained why I consider Charge an I-WIN button.

No, you have not. You said Charge was equivalent to ME1's immunity + teleport to point blank range. You also said Vanguard couldn't die. This is the biggest bull**** I have read in a long, long time. Seriously. It's number one, and NHL playoffs just began and there has been a lot of BS on HFBoards. But this one takes the cake, despite a fierce competition.

More cohesive enemy squads and less opportuneties to get cover would make life for the Vanguard a lot harder without gimping anything or giving enemies more HP.

Yeah, why not. I do not care about that. The more enemies the better.

I can play an Adept like a Soldier if I want to - will take multiple times longer to complete the game though (tedious & boring). Vanguards can go casting. It's the same thing - you're deliberately gimping yourself. I have never seen a (Insanity) VG vid, in which Pull and Shockwave see regular action, AND fought roughly equally effective compared to a non-stop Charge VG. Shockwave and Pull are like the Soldier's CS - Charge and ARush are (almost) always the best option. I don't think there are many people who like to get behind cover, use the Shuriken to remove shields, Pull enemy and kill him (weapon/shockwave) - when they can also use Charge twice and kill 2-5 enemies in the same time-frame.

Not all powers/playstyles are equally effective/quick. That will NEVER be the case. Never. How you can actually think otherwise is beyond me.




Obviously, I am not gonna agree with you here. I think you are totally off the base on basically all your points/or I totally misunderstood you, but it does not matter. I agree to disagree with you, and I am off to calm waters, with no Sharks(cookie for everyone who gets teh reference).

Modifié par Kronner, 16 avril 2011 - 09:24 .

[ahgchyhn]

one major problem with the current system:

some powers are "imbalanced" in a sense of combining offensive and/or defensive and/or mobility in one power. then these powers coexist in a class'  armory with other, "inferior" or more situational powers, but all share the "same" global cooldown.
naturally this results in favoring the first; some classes become one-trick ponys like soldiers, sentinels or vanguards.

so one could strengthen the former/weaken the latter sort of powers while retaining a single global cooldown, offering a relativly equal choice. but i think this will only work with a very small set of available powers.

so i also would prefer a system of seperate cooldowns for the signature
active class power and all others (and no cooldown for ammo powers or
better no ammo power at all). this would allow a greater amory of powers without favoring tech/biotic, combat/biotic etc. hybrids. but it would also make the classes very active class power centric, thus requiring careful balance, and also only work with a small count of powers.

but i believe we think too much in the scale of the ME2 mechanics.

[ME3 spoiler]

Skill builds
- More freedom with character skills
- Larger skill trees
- Powers will evolve several times, not just once

if this stays true, noone of the above systems would be fitting, maybe we see the returning of individual power cooldowns.

(btw didn't we discuss these issues a while ago in a proposal thread of bozorg or somesuch?)

[Stardusk78]

Kronner wrote...

Bozorgmehr wrote...

Internet discussions - who doesn't love em

You tell me.

Bozorgmehr wrote...
First you say Vanguard play is very tactical and now it's hilarious when I argue using multiple powers (instead of one) is more complex? And yes, Charge is not at all a difficult power to use. The first time I played Vanguard, I charged - killed the target - got into cover - charged again. You won't die often playing like this (at least I didn't) and you can find cover everywhere (plus enemies never flank you).

I said Charge was tactical power, and it is. You make it sound like setting up a Warp bomb is complex, while Charge is for retards. I have nothing to add to that.

Well, congratulations to you, then.

Enemies do not flank you. True. It is why Adept is so easy to play, by the way. I almost never died as an Adept or Engineer, unless I played recklessly on purpose (read: I made a stupid mvoe). Enemy AI is idiotic when it comes to flanking, so it is impossible to die while in cover.

I disagree - the Charge-Shoot-Cover playstyle (which basically equals the cautious Adept playstyle) isn't very risky. It will be harder if you try to ignore cover whenever possible; but trying the same thing with an Adept is a lot harder and likely results in more critical mission failures (again, my experience).

Because Adept is NOT built for that. Vanguard will not hold anyone in place with a Singularity, Adept will. So I do not see how this is a surprise to you.

Bozorgmehr wrote...
I explained why I consider Charge an I-WIN button.

No, you have not. You said Charge was equivalent to ME1's immunity + teleport to point blank range. You also said Vanguard couldn't die. This is the biggest bull**** I have read in a long, long time. Seriously. It's number one, and NHL playoffs just began and there has been a lot of BS on HFBoards. But this one takes the cake, despite a fierce competition.

More cohesive enemy squads and less opportuneties to get cover would make life for the Vanguard a lot harder without gimping anything or giving enemies more HP.

Yeah, why not. I do not care about that. The more enemies the better.

