65 réponses à ce sujet

[KarmaTheAlligator]

Before asking for a nerf to anything, we'll need to see how the different weapons deal with different enemy types. So far we've only seen the Cerberus enemies, and a limited amount of weapons. Wait and see.

[Cloaking_Thane]

Kronner wrote...

Cloaking_Thane wrote...

The reverse is also true.

If you're not going to do any damage at all, there is very little benefit of .3 second cooldown

What do you mean? Carnifex + headshot = gold enemy dead
You have 6 shots in a clip.

Claymore? One shot. 10 times as heavy, so your cooldowns are significantly longer.

I mean exactly what I said. Maybe it's easier on PC, but on 360 I don't see with any regularity anyone with a Carifex getting more than 10 headshots a game....or at least less than 20 and most people average 50+ (less than 75) kills a game between 4 players.

So Claymore and Carnifex have a 1 instant death per clip rate in my experience unless youre super leet or use powers before hand.

What damage do you propose a "Hand Cannon" have?

[incinerator950]

Don't know about you, but you practically need unbalanced to even win Gold rounds.

[Cloaking_Thane]

[quote]Cloaking_Thane wrote...


The reverse is also true.

If you're not going to do any damage at all, there is very little benefit of .3 second cooldown
[/quote]

Here is a little scenario. Say you fire off the Claymore and it manages to kill two enemies; lucky shot. In the amount of time it takes you to accomplish this and reload, my Engineer will have activated his drone to stun three enemies, killed them, used Overload to stun three more and again killed them.

You have two and will take damage as enemies rush you. Whereas, I have locked down six enemies and killed them all. The latter is far more beneficial to the team, especially on Gold. The exact same scenario can be applied to a Vanguard using Charge+Nova+Avenger.

This is why the system is flawed. [/quote]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First of all what's my class?

Maybe thats the engineer's role on gold and the X is specced and designed for "one on one" damage. The are several variable you leave out in your scenario that its hard to say anything, let alone an engineer killing six enemies that quickly on gold as you propose.

Again it's a team effort with 6 different classes an hundreds of choices/playstyles.

Modifié par Cloaking_Thane, 24 février 2012 - 08:00 .

[Jenetic]

Kronner wrote...

Cloaking_Thane wrote...

The reverse is also true.

If you're not going to do any damage at all, there is very little benefit of .3 second cooldown

What do you mean? Carnifex + headshot = gold enemy dead
You have 6 shots in a clip.

Claymore? One shot. 10 times as heavy, so your cooldowns are significantly longer.

Again, I would go back to my argument that the pistols are way too accurate.  If they want to balance the pistols, make the accuracy realistic.  The accuracy for all the other weapons is pretty much dead on, but no one should be able to headshot an enemy from accross the battlefield with any pistol, I don't care what kind of scope you have on it. Pistols (in general) will never be more accurate than a rifle. It's simple physics.

[Cloaking_Thane]

Dagasi wrote...

Kronner wrote...

Cloaking_Thane wrote...

The reverse is also true.

If you're not going to do any damage at all, there is very little benefit of .3 second cooldown

What do you mean? Carnifex + headshot = gold enemy dead
You have 6 shots in a clip.

Claymore? One shot. 10 times as heavy, so your cooldowns are significantly longer.

Again, I would go back to my argument that the pistols are way too accurate.  If they want to balance the pistols, make the accuracy realistic.  The accuracy for all the other weapons is pretty much dead on, but no one should be able to headshot an enemy from accross the battlefield with any pistol, I don't care what kind of scope you have on it. Pistols (in general) will never be more accurate than a rifle. It's simple physics.

Fair balance mechanic and I would agree with it. The only problem I have with it is that the maps are very small

[themaxzero]

Cloaking_Thane wrote...

Kronner wrote...

Cloaking_Thane wrote...

The reverse is also true.

If you're not going to do any damage at all, there is very little benefit of .3 second cooldown

What do you mean? Carnifex + headshot = gold enemy dead
You have 6 shots in a clip.

Claymore? One shot. 10 times as heavy, so your cooldowns are significantly longer.

I mean exactly what I said. Maybe it's easier on PC, but on 360 I don't see with any regularity anyone with a Carifex getting more than 10 headshots a game....or at least less than 20 and most people average 50+ (less than 75) kills a game between 4 players.

So Claymore and Carnifex have a 1 instant death per clip rate in my experience unless youre super leet or use powers before hand.

What damage do you propose a "Hand Cannon" have?

Must be easier on PC. If I am rocking the Carnifex I have 20 headshots by the end of Round 3.

[themaxzero]

incinerator950 wrote...

Don't know about you, but you practically need unbalanced to even win Gold rounds.

To be honest Gold does not really feel all the different then Silver for me.

Bronze->Silver was a far bigger jump then Silver->Gold.

[UK Wildcat]

20 shots in first few waves with Carnifex is cake, maybe its the ability for PC players to more tightly control bullet placement. I'll show you on PC if you have the client in addition to your xbox or ps3.

[Cloaking_Thane]

I imagine it is easier on PC due to pinpoint placement, that's why all this context matters. 

Modifié par Cloaking_Thane, 24 février 2012 - 08:19 .

