146 réponses à ce sujet

[Reptillius]

Considering from everything I've seen ME3 is closest to ME2's way of doing biotics. Just that there are gimmicks like those impenetrable shields that you can remove so you can actually do damage to a target's shields and health is just more you can do with biotics. You can also get around behind them or knock the shields around and shoot past them.

So those that want everything to return to ME1 are probably going to be disappointed.

And this isn't to say I'm not looking forward to a couple of those new uses... 

Modifié par Reptillius, 05 septembre 2011 - 08:26 .

[Mand0l1n]

@adonfraz - using your criteria i.e. Killing speed, durability, learning curve, the adept is only weak in one of those areas - durability. The engineer is equally fragile and doesn't kill anywhere near as fast as an adept. Therefore the engineer is weaker given your own criteria. By the way I love the engineer it's one of my favourite classes.

[Reptillius]

Mand0l1n wrote...

@adonfraz - using your criteria i.e. Killing speed, durability, learning curve, the adept is only weak in one of those areas - durability. The engineer is equally fragile and doesn't kill anywhere near as fast as an adept. Therefore the engineer is weaker given your own criteria. By the way I love the engineer it's one of my favourite classes.

Maybe it's my particular style but the soldier tends to kill slower a lot of time for me than the adept does.  The Vanguard it's hard for me to tell how slow or fast it kills because of it's in your face style that keeps the adrenaline running responding to things in those close quarters where things can go wrong a lot faster.

Modifié par Reptillius, 05 septembre 2011 - 08:28 .

[Someone With Mass]

Given that all classes can use any weapon, getting rid of those protections as an Adept shouldn't be that hard.

[adonfraz]

Mand0l1n wrote...

@adonfraz - using your criteria i.e. Killing speed, durability, learning curve, the adept is only weak in one of those areas - durability. The engineer is equally fragile and doesn't kill anywhere near as fast as an adept. Therefore the engineer is weaker given your own criteria. By the way I love the engineer it's one of my favourite classes.

The Engineer is probably the easiest class to use outside of the Soldier/Sentinel classes, and "my own criteria" were just examples. Drone draws aggro and IMO gives them an edge over the adept in terms of durability.

[Mand0l1n]

Perhaps you can explain why you think adept is the weakest "objectively" cause all I'm hearing is opinion. Personally I think it all comes down individual preference and playstyle.

[adonfraz]

Reptillius wrote...

Mand0l1n wrote...

@adonfraz - using your criteria i.e. Killing speed, durability, learning curve, the adept is only weak in one of those areas - durability. The engineer is equally fragile and doesn't kill anywhere near as fast as an adept. Therefore the engineer is weaker given your own criteria. By the way I love the engineer it's one of my favourite classes.

Maybe it's my particular style but the soldier tends to kill slower a lot of time for me than the adept does.  The Vanguard it's hard for me to tell how slow or fast it kills because of it's in your face style that keeps the adrenaline running responding to things in those close quarters where things can go wrong a lot faster.

Different players excel with different playstyles. I have a hard time seeing an Adept on Insanity kill as fast as a Soldier on Insanity but it's certainly possible for the Adept to kill fast with the right squadmates.

[Bozorgmehr 2.0]

May I ask WTF killing speed, durability, learning curves, weaknesses and whatever, have got to do with playing a game and having fun?

[Mand0l1n]

Absolutely nothing :-)

[Stardusk78]

This **** all over again...

[adonfraz]

Mand0l1n wrote...

Perhaps you can explain why you think adept is the weakest "objectively" cause all I'm hearing is opinion. Personally I think it all comes down individual preference and playstyle.

You're right, it is my opinion. I probably used the word "objective" out of context, but I still think you can be "objective" while giving your opinion. Being objective doesn't mean "Everything I say is a fact."

Well whatever, here's why I think the Adept is the weakest "subjectively" lol

"My problems with the ME2 Adept are as follows.

1) They are the worst class in the game (Hardcore/Insanity)

The three things I look at when ranking a class is killing speed, ease-of-use, and durability. With these factors the Adept is last in durability (Engineer's drone is more reliable than singularity), second the last in ease-of-use (Vanguard is a bit tougher for most), and second to last in killing speed (Engineer is slower).