I can play an Adept like a Soldier if I want to - will take multiple times longer to complete the game though (tedious & boring). Vanguards can go casting. It's the same thing - you're deliberately gimping yourself. I have never seen a (Insanity) VG vid, in which Pull and Shockwave see regular action, AND fought roughly equally effective compared to a non-stop Charge VG. Shockwave and Pull are like the Soldier's CS - Charge and ARush are (almost) always the best option. I don't think there are many people who like to get behind cover, use the Shuriken to remove shields, Pull enemy and kill him (weapon/shockwave) - when they can also use Charge twice and kill 2-5 enemies in the same time-frame.

Not all powers/playstyles are equally effective/quick. That will NEVER be the case. Never. How you can actually think otherwise is beyond me.




Obviously, I am not gonna agree with you here. I think you are totally off the base on basically all your points/or I totally misunderstood you, but it does not matter. I agree to disagree with you, and I am off to calm waters, with no Sharks(cookie for everyone who gets teh reference).

I wish I had had students like you when I still taught English. Very impressive use of an idiom!

[Bozorgmehr]

Kronner wrote...

I said Charge was tactical power, and it is. You make it sound like setting up a Warp bomb is complex, while Charge is for retards. I have nothing to add to that.

Enemies do not flank you. True. It is why Adept is so easy to play, by the way. I almost never died as an Adept or Engineer, unless I played recklessly on purpose (read: I made a stupid mvoe). Enemy AI is idiotic when it comes to flanking, so it is impossible to die while in cover.

Vanguards are just as easy if not easier to play. Level design, enemy AI behavior and the reload trick almost look like ME2 is designed around Charge. You die as often as a cover-based Adept when you use Charge "tactically" (hit - shoot - run/hide). This tactic can be used against all enemies without risk. The only danger is getting stunned - which is also true for anyone playing behind cover > when peaking out of cover and hit by FB, rocket, drone whatever can kill you without anything you can do about it.

Because Adept is NOT built for that. Vanguard will not hold anyone in place with a Singularity, Adept will. So I do not see how this is a surprise to you.

You said Charge was equivalent to ME1's immunity + teleport to point blank range. You also said Vanguard couldn't die. This is the biggest bull**** I have read in a long, long time. Seriously. It's number one, and NHL playoffs just began and there has been a lot of BS on HFBoards. But this one takes the cake, despite a fierce competition.

Charge would have been a tactical power without the shield boost, or on higher cd, or with less cover around, or enemies who instead of retreating, turned around and attacked player. The ability to instantly move between all enemies, get one shot (kill) for free and full shields - which gives you 2 seconds to get somewhere safe (=everywhere) is not very risky at all (it looks like it, feels like it, but using powers without a shield behind cover is equally, if not more ,dangerous).

All your Vanguard videos show how insanely powerful Charge is - if it, like you say, is a tactical power you could never pull off all those stunts. Also explain why Vanguards should be capable to go around without cover and other classes should not (beats me) - your Singularity comparison is a joke: Charge = one kill + shields back, Singularity = one trapped enemy + shields lost (if you had any).

Not all powers/playstyles are equally effective/quick. That will NEVER be the case. Never. How you can actually think otherwise is beyond me.

What? So now you're saying that because perfect balance is impossible we all should accept that fact and do nothing about it? This is the biggest nonsense you've posted thus far.

ME2 is poorly balanced game (between classes and the powers they can use). The Adept class needed Stasis and other dlc gear (Arc Projector, Mattock, GPS) to get them really going. I hope BW does a better job in ME3.

If they can design something like Charge you can say "that's great keep it and **** everything else" or "damn, that's an awesome power - I want more stuff like that!"

Obviously, I am not gonna agree with you here. I think you are totally off the base on basically all your points/or I totally misunderstood you, but it does not matter. I agree to disagree with you, and I am off to calm waters, with no Sharks(cookie for everyone who gets teh reference).

I think we finally reached some kind of an agreement

I hope you have/had a better time with the NHL playoffs than I did with Real Madrid - Barcelona, what a poor match

[Stardusk78]

Bozorgmehr wrote...

Kronner wrote...

I said Charge was tactical power, and it is. You make it sound like setting up a Warp bomb is complex, while Charge is for retards. I have nothing to add to that.

Enemies do not flank you. True. It is why Adept is so easy to play, by the way. I almost never died as an Adept or Engineer, unless I played recklessly on purpose (read: I made a stupid mvoe). Enemy AI is idiotic when it comes to flanking, so it is impossible to die while in cover.

Vanguards are just as easy if not easier to play. Level design, enemy AI behavior and the reload trick almost look like ME2 is designed around Charge. You die as often as a cover-based Adept when you use Charge "tactically" (hit - shoot - run/hide). This tactic can be used against all enemies without risk. The only danger is getting stunned - which is also true for anyone playing behind cover > when peaking out of cover and hit by FB, rocket, drone whatever can kill you without anything you can do about it.

