Liana Nighthawk wrote...
Atlas are only dangerous in multiples, and even then only if people have wasted missiles on a lone atlas half a map away. I can't imagine why people would want them nerfed.
flamingCanine wrote...
I agree that the atlas is well-balanced, as is most of Cerebus's forces. However, the phantom seems more a direct implementation of fake difficulty. I would guess that you only play as a Asari adept.
The only way to reliably kill one is to have an asari spam stasis on it because it has the magic ability to jump out of the way of powers and bullets, or just raise it's hand and become invulnerable to damage for a few seconds. It also has a sword which will kill you in two hits on any difficulty, or a chance based on difficulty that it will just randomly instant kill you instead, even during invincibility frames while your getting up. If you manage to get one at range, not only will you be lucky to actually hit it while it schizophrenicly dances towards you, it will shoot it's pistol at you, which appears to deal as much damage as the following weapons: rocket from an Atlas, main gun of an Atlas, the Nemesis's sniper rifle, and it's sword. It is also incredibly accurate with said pistol considering that it is usually firing one handed, while jumping around and running towards a target who is in cover.
A tough enemy is one thing. a unbalanced super-enemy is another. The difference between the Atlas's instant-death melee and the Phantom's is that the atlas doesn't close distance by running at you. The Phantom does. So yes, phantoms are ridiculously unbalanced.
don't have a class with overload or warp, and c) don't have any vangaurds on your team. If all of those are true then yes phantoms are unstopable, but all that should never be the case. I love the bowel clenching feeling I get when I hear a team mate yell out "phantom!". If anything the ease with which stasis and vanguards own them makes me a little sad.
bleetman wrote...
I'm thinking standard silver level difficulty (or gold, if people prefer) with the same number of enemies per wave, but everything is replaced by phantoms. Phantoms that, upon defeat, split into two other, smaller phantoms.marshalleck wrote...
For a second I thought "Platinum" said "Phantom" and the thought of "Phantom difficulty" setting almost made me break out in a cold sweat.
Oh, and make 'em immune to stasis too.
Modifié par TexasToast712, 27 février 2012 - 04:06 .
TexasToast712 wrote...
I'm more worried about the idiots on here screaming for weapon nerfs. Mainly pistols. It isn't PvP. Weapon balance isn't something to worry about unless you have like some uber gun that gibs people in one shot every time.
Carnifex is good for Infiltrators who want down range power minus a sniper rifle.spiros9110 wrote...
TexasToast712 wrote...
I'm more worried about the idiots on here screaming for weapon nerfs. Mainly pistols. It isn't PvP. Weapon balance isn't something to worry about unless you have like some uber gun that gibs people in one shot every time.
Some people don't like being carried by a player. but I agree. Canifax(sp?) with that scope is nasty.
Modifié par TexasToast712, 27 février 2012 - 04:18 .
GHOST OF FRUITY wrote...
I fully agree. The multiplayer is balanced just right (in the demo at least) - I like that even standard Cerberus troopers can take you down if you don't play smart. Turrets, Phantoms and Atlas mechs are fine as they are.
DisagreeTexasToast712 wrote...
I'm more worried about the idiots on here screaming for weapon nerfs. Mainly pistols. It isn't PvP. Weapon balance isn't something to worry about unless you have like some uber gun that gibs people in one shot every time.
The above post is exactly what I'm talking about. If you people think the current pistols are overpowered you are in for a rude awakening in the full game. The Paladin is a Carnifex on steroids and the Scorpion pistol is a miniature heavy weapon.
Shotguns are better than ever and even though the Claymore is heavy as ****, you can snipe with the damn thing with the choke on it.Butthead11 wrote...
DisagreeTexasToast712 wrote...
I'm more worried about the idiots on here screaming for weapon nerfs. Mainly pistols. It isn't PvP. Weapon balance isn't something to worry about unless you have like some uber gun that gibs people in one shot every time.
The above post is exactly what I'm talking about. If you people think the current pistols are overpowered you are in for a rude awakening in the full game. The Paladin is a Carnifex on steroids and the Scorpion pistol is a miniature heavy weapon.
As it is most people aren't using shotguns because frankly they suck, except in very rare situations. Same goes for SMGS
Some weapon balance changes could imrpove balance, they also need to change weight values on almost everything, most weapons need lower weights in order to make carrying 2 weapons more competitive for more classes.
Modifié par TexasToast712, 27 février 2012 - 04:32 .
Guest_Aotearas_*
TexasToast712 wrote...
I'm more worried about the idiots on here screaming for weapon nerfs. Mainly pistols. It isn't PvP. Weapon balance isn't something to worry about unless you have like some uber gun that gibs people in one shot every time.
