50 réponses à ce sujet

[Berkilak]

 It is the intent of this thread to collect a myriad of suggestions from the community that may help BioWare negotiate the delicate act of class balance. In the current state of the game, some classes are simply non-competitive, particularly relative to others. As such, I ask the community how they would elevate their chosen classes to be on par with the top tier choices. As the thread progresses, I will continually update this post.

Guidelines

1. When submitting your feedback, please submit it in the following format:

class:
Species:
Issue:
Suggestion:

Example:

class: Vanguard
Species: Drell
Issue: Crowd Control
Suggestion: Allow Pull to affect enemies with shields/barriers still active.

2. Keep it sweet and concise. A thesis on your reasoning behind the suggestion would be much too cumbersome for a compilation of suggestions. If you do wish to provide reasoning, by all means, do so - just use the above format beforehand, and I will link your suggestion to your full post if someone desires to read further.

3. Try to keep discussion to a minimum. You're probably going to see some outlandish ideas thrown out there. Don't fly off the handle. If you would like to add to someone's idea, but all means do so. But this is not the place to berate others for trying to help.

4. Braggarts need not apply. Yes, I'm sure that you soloed Gold on your volus accountant using only Glitter Grenades. That doesn't matter here, at all. We are fully aware that every class can be successful on Gold, and you need not regale us with your tales of heroism. No one will be impressed, and it doesn't help the issue at hand - some classes are simply mechanically and numerically subverted by others.

5. Let's talk buffs, not nerfs. There are a few classes out there that I'm sure people consider overpowered. But that should never be an issue - this is a cooperative game. There is no need to drag down those around you who are having fun when you could be brought up to their level.






Suggestions


Soldier

Human

Issue: Power Synergy

1. Adreneline Rush renders Concussive Shot-based builds moot; allow Power Use to enable multiple abilitiy uses instead of just one during Rush. [Hoki]

Krogan

Issue:



Adept

Human

Issue:

Asari

Issue:



Engineer

Human

Issue:

Quarian

Issue:


Vanguard

Human

Issue:

Drell

Issue: Survivability

1. When an enemy is in a Pulled state, have their health drained into the drellguard's barrier. [Berkilak]
2. Give drellguards more barriers in exchange for health (or a flat increase) - a deeper regenerative pool is needed. [Kakaw]

Issue: Crowd Control

1. Allow Pull to affect enemies with shields/barriers still active. [Berkilak]


Infiltrator

Human

Issue:

Salarian

Issue:



Sentinel

Human

Issue: Damage Output

1. Increase the radius and damage of the Tech Armour explosions. [elferin91]
2. Increase melee damage buff from Tech Armour. [elferin91] 

Issue: Survivability

1. Allow the Sentinel to heal a portion of their shields and/or health upon re-activating Tech Armour. [elferin91] 

Turian

Issue:

Modifié par Berkilak, 26 février 2012 - 07:18 .

[Berkilak]

Saved.

[UK Wildcat]

I have an idea, because I support what you are doing. Save this until release and test each class/gun extensively. This may be a moot point at release with new guns / tweaks to classes.

[Berkilak]

UK Wildcat wrote...

I have an idea, because I support what you are doing. Save this until release and test each class/gun extensively. This may be a moot point at release with new guns / tweaks to classes.

Guns are ultimately preference. And they are equally available to everyone. Thus, I'd like this topic to shy away from that area.

[Berkilak]

Come on guys, I know that there area few quarians out there with something to say.

[UK Wildcat]

Berkilak wrote...

UK Wildcat wrote...

I have an idea, because I support what you are doing. Save this until release and test each class/gun extensively. This may be a moot point at release with new guns / tweaks to classes.

Guns are ultimately preference. And they are equally available to everyone. Thus, I'd like this topic to shy away from that area.

You can't have a class 'flaw' discussion without factoring in guns, as certain classes get bonuses based on the weapon type they are using.  If there is a wider array of guns, and the inclusion of these guns balances certain classes, then this is all moot.

[themaxzero]

Berkilak wrote...

Come on guys, I know that there area few quarians out there with something to say.

No point thinking about balance changes till we have all enemy types, weapons and classes.

Yes things are unbalanced in the Demo at the moment but that does not reflect the full game.

I think Asari Vanguards and perhaps even Quarian Infiltrators (Sabotage against Geth wtf?) are really going to mix things up.

[elferin91]

class: sentinel
Species: human/turian
Issue: tech armor
Suggestion:
1. on 4. rank buff up explosion dmg and radius to 50% and add 5% bonus hp and shield on protection
2. on 5. rank melee dmg buff to 50% and maybe, but only maybe add weapon damage on power damage option
3. add 10% hp and shield on protection

edit: i don't really think turian needs this kind of buff, but human def does

Modifié par elferin91, 26 février 2012 - 05:49 .