Because Adept is NOT built for that. Vanguard will not hold anyone in place with a Singularity, Adept will. So I do not see how this is a surprise to you.

You said Charge was equivalent to ME1's immunity + teleport to point blank range. You also said Vanguard couldn't die. This is the biggest bull**** I have read in a long, long time. Seriously. It's number one, and NHL playoffs just began and there has been a lot of BS on HFBoards. But this one takes the cake, despite a fierce competition.

Charge would have been a tactical power without the shield boost, or on higher cd, or with less cover around, or enemies who instead of retreating, turned around and attacked player. The ability to instantly move between all enemies, get one shot (kill) for free and full shields - which gives you 2 seconds to get somewhere safe (=everywhere) is not very risky at all (it looks like it, feels like it, but using powers without a shield behind cover is equally, if not more ,dangerous).

All your Vanguard videos show how insanely powerful Charge is - if it, like you say, is a tactical power you could never pull off all those stunts. Also explain why Vanguards should be capable to go around without cover and other classes should not (beats me) - your Singularity comparison is a joke: Charge = one kill + shields back, Singularity = one trapped enemy + shields lost (if you had any).

Not all powers/playstyles are equally effective/quick. That will NEVER be the case. Never. How you can actually think otherwise is beyond me.

What? So now you're saying that because perfect balance is impossible we all should accept that fact and do nothing about it? This is the biggest nonsense you've posted thus far.

ME2 is poorly balanced game (between classes and the powers they can use). The Adept class needed Stasis and other dlc gear (Arc Projector, Mattock, GPS) to get them really going. I hope BW does a better job in ME3.

If they can design something like Charge you can say "that's great keep it and **** everything else" or "damn, that's an awesome power - I want more stuff like that!"

Obviously, I am not gonna agree with you here. I think you are totally off the base on basically all your points/or I totally misunderstood you, but it does not matter. I agree to disagree with you, and I am off to calm waters, with no Sharks(cookie for everyone who gets teh reference).

I think we finally reached some kind of an agreement

I hope you have/had a better time with the NHL playoffs than I did with Real Madrid - Barcelona, what a poor match

So we agree that Charge and Vanguards are OP...hehe.

Seriously Boz, to put the UMPH back in the Adept I would suggest the following for one of the classes evolutions; make Singuarity much more powerful, stripping defence layers twice as fast, having a 6m AOE and causing health damage; the trade off would be that other powers could not be evolved as much. I would see this as balancing, because either you gimp the Vanguard OR you keep the Adept culled...

[RGFrog]

First, a vanguard is a soldier that uses biotics to boost his/her abillity to shoot/be a soldier. A vanguard is not an adept that uses guns to support biotics.

Similarly an Infiltrator is a soldier that uses tech to support killing.

A soldier is just a plane old tank with all the best weapons and one extra skill his omni-tool can perform to ensure he remains a tank and not just a cover hugger.

Changes in the GC would not change any of these things. Nor would I want it to. I don't play VG so I can be an adept. I play adept for that.

What the OP is suggesting, imo, with the GC changes is opening up more choices for the player.

Personally, I'm fine with the way they are now. Vanguard plays the way it's supposed to play. A cqc soldier with a trick that makes it an even better cqc soldier if you're proficient at using said trick.

The funny thing is, add charge to an adept (which I've tried) and adept doesn't become OP it becomes fairly awkward.

So, back to the topic. If you think, boz, that combined cooldowns are a bad idea, then why not suggest something that would make GC's better instead of arguing about how OP things would be.

The game only has 2 real caster classes, so why are you so adamant about further gimping them? Shouldn't a player have some choice about how to play the game? I charged a ton with my VG, but there were some times when that became boring and I instead shotgun/shockwaved a bit. Then pull chained some. But in the end VG is a soldier that uses charge to make it a better soldier.

How would the op's suggestion change that? I don't think it would. You'd be able to charge and shoot off maybe one or two other casts, but why would you? A charge with a 10 second cd is useless to the berserker nature of the one chaotic class in the game. VG is about speed and the OP's suggestion wouldn't even affect that.

However, if you chose to play your VG as more of a tactical class that looked at each scenario and planned the most efficient use of combined powers, then the changes are necessary in order to keep a VG from becoming an 64 calorie Adept Light.

For ME2, not so much. However, I expect and hope that ME3 will have a much improved enemy AI and simply spamming charge will get your shep killed pdq.

You may be hooked on ME being an TPS, but frankly that only holds true for the Soldier class. I believe that the other classes exist so players have options beyond pew pew duck pew pew duck. Anything that helps that does not in any way make something OP or the game "unbalanced".