The above post is exactly what I'm talking about. If you people think the current pistols are overpowered you are in for a rude awakening in the full game. The Paladin is a Carnifex on steroids and the Scorpion pistol is a miniature heavy weapon.
Modifié par Neofelis Nebulosa, 27 février 2012 - 04:42 .
TexasToast712 wrote...
Shotguns are better than ever and even though the Claymore is heavy as ****, you can snipe with the damn thing with the choke on it.Butthead11 wrote...
DisagreeTexasToast712 wrote...
I'm more worried about the idiots on here screaming for weapon nerfs. Mainly pistols. It isn't PvP. Weapon balance isn't something to worry about unless you have like some uber gun that gibs people in one shot every time.
The above post is exactly what I'm talking about. If you people think the current pistols are overpowered you are in for a rude awakening in the full game. The Paladin is a Carnifex on steroids and the Scorpion pistol is a miniature heavy weapon.
As it is most people aren't using shotguns because frankly they suck, except in very rare situations. Same goes for SMGS
Some weapon balance changes could imrpove balance, they also need to change weight values on almost everything, most weapons need lower weights in order to make carrying 2 weapons more competitive for more classes.
SMG's are meant to suck. The only thing they should do well against is shields and they do just that.
Weight value changes I don't mind. Phalanx should weigh more than the Predator at level 10.
Also, competition is not needed as this is a Coop only game.
Every gun in the game should perform exactly the same as it does in Singleplayer. Otherwise Bioware's goal of multiplayer making sense will have failed.
Competition has no place in this game. This game encourages you to use what you want rather than what others say is the most effective. Everything is balanced. I personally don't give a damn about SMG's because I see their inclusion into the series as pointless so your arguing isn't doing anything.Butthead11 wrote...
TexasToast712 wrote...
Shotguns are better than ever and even though the Claymore is heavy as ****, you can snipe with the damn thing with the choke on it.Butthead11 wrote...
DisagreeTexasToast712 wrote...
I'm more worried about the idiots on here screaming for weapon nerfs. Mainly pistols. It isn't PvP. Weapon balance isn't something to worry about unless you have like some uber gun that gibs people in one shot every time.
The above post is exactly what I'm talking about. If you people think the current pistols are overpowered you are in for a rude awakening in the full game. The Paladin is a Carnifex on steroids and the Scorpion pistol is a miniature heavy weapon.
As it is most people aren't using shotguns because frankly they suck, except in very rare situations. Same goes for SMGS
Some weapon balance changes could imrpove balance, they also need to change weight values on almost everything, most weapons need lower weights in order to make carrying 2 weapons more competitive for more classes.
SMG's are meant to suck. The only thing they should do well against is shields and they do just that.
Weight value changes I don't mind. Phalanx should weigh more than the Predator at level 10.
Also, competition is not needed as this is a Coop only game.
Every gun in the game should perform exactly the same as it does in Singleplayer. Otherwise Bioware's goal of multiplayer making sense will have failed.
Co-op is still competitive, just PVE rather than PVP. Balance is still very important.
The Claymore is decent. But still not competitive with the carnifex or Avenger atleast at the early levels.
And SMGS do decent against shields, but heavy pistols, and ARS can do a better job if you aim properly. and since they weigh about the same, it makes SMGS ****.
And why should every gun preform the same if every power dosen't? THe singleplayer gameplay is mechanically different from the MP gameplay and balance should reflect that.
You can do just as good on gold as a Asari adept with a Engineer or Soldier provided you have the skills. People will use what they want regardless if something is stronger that the other. Why change something when it won't make a difference? Balance is not critical in a Coop only game. This game is balanced anyway.Hyunsai wrote...
We need to stop the "This is not PVP" argument. Balance is required in coop games to assure some diversity in the higher difficulty levels.
Modifié par TexasToast712, 27 février 2012 - 04:51 .
TexasToast712 wrote...
Competition has no place in this game. This game encourages you to use what you want rather than what others say is the most effective. Everything is balanced. I personally don't give a damn about SMG's because I see their inclusion into the series as pointless so your arguing isn't doing anything.Butthead11 wrote...
TexasToast712 wrote...
Shotguns are better than ever and even though the Claymore is heavy as ****, you can snipe with the damn thing with the choke on it.Butthead11 wrote...
DisagreeTexasToast712 wrote...
I'm more worried about the idiots on here screaming for weapon nerfs. Mainly pistols. It isn't PvP. Weapon balance isn't something to worry about unless you have like some uber gun that gibs people in one shot every time.
The above post is exactly what I'm talking about. If you people think the current pistols are overpowered you are in for a rude awakening in the full game. The Paladin is a Carnifex on steroids and the Scorpion pistol is a miniature heavy weapon.