[Jenetic]

Cloaking_Thane wrote...

Dagasi wrote...

Kronner wrote...

Cloaking_Thane wrote...

The reverse is also true.

If you're not going to do any damage at all, there is very little benefit of .3 second cooldown

What do you mean? Carnifex + headshot = gold enemy dead
You have 6 shots in a clip.

Claymore? One shot. 10 times as heavy, so your cooldowns are significantly longer.

Again, I would go back to my argument that the pistols are way too accurate.  If they want to balance the pistols, make the accuracy realistic.  The accuracy for all the other weapons is pretty much dead on, but no one should be able to headshot an enemy from accross the battlefield with any pistol, I don't care what kind of scope you have on it. Pistols (in general) will never be more accurate than a rifle. It's simple physics.

Fair balance mechanic and I would agree with it. The only problem I have with it is that the maps are very small

Even within handgun ranges, the solid hold and stability of a rifle along with the longer sight radius allows you to get a more accurate shot.  Since this is a video game, they would have to compensate for this by simply decreasing the accuracy.  Forget about the accuracy stat bar.  Once you put a scope on a pistol in this game, it's as accurate as any other weapon.....at least the ones I've unlocked.

Even if I'm within 15 to 25 yards of a target and I need to hit an area the size of a baloon, I'm going to choose a rifle because I'm going to hit that target statistically more often than if I choose a pistol.  That is assuming you are just as proficient with either weapon, which the game obviously assumes. I heard a guy say one time that if you are going in to an unknown combat situation and you have the choice between your rifle (meaning an M4 or similar rifle specifically) or your sidearm, you'll grab your rifle every time.  The stability, accuracy, projectile velocity (damage), etc. are the reasons why.

In other words, within short to medium range, the ARs should always be more accurate than the pistols and within long range, the sniper rifles should always be more accurate than either.  Handguns, in general, are sidearms; backup weapons; more for last resort defense than first resort offense.  That's all I'm saying.  So I don't think the map size is much of an excuse for a wildly accurate pistol.

Of course, it's not a big deal though and I'm not complaining.  We are working together as a team so if we're all beasts with pistols, then I'm fine with that.  I just don't think damage is as much the issue as I think accuracy is the issue. But, of course, I think, compared to the Mattock for example, the pistols are pretty darn powerful for what they are.

[Kronner]

Cloaking_Thane wrote...

I mean exactly what I said. Maybe it's easier on PC, but on 360 I don't see with any regularity anyone with a Carifex getting more than 10 headshots a game....or at least less than 20 and most people average 50+ (less than 75) kills a game between 4 players.

So Claymore and Carnifex have a 1 instant death per clip rate in my experience unless youre super leet or use powers before hand.

What damage do you propose a "Hand Cannon" have?

PC obviously has better aiming. When I play the damager role with Carnifex (scoped), I do get 20 headshots in round 2 or 3.
They can keep the damage unchanged, but weight needs to go up. Why have a weight system if it is not used for balancing the weapons?

There is no logical reason for the difference in weight between Carnifex and Claymore (just an example) given their stats.

The demo clearly indicates that lightweight weapons + power spam is the way to go. And it is not even close. Partly because the lightweight weapons are often actually superior to their heavyweight counterparts. Widow Infiltrator may be the lone exception.

Modifié par Kronner, 24 février 2012 - 09:16 .

[Gregums]

i concur with KarmatheAlligator.. pistol can handle most Cerberus without much difficulty, but i get the feeling that they struggle against barriers and make dealing at least with phantoms tricky. i've been testing a light shotgun infiltrator specifically because scoring a pistol headshot on a phantom on xbox is a lesson in frustration..

re: SMGs - i haven't crunched the numbers but i get the feeling that they're stronger against shields/barriers than the assault rifle, i rolled one out with a sniper to help take down atlas shields.. still don't seem to be that effective except in coordinated fire since they don't provide the knockback effect that you get from a shotgun or sniper rifle - they just leave you vulnerable for longer.

[Gregums]

oh, and i think the benefit of the claymore over carnifex is that it tears shields to shreds; it's also possible to hit multiple targets with the claymore if you get the angle right

[Bourne Endeavor]

Cloaking_Thane wrote...

First of all what's my class?

Maybe thats the engineer's role on gold and the X is specced and designed for "one on one" damage. The are several variable you leave out in your scenario that its hard to say anything, let alone an engineer killing six enemies that quickly on gold as you propose.

Again it's a team effort with 6 different classes an hundreds of choices/playstyles.

Pick any class, the stipulation was you were using the Claymore while I was using the Phalanx or Avenger. Regardless, of the circumstances, I will kill more enemies than you through the usage of a lightweight weapon and spamming powers. For argument's sake, say we both have the Vanguard with identical point spreads. My using even a Katana will to score far more kills purely because I can also spam powers, whereas you cannot.

This makes the Katana, what is thought the weakest shotgun, better than the supposed king. Even one a Krogan Soldier, where the Claymore has some use, an Avenger is more efficient.

Except there really isn't hundreds of styles when the fact remains a lightweight weapon along with power spamming will produce the best results. As previously mentioned, the Widow Infiltrator may be the lone exception.

[Cloaking_Thane]

Cool, I'm done discussing it with you.