Who wants balance anyway. If it takes the same to play the game as a soldier as it does an Adept, then why even bother. Balance is stagnation. However, shep is supposed to be the most bad as$ in whatever class you choose, so there should be a measure of OP to each of them in one way or another.

Otherwise, soldier class shouldn't be able to use AR or even hack. The only thing that class should be able to do is put finger to trigger. ANYTHING beyond the best weapons available in game makes the standard class OP and unbalanced. Since that's not going to change, perhaps hoping for balance in any class should change, too.

[Kronner]

Bozorgmehr wrote...
Charge would have been a tactical power without the shield boost, or on higher cd, or with less cover around, or enemies who instead of retreating, turned around and attacked player. The ability to instantly move between all enemies, get one shot (kill) for free and full shields - which gives you 2 seconds to get somewhere safe (=everywhere) is not very risky at all (it looks like it, feels like it, but using powers without a shield behind cover is equally, if not more ,dangerous).

All your Vanguard videos show how insanely powerful Charge is - if it, like you say, is a tactical power you could never pull off all those stunts. Also explain why Vanguards should be capable to go around without cover and other classes should not (beats me) - your Singularity comparison is a joke: Charge = one kill + shields back, Singularity = one trapped enemy + shields lost (if you had any).

Charge is tactical power, because when used correctly it is very powerful. The two are not mutually exclusive. A power can be tactical and powerful at the same time. Most of all, Charge is fun. I am all for a greater challenge, but I don't like your proposals (other than varied enemies in greater numbers). I think that adding separate cooldowns for powers is a bad idea. I would rather have the option to build my Shepard, pick my own powers from the pool of available powers, and with addition of improved enemies (numbers, AI, variety) it will do the job just as well, without any changes to Global Cooldown.

You keep saying Charge is OP or I-WIN button, but you lack perspective. Do you think an average player is as good as you? (S)he is not. That is simply a fact.  You also say Charge is easy to use. Again, for you, perhaps. But you again ignore the average player. That is a great mistake. Unlike you, I realize that it is not true (which means I try to consider all difficulty levels and all player groups..from casual to hardcore ME freaks, like you or me), despite the fact that I think (ok, may not sound humble, but it's true) I mastered all classes and all of them are easy to play for me on Insanity..but I still have FUN playing the game.

Compared to Cloak/Tech Armor/Adrenaline Rush/Drone you can't possibly think Charge is overpowered. Singularity is probably a bit weaker compared to the other 5 signature powers. (on Insanity, that is)
But any of these powers will win you the game, once you know how to use them. That's just the way it is.
So if Charge is overpowered, then any other Signature power, Energy Drain, Neural Shock, Throw, Pull, Reave, Dominate, Stasis, Inferno Ammo, Cryo Ammo, Warp, Sniper Rifle Zoom time-slowdown are overpowered too...in which case it does not matter, and overpowered is a meaningless term.

Also, I did not compare Charge to Singularity, I only said Adept is not build for CQC, unlike the Vanguard; and Vanguard is not CC class, unlike Adept..so I was surprised that you were surprised that Adept is not as good in CQC.

What? So now you're saying that because perfect balance is impossible we all should accept that fact and do nothing about it? This is the biggest nonsense you've posted thus far.

It is not nonsense.
You basically proposed adding extra power (as in, buff, not ability) to all classes (to make them more caster-like I guess), and you considered Insanity only.

And of course that we should accept that achieving perfection (in software) is not worth the resources. That is what they teach you at any University of Information technology.

You can't possibly think that all powers, and all builds will be equally effective on all difficulty levels. Some powers and some builds will always be better than others on different difficulty modes.

ME2 is poorly balanced game (between classes and the powers they can use). The Adept class needed Stasis and other dlc gear (Arc Projector, Mattock, GPS) to get them really going. I hope BW does a better job in ME3.

I disagree here. Mass Effect 2 is quite well balanced game. Once mastered, any class will dominate the game on Insanity. Just look at your Banzai Biotics compilation. Does that make Adept overpowered? No, it only shows you mastered the class.
How easy or hard it is to master the class is very subjective. Some people say Soldier is the easiest to play, other people say Adept or Engineer was their easiest playthrough etc. This is the ultimate proof that the game is balanced well.

Adept was very good prior to any DLC imho. I did dominate the game with the Adept, and I did not have Stasis or GPS to one shot defenses from a far. I rarely died. That does not make Adept overpowered. It only means I found the way to make the class effective.

If they can design something like Charge you can say "that's great keep it and **** everything else" or "damn, that's an awesome power - I want more stuff like that!"

No idea what you mean here. Could you explain please? Thanks!