As it is most people aren't using shotguns because frankly they suck, except in very rare situations. Same goes for SMGS
Some weapon balance changes could imrpove balance, they also need to change weight values on almost everything, most weapons need lower weights in order to make carrying 2 weapons more competitive for more classes.
SMG's are meant to suck. The only thing they should do well against is shields and they do just that.
Weight value changes I don't mind. Phalanx should weigh more than the Predator at level 10.
Also, competition is not needed as this is a Coop only game.
Every gun in the game should perform exactly the same as it does in Singleplayer. Otherwise Bioware's goal of multiplayer making sense will have failed.
Co-op is still competitive, just PVE rather than PVP. Balance is still very important.
The Claymore is decent. But still not competitive with the carnifex or Avenger atleast at the early levels.
And SMGS do decent against shields, but heavy pistols, and ARS can do a better job if you aim properly. and since they weigh about the same, it makes SMGS ****.
And why should every gun preform the same if every power dosen't? THe singleplayer gameplay is mechanically different from the MP gameplay and balance should reflect that.
The Claymore is totally on par with other weapons. How many other weapons can consistently get one shot kills on shielded targets and through the mail slot on Guardians. Also, again, you are in for a rude awakening when the full game releases. The weapons only get stronger and stronger.
And kill in one shot consistenly? No? I thought so.Butthead11 wrote...
TexasToast712 wrote...
Competition has no place in this game. This game encourages you to use what you want rather than what others say is the most effective. Everything is balanced. I personally don't give a damn about SMG's because I see their inclusion into the series as pointless so your arguing isn't doing anything.Butthead11 wrote...
TexasToast712 wrote...
Shotguns are better than ever and even though the Claymore is heavy as ****, you can snipe with the damn thing with the choke on it.Butthead11 wrote...
DisagreeTexasToast712 wrote...
I'm more worried about the idiots on here screaming for weapon nerfs. Mainly pistols. It isn't PvP. Weapon balance isn't something to worry about unless you have like some uber gun that gibs people in one shot every time.
The above post is exactly what I'm talking about. If you people think the current pistols are overpowered you are in for a rude awakening in the full game. The Paladin is a Carnifex on steroids and the Scorpion pistol is a miniature heavy weapon.
As it is most people aren't using shotguns because frankly they suck, except in very rare situations. Same goes for SMGS
Some weapon balance changes could imrpove balance, they also need to change weight values on almost everything, most weapons need lower weights in order to make carrying 2 weapons more competitive for more classes.
SMG's are meant to suck. The only thing they should do well against is shields and they do just that.
Weight value changes I don't mind. Phalanx should weigh more than the Predator at level 10.
Also, competition is not needed as this is a Coop only game.
Every gun in the game should perform exactly the same as it does in Singleplayer. Otherwise Bioware's goal of multiplayer making sense will have failed.
Co-op is still competitive, just PVE rather than PVP. Balance is still very important.
The Claymore is decent. But still not competitive with the carnifex or Avenger atleast at the early levels.
And SMGS do decent against shields, but heavy pistols, and ARS can do a better job if you aim properly. and since they weigh about the same, it makes SMGS ****.
And why should every gun preform the same if every power dosen't? THe singleplayer gameplay is mechanically different from the MP gameplay and balance should reflect that.
The Claymore is totally on par with other weapons. How many other weapons can consistently get one shot kills on shielded targets and through the mail slot on Guardians. Also, again, you are in for a rude awakening when the full game releases. The weapons only get stronger and stronger.
Am i being trolled?
Because you don't give a **** about SMGS they should stay **** and no one should use them?
The Claymore does not get one shot kills on shielded enemies on gold, and any weapon can shoot through the mail slot on guardians, i use the avenger.
TexasToast712 wrote...
You can do just as good on gold as a Asari adept with a Engineer or Soldier provided you have the skills. People will use what they want regardless if something is stronger that the other. Why change something when it won't make a difference? Balance is not critical in a Coop only game. This game is balanced anyway.Hyunsai wrote...
We need to stop the "This is not PVP" argument. Balance is required in coop games to assure some diversity in the higher difficulty levels.
Widow and most snipers can.TexasToast712 wrote...
And kill in one shot consistenly? No? I thought so.Butthead11 wrote...
TexasToast712 wrote...
Competition has no place in this game. This game encourages you to use what you want rather than what others say is the most effective. Everything is balanced. I personally don't give a damn about SMG's because I see their inclusion into the series as pointless so your arguing isn't doing anything.Butthead11 wrote...
TexasToast712 wrote...
Shotguns are better than ever and even though the Claymore is heavy as ****, you can snipe with the damn thing with the choke on it.Butthead11 wrote...
DisagreeTexasToast712 wrote...