2) Singularity is the worst class exculsive power.

On lower diffculties, you're better off just using pull field and on higher diffculties it's a worst version of the drone (fewer enemies are immune to the drone then singularity). In a dire situation, the other
five powers are just better.

3) They have to rely not just on squadmates more than other classes, they also rely on enemy positioning
more than any other class.

Adepts are just on par with other classes only under ideal circumstances. Those circumstances being:
multiple enemies grouped together and squadmates with the right powers. Adepts need to know more about the kind of enemy they are facing just to come close to other classes effectiveness.

If I'm using a class that is less durable than other classes and not easy to master, I want to be rewarded with greater killing speed when I play effectively. That's basically it."

Modifié par adonfraz, 05 septembre 2011 - 08:58 .

[adonfraz]

Bozorgmehr 2.0 wrote...

May I ask WTF killing speed, durability, learning curves, weaknesses and whatever, have got to do with playing a game and having fun?

Nothing. Did I say they did?

Sorry, if I implied that.

[Malanek]

Bozorgmehr 2.0 wrote...

May I ask WTF killing speed, durability, learning curves, weaknesses and whatever, have got to do with playing a game and having fun?

Well actually these are all really important!!!

Killing speed - Too slow and the game becomes tedious ie ME1 on insanity, too quick and the diversity of gameplay (different guns, powers) is lost because enemies just die.

Durability - Too durable and the game doesn't have any challenge, too weak and the game gets frustrating when you die with every slight mis-play.

Learning curve - This one is tricky. The game should ideally be easy to get into yet difficult to master. With classes, each class should be different forcing the player to learn new strategies. There is nothing wrong with some classes being more difficult to learn than others, but no class should be impossible for a brand new player.

Weaknesses - If a class has no weaknesses, there is no design space left for the other classes.

[The Spamming Troll]

Rezources wrote...

In a nutshell:

ME2 Adept: Cool, obscure underground band that is objectively not very good but you will look cool if you say you played with them.

ME1 Adept: Singularity.

id say....

ME1 adept: biotic powerhouse(what an adept should be)

ME2 adept: singularity warper(which happens when gameplay designers cant create an appropriate challenge)

Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 05 septembre 2011 - 09:09 .

[Mand0l1n]

@adonfraz - thanks for taking the time to set out your objections. Ultimately though you are basing your arguments on how you have personally experienced the game. From my own perspective i've played all the classes at least twice (on insanity) and I've never found the adept to be one of the "weaker classes" for me. I guess we'll have to amicably disagree.

[Mr.Pink]

Biotics work no matter what. If their is a soldier with shields, hit him with singularity, and it will start to drain his shield about halfway, then hit him with a warp, and a few bullets, shield is gone in a few seconds, but that's just for ME2.

[RPGamer13]

In ME1, when I got to Insanity, I was playing a Vanguard with both Barrier and Immunity with the specialization that increased Barrier's protective abilities. For me, it was awesome, because with my Spectre Shotgun that generated little heat I could just hold down the fire button while walking toward an enemy to kill them. Though the amount of damage they could endure was a killer and slowed progress down a bit.

In ME2, if I had tried Insanity with an Adept instead of Vanguard, I would have had a much harder time because all the biotics would have been next to useless and they had lower health and shields.


For ME3, I didn't think there was any way they could stick with the universal cooldown thing and improve on it, if it was global then only abilities of the same type would be on a timer when you used one instead of every ability going on a timer.

But reading the latest info from twits and whatnot, sounds like they may have exceeded my expectations. Vanguard will be able to charge a lot if properly specialized? Sweet! By the time I kill an enemy, Charge should be finished with the cooldown.

Then there's the fact that there will be abilities to increase melee effectiveness, sounds like it should be a lot more effective than in ME2.

[Xariann]

Mand0l1n wrote...
Personally I think it all comes down individual preference and playstyle.

^ That.

[Bcuz]

Vangaurd.
/walks out of thread.