I think we finally reached some kind of an agreement

I hope you have/had a better time with the NHL playoffs than I did with Real Madrid - Barcelona, what a poor match

It was glorious. Gotta love playoff hockey! Let's go Red Wings

Stardusk78 wrote...

So we agree that Charge and Vanguards are OP...hehe.

Are you serious? You of all people?
Just watch your own videos - some of the older ones (without Mattock, which is actually overpowered - confirmed by BioWare dev - because it has no drawback, and it was meant to be overpowered since the release of the DLC pack) - and honestly tell me if you are godlike/overpowered in those videos. Newsflash: You aren't.


I am sick of all the overpowered BS that gets thrown around here..overpowered this, overpowered that.

Of course that once players masters a certain power, the game will get easier. Do you want Shepard to be a weakling? (S)He is a goddamn cybernetically enhanced supersoldier..(s)he should have a way to frack up all enemies.

Modifié par Kronner, 17 avril 2011 - 09:22 .

[Siegdrifa]

I don't find charge to be an i-win button, because if you use it when you are SURE it won't be a fatal move to yourself, yeah, it's like any power used "wisely".

But, charge is not the same kind of power as tactical cloack for exemple, for TC, doesn't matter when you push it, it's never a fail, you can't die by getting invisible, even if you miss the burst dps power.
Charge on the other side can be used NOT wisely and it can make you die.
A good vanguard, with more experience, will charge more and more on totaly dangerous situation surounding by many ennemys without much cover when you arrive, and i'm not talking about Charge / Shot / Cover
I'm talking about Charge on not unprotected guyA / Shot on guy B / elbow guy B / Shot / Run / Cover.
Often loosing more than your shield, often bleeding, never diyng, total kick ass.

Isn't it awsome to also use charge as tactical instant displacement ? charging a weak ennemy far away to attack ennemy squad from behind, very effective.

My best moment as a vanguard is a newgame+ starting by recruiting garus first (insanity of cause), i could at least use the full potential of the vanguard without killing too quickly (charge / head shot lol was useless).

Modifié par Siegdrifa, 17 avril 2011 - 10:00 .

[Siegdrifa]

Double post, sorry

Modifié par Siegdrifa, 17 avril 2011 - 09:56 .

[Stardusk78]

Kronner wrote...

Bozorgmehr wrote...
Charge would have been a tactical power without the shield boost, or on higher cd, or with less cover around, or enemies who instead of retreating, turned around and attacked player. The ability to instantly move between all enemies, get one shot (kill) for free and full shields - which gives you 2 seconds to get somewhere safe (=everywhere) is not very risky at all (it looks like it, feels like it, but using powers without a shield behind cover is equally, if not more ,dangerous).

All your Vanguard videos show how insanely powerful Charge is - if it, like you say, is a tactical power you could never pull off all those stunts. Also explain why Vanguards should be capable to go around without cover and other classes should not (beats me) - your Singularity comparison is a joke: Charge = one kill + shields back, Singularity = one trapped enemy + shields lost (if you had any).

Charge is tactical power, because when used correctly it is very powerful. The two are not mutually exclusive. A power can be tactical and powerful at the same time. Most of all, Charge is fun. I am all for a greater challenge, but I don't like your proposals (other than varied enemies in greater numbers). I think that adding separate cooldowns for powers is a bad idea. I would rather have the option to build my Shepard, pick my own powers from the pool of available powers, and with addition of improved enemies (numbers, AI, variety) it will do the job just as well, without any changes to Global Cooldown.

You keep saying Charge is OP or I-WIN button, but you lack perspective. Do you think an average player is as good as you? (S)he is not. That is simply a fact.  You also say Charge is easy to use. Again, for you, perhaps. But you again ignore the average player. That is a great mistake. Unlike you, I realize that it is not true (which means I try to consider all difficulty levels and all player groups..from casual to hardcore ME freaks, like you or me), despite the fact that I think (ok, may not sound humble, but it's true) I mastered all classes and all of them are easy to play for me on Insanity..but I still have FUN playing the game.

Compared to Cloak/Tech Armor/Adrenaline Rush/Drone you can't possibly think Charge is overpowered. Singularity is probably a bit weaker compared to the other 5 signature powers. (on Insanity, that is)
But any of these powers will win you the game, once you know how to use them. That's just the way it is.
So if Charge is overpowered, then any other Signature power, Energy Drain, Neural Shock, Throw, Pull, Reave, Dominate, Stasis, Inferno Ammo, Cryo Ammo, Warp, Sniper Rifle Zoom time-slowdown are overpowered too...in which case it does not matter, and overpowered is a meaningless term.

Also, I did not compare Charge to Singularity, I only said Adept is not build for CQC, unlike the Vanguard; and Vanguard is not CC class, unlike Adept..so I was surprised that you were surprised that Adept is not as good in CQC.