I'm more worried about the idiots on here screaming for weapon nerfs. Mainly pistols. It isn't PvP. Weapon balance isn't something to worry about unless you have like some uber gun that gibs people in one shot every time.
The above post is exactly what I'm talking about. If you people think the current pistols are overpowered you are in for a rude awakening in the full game. The Paladin is a Carnifex on steroids and the Scorpion pistol is a miniature heavy weapon.
As it is most people aren't using shotguns because frankly they suck, except in very rare situations. Same goes for SMGS
Some weapon balance changes could imrpove balance, they also need to change weight values on almost everything, most weapons need lower weights in order to make carrying 2 weapons more competitive for more classes.
SMG's are meant to suck. The only thing they should do well against is shields and they do just that.
Weight value changes I don't mind. Phalanx should weigh more than the Predator at level 10.
Also, competition is not needed as this is a Coop only game.
Every gun in the game should perform exactly the same as it does in Singleplayer. Otherwise Bioware's goal of multiplayer making sense will have failed.
Co-op is still competitive, just PVE rather than PVP. Balance is still very important.
The Claymore is decent. But still not competitive with the carnifex or Avenger atleast at the early levels.
And SMGS do decent against shields, but heavy pistols, and ARS can do a better job if you aim properly. and since they weigh about the same, it makes SMGS ****.
And why should every gun preform the same if every power dosen't? THe singleplayer gameplay is mechanically different from the MP gameplay and balance should reflect that.
The Claymore is totally on par with other weapons. How many other weapons can consistently get one shot kills on shielded targets and through the mail slot on Guardians. Also, again, you are in for a rude awakening when the full game releases. The weapons only get stronger and stronger.
Am i being trolled?
Because you don't give a **** about SMGS they should stay **** and no one should use them?
The Claymore does not get one shot kills on shielded enemies on gold, and any weapon can shoot through the mail slot on guardians, i use the avenger.
When I speak balance I'm talking about classes and weapons. Not obvious glitches like Nova cancelling. As it stands everything (minus the obvious glitches) is balanced. I also like the fact that you keep ignoring the my post about how the full game will have even stronger weapons. Get over it. The game isn't going to be nerfed just because you can't handle someone else and their class being on top of the scoreboard.Butthead11 wrote...
TexasToast712 wrote...
You can do just as good on gold as a Asari adept with a Engineer or Soldier provided you have the skills. People will use what they want regardless if something is stronger that the other. Why change something when it won't make a difference? Balance is not critical in a Coop only game. This game is balanced anyway.Hyunsai wrote...
We need to stop the "This is not PVP" argument. Balance is required in coop games to assure some diversity in the higher difficulty levels.
*Facepalm*
Balance is extremley critical in co-op multiplayer. You would know this if you had ever played any PVE focused MMO group content ever in your life.
People will not stay with what they think is fun if it sucks beyond all belief. Some will but most won't.
and the game is not balanced...
SEE NOVA CANCELLING. See the 100 threads about asari adepts talking about how they roflpwn everything with stasis, See human sentinels cry about how they are inferior in every way to Turians. See how soldiers have declared their bread and butter ability useless, and think their only worthwhile power is CS which is still underwhelming on gold.
Modifié par TexasToast712, 27 février 2012 - 05:03 .
Guest_Aotearas_*
gtx3 wrote...
Ive seen threads saying that turrets, phantoms, and atluss are all overpowerd. I would just like to say that I don't think they are and that their difficulty is part of the challenge. The game balance in ME3 is actually really good as is, so please don't change anything.
Nyadnar17 wrote...
flamingCanine wrote...
I agree that the atlas is well-balanced, as is most of Cerebus's forces. However, the phantom seems more a direct implementation of fake difficulty. I would guess that you only play as a Asari adept.
The only way to reliably kill one is to have an asari spam stasis on it because it has the magic ability to jump out of the way of powers and bullets, or just raise it's hand and become invulnerable to damage for a few seconds. It also has a sword which will kill you in two hits on any difficulty, or a chance based on difficulty that it will just randomly instant kill you instead, even during invincibility frames while your getting up. If you manage to get one at range, not only will you be lucky to actually hit it while it schizophrenicly dances towards you, it will shoot it's pistol at you, which appears to deal as much damage as the following weapons: rocket from an Atlas, main gun of an Atlas, the Nemesis's sniper rifle, and it's sword. It is also incredibly accurate with said pistol considering that it is usually firing one handed, while jumping around and running towards a target who is in cover.
A tough enemy is one thing. a unbalanced super-enemy is another. The difference between the Atlas's instant-death melee and the Phantom's is that the atlas doesn't close distance by running at you. The Phantom does. So yes, phantoms are ridiculously unbalanced.
Phantom's are only unbalanced if you a) don't have stasis
Retour en haut