First of all, I'm not, in any way, arguing for any kind of new-system - I love the global cd system and would never trade it for the crappy ME1 system. Second, I've no problem with some difference between classes - the less alike, the better. I do, however, have issues with the fact that some classes have strengths AND weaknesses whilst others have only strengths.
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.
Being able to struggle through the game using one power is one thing, but being at your best doesn't sit well with me - I agree. Every strategic, tactical or causal game with different abilities/units/pieces has some kind of depth. A RTS game - with super-units that have no weakness and destroy all other units without breaking a sweat - is a very poor game. If you could play chess and beat everything using only one piece - nobody would have ever heard about chess in the first place. This simple principle does not (or hardly) exist is ME2.
The Vanguard class is the ME equivalent of (oldschool) cavalry. Speed and maneuverability are their strengths; they can appear everywhere on the battlefield to use their devastating charge. (Heavy) cavalry ruled the battlefield but, despite all their power, cavalry could never charge a well disciplined enemy (spear/pike) formation head on (that's suicidal). This makes cavalry an extremely useful component in the hands of any commander (including fools) - but not invincible. They can annihilate small groups of skirmishers who got separated from the main army AND they are lethal hitting the enemy in the rear or flanks.
In modern-day warfare speed still is an important factor, but a very fast vehicle cannot be well armored at the same time; speed makes it harder for enemies to catch/hit/destroy the vehicle (protecting the people inside), speed is used to stay clear of trouble. ME2 Vanguards are heavily armored F1 racing cars - a ridiculous concept.
I totally agree every class should be easy to play on Normal (they all are); everything dies quickly and all classes don't have to care about cover much; Vanguards Charge and kill, Soldiers shoot and kill, and Adepts CC the lot and kill. On Insanity, Vanguards still don't need cover and Charge-Kill; Soldier do need cover and Shoot-Kill; and Adepts also need cover and CC-Kill (regardless of skill). This doesn't make sense, the only true combat specialist (Soldier) is a lot more vulnerable than the part-combatant? Why are vanguards still armored F1 racing cars whereas Soldiers (and Adepts) all of a sudden become extremely fragile?
In my book - and if anyone still doesn't understand, why after all this time, I give up <_< - Vanguards are not the class they're supposed to be. Very powerful on Normal is OK, but without any significant weakness on Insanity is not good. Charge should be a tactical power; speed should be key to the Vanguard's success, but it isn't. Charge is used for two things only: to get shields back and to teleport into point blank shotgun range (allowing OSOK) to maximize damage; 'shields lost' > Charge, 'nearest enemy is 15+ feet away' > Charge. This has little to nothing to do with tactics, and there are no targets that cannot be charged which, again, should be (easily) possible on Normal, but not on Insanity. Just like anyone who wants to play a biotic god can be one on Normal; so should anyone who wants to play a non-cover, non-tactical Vanguard.
There is no problem with Vanguards being harder to kill than Adepts (Soldiers are a different matter though). I, however, do believe the game would have been better balanced if Bioware had added Reave to the Adept and Energy Drain to the Engineer - for example. Those powers would give them the option to keep shooting / using powers without having to get back into cover to wait for shield regen all the time - Adepts and Engineers would still be a lot more vulnerable out in the open compared to Vanguards, but it would have given them some breathing room (it'd also fit their profile; Adepts are strong against organics - Engineers against synthetics).
If you develop a 3rd person, cover-based shooter with tactical rpg elements - the game ME wants to be - you don't come up with near invincible classes (who need cover nor tactics) and (squisy) classes who do rely on cover and (basic) tactics. "Wait, wait, but Boz it's so much fun to play Vanguard / Sentinel like this" - Yes, so is an Adept who can go berserk with biotics > turn down the difficulty if you want to play in (near) godmode please.
Seriously, I really hope this changes in ME3. Vanguards should be about speed, not armor (on Insanity), Charge should be a tactical power - not something that allows players to head-butt their way through.
Heavy cavalry was best when they charged, retreated, regrouped and charged again and they (only) charged where the enemy was most vulnerable. Vanguards should charge, kill, pull back (charge back to somewhere safe maybe? - i.e. speed is used for protection, not armor), recover/regen, charge again. Other skills should play a more important role to complement charge - ME2's powers are useless (Charge = kill, Pull/Shockwave = a dizzy enemy), only a couple bonus powers have their uses (Slam-bombs, Reave, ED and Stasis (damage bug) but that's nothing special coz they are equally useful on all the other classes - hell, even the Adept cannot insta-warp-bomb without bonus power).
End of rant
P.S. I do want to break a lance for Charge. Because it is a truly awesome power - more than enough to play ME2. There are, however, a couple things worth mentioning. Charge is the total opposite of '3rd person, cover-based shooter with tactical rpg elements'-gameplay. It's a completely illogical power - instead of the usual 'get cover when you're taking heavy fire' you Charge! Which is great fun btw. The 'hardest' part is to reorganize your mind and get familiar with the new rules of engagement, 'skills' (the ability to use controls) play a less important role.
Charge needed the shield buff to allow players to get going - it would've been a fiasco without. Once adepted to this new playstyle the shield regen isn't needed anymore. Those who know how to use Charge can easily charge in (with shields up), kill 1-3 mooks and get somewhere safe without high risk (Insanity) > a more tactical version of Charge, not a quasi defensive buff.
Everything stated above is NOT directly related to ME2, it's about MY hopes for ME3. At this point we know nothing about the ME3 Vanguard except that they will have Charge (though we do not know if it will be exactly like ME2's version), that Vanguards can carry 3 weapons and (like all classes) will get a CQC melee skill. I hope Bioware treats the the ME2 Vanguard the way they did the Adept (ME1 > ME2). The Adepts' powers were 'gimped' but in a good way (still 'gamebreakingly' powerful on Normal yet less useful on Insanity). Instead of CC ing all enemies, the ME2 (Insanity) Adept can only CC a select few enemies, biotics remain useful but do not trivializing fights like in ME1. We all are familiar with ME2's Charge by now - let's turn up the difficulty and make it a true "High Risk, High Reward" power and while BW is at it - add a bunch of cool combat and biotic powers and you'll end up with combat-biotic-CQC class who needs tactics, uses more than one power/weapon and requires cover sometimes.
This Vanguard can still kill a lot faster than an Adept but not in the over-the-top ME2 way. If that's your thing play Duke Nukem Forever to kick some aliens between the legs and say something badass (if it will be released of course) or turn down the difficulty.
Yes, I will shut up now - don't worry - it's time for diner.
Retour en haut