[adonfraz]

Rezources wrote...

In a nutshell:

ME2 Adept: Cool, obscure underground band that is objectively not very good but you will look cool if you say you played with them.

ME1 Adept: Singularity.

Well ME1 Adept: Singularity and Lift

Vanguard is probably the most popular class, and liking them makes you seem cool.

Evidenced (is that a word?) by the guy who posted "Vanguard" and just left.

Modifié par adonfraz, 05 septembre 2011 - 09:46 .

[Mand0l1n]

@Bcuz - close the door on the way out thanks. :-)

[Malanek]

adonfraz wrote...
The three things I look at when ranking a class is killing speed, ease-of-use, and durability. With these factors the Adept is last in durability (Engineer's drone is more reliable than singularity), second the last in ease-of-use (Vanguard is a bit tougher for most), and second to last in killing speed (Engineer is slower).

Adepts have good killing speed. They are definately a lot faster than the Infiltrator, quite a few of the classes are very close in this regard. I'll have to look at time taken for my playthroughs. They are fairly easy to get into, the fact that the gameplay takes a little longer to master is a good thing. I like Barrier on Adepts as a bonus power, and with that they become one of the more duarble classes. I've played right through with an adept and not died once, (and got close 3 times trying to do it), their durability is fine. I haven't managed that with a Vanguard or Engineer.

adonfraz wrote...
2) Singularity is the worst class exculsive power.

On lower diffculties, you're better off just using pull field and on higher diffculties it's a worst version of the drone (fewer enemies are immune to the drone then singularity). In a dire situation, the other
five powers are just better.

I actually find the drone, charge and cloak unreliable. They have funny glitches. Charge is well documented but the drone and cloak do funny things to enemy spawn points. The behaviour is really quite unreliable. With drone especially, it is responsible for most of my deaths with engineer on insanity.

adonfraz wrote...
3) They have to rely not just on squadmates more than other classes, they also rely on enemy positioning
more than any other class.

Adepts are just on par with other classes only under ideal circumstances. Those circumstances being:
multiple enemies grouped together and squadmates with the right powers. Adepts need to know more about the kind of enemy they are facing just to come close to other classes effectiveness.

If I'm using a class that is less durable than other classes and not easy to master, I want to be rewarded with greater killing speed when I play effectively. That's basically it."

I use squadmates to 100% capability with all classes. They very rarely have a cooldown unused. Adept argueably gets more out of them than any other class with the exception of the Sentinel. Again, this is a good thing not a bad thing IMO. I guess you do tend to get more limited with which squadmates are effective.

[Bozorgmehr 2.0]

Malanek999 wrote...

Bozorgmehr 2.0 wrote...

May I ask WTF killing speed, durability, learning curves, weaknesses and whatever, have got to do with playing a game and having fun?

Well actually these are all really important!!!

Killing speed - Too slow and the game becomes tedious ie ME1 on insanity, too quick and the diversity of gameplay (different guns, powers) is lost because enemies just die.

Durability - Too durable and the game doesn't have any challenge, too weak and the game gets frustrating when you die with every slight mis-play.

Learning curve - This one is tricky. The game should ideally be easy to get into yet difficult to master. With classes, each class should be different forcing the player to learn new strategies. There is nothing wrong with some classes being more difficult to learn than others, but no class should be impossible for a brand new player.

Weaknesses - If a class has no weaknesses, there is no design space left for the other classes.

Those things are subjective, but they are related to the difficulty settings - not classes. I believe anyone can play Adept on the default difficulty.

People also forget about weapons. Try playing a Vanguard without a shotgun; or a sniperless Infiltrator (up to the Collector Ship - Insanity) - then you're really comparing classes (and not weapons). Fortunately, foolish weapon restriction will be a thing of the past

[Malanek]

Well weapon restrictions were part of the classes make up in ME2. I quite liked them, I'm nervous about the game getting a bit unbalanced without them. Comparing classes is fun, but they don't need to be balanced perfectly. The fact that some players like each different class the most proves they did a good job. Whatever works for each player is right.