What? So now you're saying that because perfect balance is impossible we all should accept that fact and do nothing about it? This is the biggest nonsense you've posted thus far.

It is not nonsense.
You basically proposed adding extra power (as in, buff, not ability) to all classes (to make them more caster-like I guess), and you considered Insanity only.

And of course that we should accept that achieving perfection (in software) is not worth the resources. That is what they teach you at any University of Information technology.

You can't possibly think that all powers, and all builds will be equally effective on all difficulty levels. Some powers and some builds will always be better than others on different difficulty modes.

ME2 is poorly balanced game (between classes and the powers they can use). The Adept class needed Stasis and other dlc gear (Arc Projector, Mattock, GPS) to get them really going. I hope BW does a better job in ME3.

I disagree here. Mass Effect 2 is quite well balanced game. Once mastered, any class will dominate the game on Insanity. Just look at your Banzai Biotics compilation. Does that make Adept overpowered? No, it only shows you mastered the class.
How easy or hard it is to master the class is very subjective. Some people say Soldier is the easiest to play, other people say Adept or Engineer was their easiest playthrough etc. This is the ultimate proof that the game is balanced well.

Adept was very good prior to any DLC imho. I did dominate the game with the Adept, and I did not have Stasis or GPS to one shot defenses from a far. I rarely died. That does not make Adept overpowered. It only means I found the way to make the class effective.

If they can design something like Charge you can say "that's great keep it and **** everything else" or "damn, that's an awesome power - I want more stuff like that!"

No idea what you mean here. Could you explain please? Thanks!

I think we finally reached some kind of an agreement

I hope you have/had a better time with the NHL playoffs than I did with Real Madrid - Barcelona, what a poor match

It was glorious. Gotta love playoff hockey! Let's go Red Wings

Stardusk78 wrote...

So we agree that Charge and Vanguards are OP...hehe.

Are you serious? You of all people?
Just watch your own videos - some of the older ones (without Mattock, which is actually overpowered - confirmed by BioWare dev - because it has no drawback, and it was meant to be overpowered since the release of the DLC pack) - and honestly tell me if you are godlike/overpowered in those videos. Newsflash: You aren't.


I am sick of all the overpowered BS that gets thrown around here..overpowered this, overpowered that.

Of course that once players masters a certain power, the game will get easier. Do you want Shepard to be a weakling? (S)He is a goddamn cybernetically enhanced supersoldier..(s)he should have a way to frack up all enemies.

Haha, thanks for telling me I suck.
I can Charge just as well with the Claymore as with the Mattock but yeah, in the old days I was pretty bad. I practised and now I am good. Vanguards are like that; in the beginning we all sucked and died a lot. Now we clear rooms at light speed.

The problem is that compared to other classes, including the Vanguard, the Adept doesn't really have an outstanding power. Sure, Singularity is OK but nothing special. Every other classes' power is better and had more uses.

[Stardusk78]

Kronner wrote...

Bozorgmehr wrote...

Internet discussions - who doesn't love em

You tell me.

Bozorgmehr wrote...
First you say Vanguard play is very tactical and now it's hilarious when I argue using multiple powers (instead of one) is more complex? And yes, Charge is not at all a difficult power to use. The first time I played Vanguard, I charged - killed the target - got into cover - charged again. You won't die often playing like this (at least I didn't) and you can find cover everywhere (plus enemies never flank you).

I said Charge was tactical power, and it is. You make it sound like setting up a Warp bomb is complex, while Charge is for retards. I have nothing to add to that.

Well, congratulations to you, then.

Enemies do not flank you. True. It is why Adept is so easy to play, by the way. I almost never died as an Adept or Engineer, unless I played recklessly on purpose (read: I made a stupid mvoe). Enemy AI is idiotic when it comes to flanking, so it is impossible to die while in cover.

I disagree - the Charge-Shoot-Cover playstyle (which basically equals the cautious Adept playstyle) isn't very risky. It will be harder if you try to ignore cover whenever possible; but trying the same thing with an Adept is a lot harder and likely results in more critical mission failures (again, my experience).

Because Adept is NOT built for that. Vanguard will not hold anyone in place with a Singularity, Adept will. So I do not see how this is a surprise to you.

Bozorgmehr wrote...
I explained why I consider Charge an I-WIN button.

No, you have not. You said Charge was equivalent to ME1's immunity + teleport to point blank range. You also said Vanguard couldn't die. This is the biggest bull**** I have read in a long, long time. Seriously. It's number one, and NHL playoffs just began and there has been a lot of BS on HFBoards. But this one takes the cake, despite a fierce competition.

More cohesive enemy squads and less opportuneties to get cover would make life for the Vanguard a lot harder without gimping anything or giving enemies more HP.

Yeah, why not. I do not care about that. The more enemies the better.

I can play an Adept like a Soldier if I want to - will take multiple times longer to complete the game though (tedious & boring). Vanguards can go casting. It's the same thing - you're deliberately gimping yourself. I have never seen a (Insanity) VG vid, in which Pull and Shockwave see regular action, AND fought roughly equally effective compared to a non-stop Charge VG. Shockwave and Pull are like the Soldier's CS - Charge and ARush are (almost) always the best option. I don't think there are many people who like to get behind cover, use the Shuriken to remove shields, Pull enemy and kill him (weapon/shockwave) - when they can also use Charge twice and kill 2-5 enemies in the same time-frame.

Not all powers/playstyles are equally effective/quick. That will NEVER be the case. Never. How you can actually think otherwise is beyond me.




Obviously, I am not gonna agree with you here. I think you are totally off the base on basically all your points/or I totally misunderstood you, but it does not matter. I agree to disagree with you, and I am off to calm waters, with no Sharks(cookie for everyone who gets teh reference).

BTW, you are right about the Mattock, even on non-Soldiers and Vanguards; I am not using it anymore, any of the Firepower pack to be honest.

[Kronner]

Stardusk78 wrote...
haha, thanks for telling me I suck.
I can Charge just as well with the Claymore as with the Mattock but yeah, in the old days I was pretty bad. I practised and now I am good. Vanguards are like that; in the beginning we all sucked and died a lot. Now we clear rooms at light speed.

The problem is that compared to other classes, including the Vanguard, the Adept doesn't really have an outstanding power. Sure, Singularity is OK but nothing special. Every other classes' power is better and had more uses.

I didn't say that.

I just find it ridiculous that you now claim Vanguard is OP, when you have struggled with the class before. The fact that you can now "clear rooms at light speed" means you got good at the game. You are still using the same build and powers, only your skills got better.
If you give the very same build to average (i.e. casual) ME2 player, they will get their asses kicked on Insanity. So, overpowered my ass.

Modifié par Kronner, 17 avril 2011 - 10:28 .

[Stardusk78]

Kronner wrote...

Stardusk78 wrote...
haha, thanks for telling me I suck.
I can Charge just as well with the Claymore as with the Mattock but yeah, in the old days I was pretty bad. I practised and now I am good. Vanguards are like that; in the beginning we all sucked and died a lot. Now we clear rooms at light speed.

The problem is that compared to other classes, including the Vanguard, the Adept doesn't really have an outstanding power. Sure, Singularity is OK but nothing special. Every other classes' power is better and had more uses.

I didn't say that.

I just find it ridiculous that you now claim Vanguard is OP, when you have struggled with the class before. The fact that you can now "clear rooms at light speed" means you got good at the game. You are still using the same build and powers, only your skills got better.
If you give the very same build to average (i.e. casual) ME2 player, they will get their asses kicked on Insanity. So, overpowered my ass.

OK, but here is the problem; Charge is not OP, ok? But Tech Armour is? You can die sometimes with it?  Can't you? and even you have to admit that Adepts, well, need some love, no? You said it yourself; Shepard is a super soldier...

[Kronner]

Stardusk78 wrote...

OK, but here is the problem; Charge is not OP, ok? But Tech Armour is? You can die sometimes with it?  Can't you? and even you have to admit that Adepts, well, need some love, no? You said it yourself; Shepard is a super soldier...

What about Adepts? I have said Singularity is the worst signature power in the game. Other than that Adepts are VERY powerful. If they are easier or harder to play than class X is subjective.

About Tech Armor, it is too powerful, yes. Mainly because the cooldown is shorter than it should be (less than 6 seconds after all upgrades, while it should be exactly 6). But adding separate cooldown to Sentinel is not gonna change Tech Armor.

[Stardusk78]

Kronner wrote...

Stardusk78 wrote...

OK, but here is the problem; Charge is not OP, ok? But Tech Armour is? You can die sometimes with it?  Can't you? and even you have to admit that Adepts, well, need some love, no? You said it yourself; Shepard is a super soldier...

What about Adepts? I have said Singularity is the worst signature power in the game. Other than that Adepts are VERY powerful. If they are easier or harder to play than class X is subjective.

About Tech Armor, it is too powerful, yes. Mainly because the cooldown is shorter than it should be (less than 6 seconds after all upgrades, while it should be exactly 6). But adding separate cooldown to Sentinel is not gonna change Tech Armor.

If you lengthened Tech amour cooldown there would be no more Assault Sentinel...

[Kronner]

Stardusk78 wrote...

If you lengthened Tech amour cooldown there would be no more Assault Sentinel...

Why not? It is quite bad that it has Charge-like cooldown, and it provides much better defense and CC AND restets squad cooldowns. Just make it so that the -20% CD Tech upgrade does not affect TA and that would be enough.

[Stardusk78]

m14567 wrote...

I'm late to the party it seems but saying charge is an 'I-win' button is a stretch. Charge can get you killed if you make a mistake, or even if you get unlucky, I can't see how that is an 'I-win' ability.

I mean, Boz, you basically have a problem with
A) soldiers and adrenaline rush
vanguards and charge
C) sentinels and tech armor

I can pretty much clear levels with a widow infiltrator with hardly any threat of dying, so lets add
D) infiltrators with sniper rifles.

Maybe the better strategy is to make the game harder and buff engineers and adepts?

Yes, this.

[Kronner]

IMHO
Engineers do not need a buff, they are incredibly powerful already. Adept's Singularity should have been a bit better though.

[BAOBAB_AOTEAROA]

 i think this discussion is geared too much towards the insanity mode, then to lower level difficulties.

for istance i had some really ´funny´ build of a vanguard on  my first playthrough.
with funny i intend not so efficient, but for me at that level of ability and at that level of difficulty, it was great.


it could be that insanity mode forces you to be efficient, by mostly spamming class special power, and at the same time does not provide situations (enviroment, type of enemies, combination of enemies) where another power could be more useful.

i personally feel that arrival was a little hint of the future, by presenting the flamethrower enemies more frequently, which at least made mine strategies about charging a little different.

bioware give us a more varied enviroment ,more varied enemies types  ,more varied enemies combinations and ai behaviours , and i am sure the player reactions will be more varied, simply because different powers will be more efficient at a given time.

oh and by the way kudos to all of you in this part of mass effect forum, there are some super nice gameclass interpretations and some super seriuos game ability around here:O

[lazuli]

BAOBAB_AOTEAROA wrote...

 i think this discussion is geared too much towards the insanity mode, then to lower level difficulties.

I think this is key right here.  I'm not sure that most of the posters in the strategy forum (if any) can even discuss lower difficulty levels meaningfully anymore.  We tend to pass those difficulty levels off as not being important, because anything will work no matter how inefficient or bizarre.  In any event, we're not the players that those difficulty levels are geared towards.

[RGFrog]

BAOBAB_AOTEAROA wrote...

 i think this discussion is geared too much towards the insanity mode, then to lower level difficulties.

it could be that insanity mode forces you to be efficient, by mostly spamming class special power, and at the same time does not provide situations (enviroment, type of enemies, combination of enemies) where another power could be more useful.

I can agree with this. Except that Insanity mode has not 'forced' me to spam a power. Even on builds like Vanguard with Charge, or Engineer with Drone, etc., I find myself trying different things. The reason is that the AI is not that efficient at attacking shep.

True, arival was a bit different with the rho section, but it still showed a major flaw with the AI in that there were still locations where the AI simply failed to press sheppard.

Anytime that happens, no matter the class, no matter the build, no matter what weapons, the player has the abillity to recouperate and pretty much undue the results of prior poor decisions.

It's the lack of sustained and increasing danger that makes Insanity easy once experienced a few times. The only thing Insanity really does is add an extra stripping step that is made slightly harder (read tedious) by a slight reduction in the efficacy of weapons/powers.

In this, even simpler powers like pull are effective even OP when given enough time. Against this any change makes absolutely no gameplay difference.

What the changes proposed by the OP do, instead, is affect the gamer's ability to choose HOW he or she plays the game. I have no problem with this as the game is single player and there is absolutely nothing that requires somone to play one way or another.

Challenge right now is largely in the hands of what the player creates. In order for that to happen a player must have more choices in how to create challenge or in how to make existing challenges different or more fun to complete.

Now, if in ME3 the AI's tactics change siginificantly, then none of what has been proposed here will be even remotely OP. If you are, as a player, unable to take cover for a significant ammount of time due to enemy flanking, etc. a single global cooldown will severely hamper a player's ability to survive.

Right now the enemy AI will stay 3 feet away from Shep trying to shoot through a box nearly forever while shep's health and shields regenerate. So, the need for combined cooldowns, or me1 style separae cooldowns are completely unecessary. However, if they simply had the smarts to move around the box players would be clamoring for more of everything. Shorter CD's, more ammo, buffs that worked, etc. The abillity to make multiple casts at once would not be OP but rather the only option in many situations to keep your shep alive.

[lazuli]

RGFrog wrote...
True, arival was a bit different with the rho section, but it still showed a major flaw with the AI in that there were still locations where the AI simply failed to press sheppard.

Anytime that happens, no matter the class, no matter the build, no matter what weapons, the player has the abillity to recouperate and pretty much undue the results of prior poor decisions.

Good point.  I wonder what adding a few FENRIS and LOKI mechs to the Rho section would do to it.  They pressure more reliably than pyros.