[Berkilak]

elferin91 wrote...

class: sentinel
Species: human/turian
Issue: tech armor
Suggestion:
1. on 4. rank buff up explosion dmg and radius to 50% and add 5% bonus hp and shield on protection
2. on 5. rank melee dmg buff to 50% and maybe, but only maybe add weapon damage on power damage option
3. add 10% hp and shield on protection

edit: i don't really think turian needs this kind of buff, but human def does

Added. I hope you don't mind my summarizing - I like to leave the specifics of the changes to the developers. I hope I kept the spirit of your suggestions intact. 

[Berkilak]

themaxzero wrote...

Berkilak wrote...

Come on guys, I know that there area few quarians out there with something to say.

No point thinking about balance changes till we have all enemy types, weapons and classes.

Yes things are unbalanced in the Demo at the moment but that does not reflect the full game.

I think Asari Vanguards and perhaps even Quarian Infiltrators (Sabotage against Geth wtf?) are really going to mix things up.

It reflects a portion of the full game. The situations you see are situations that will arise within the full game. The demo is not a separate entity. Likewise, those added classes are only going to exacerbate the usability of certain classes relative to their counterparts (Stasis and Charge is going to be beyond crazy).

Likewise, I fully intend to continue this list post-release. That means both additions and retractions based on how the game progresses. 

Modifié par Berkilak, 26 février 2012 - 06:01 .

[themaxzero]

Berkilak wrote...

themaxzero wrote...

Berkilak wrote...

Come on guys, I know that there area few quarians out there with something to say.

No point thinking about balance changes till we have all enemy types, weapons and classes.

Yes things are unbalanced in the Demo at the moment but that does not reflect the full game.

I think Asari Vanguards and perhaps even Quarian Infiltrators (Sabotage against Geth wtf?) are really going to mix things up.

It reflects a portion of the full game. The situations you see are situations that will arise within the full game. The demo is not a separate entity. Likewise, those added classes are only going to exacerbate the usability of certain classes relative to their counterparts (Stasis and Charge is going to be beyond crazy).

Likewise, I fully intend to continue this list post-release. That means both additions and retractions based on how the game progresses. 

Would you base balance decisions on the amount of SP content we have played? Of course not. So why do it for something even more tenuous and subjective in MP balance?

Against Geth a Quarian Infiltrator is going to dominate Geth more then the Asari does Cerberus now. People don't know how stupid Sabotage actually is.

Modifié par themaxzero, 26 février 2012 - 06:07 .

[Berkilak]

themaxzero wrote...

Would you base balance decisions on the amount of SP content we have played? Of course not. So why do it for something even more tenuous and subjective in MP balance?

Against Geth a Quarian Infiltrator is going to dominate Geth more then the Asari does Cerberus now. People don't know how stupid Sabotage actually is.

If I note that something is off in the single-player demo, of course I would mention it. And people have. This is a slice of the game, not something separately cooked up and totally inapplicable. If your solution to "X is terrible," is "Use Y when the game comes out," something is very wrong. If an issue with something exists, it will persist. Avoiding an issue does not fix said issue.

[Hoki]

Human soldier:
Problem: can only use 1 power during addrenaline rush (if specced for rank 6 power use)
Details for why addrenaline rush LOWERS both my offense and defense is described below.

I have fully specced out concussive shot for force and damage and the dot. It is both my primary defense and offense. I have to use it to blast people out of cover, then mow them down with an avenger.
If I turn the corner and there are a couple of enemies, I can knock one to the ground and shoot the other one in the face without being tactical about it.
Also I as well only carry an avenger and get a 1.5 second concussive shot, so thats why its my primary damage. I do more damage with an avenger during rush, but when I want to shoot something around a corner or behind a shield, or a phantom, I do basically no damage without concussive shot.
So the biggest problem for me during rush is I can't use concussive shot, or if I spec all the way into it, only can use it once during it. So it sound great on paper, but rush actually LOWERS my damage and defense.
If they change the rank 6 Power Use ability to allow the use of as many other powers as we'd like, then I'd basically use rush whenever its available. I think thats fair, since you'd have to choose between your other powers or super high survival.

[Berkilak]

Hoki wrote...

Human soldier:
Problem: can only use 1 power during addrenaline rush (if specced for rank 6 power use)
Details for why addrenaline rush LOWERS both my offense and defense is described below.

I have fully specced out concussive shot for force and damage and the dot. It is both my primary defense and offense. I have to use it to blast people out of cover, then mow them down with an avenger.
If I turn the corner and there are a couple of enemies, I can knock one to the ground and shoot the other one in the face without being tactical about it.
Also I as well only carry an avenger and get a 1.5 second concussive shot, so thats why its my primary damage. I do more damage with an avenger during rush, but when I want to shoot something around a corner or behind a shield, or a phantom, I do basically no damage without concussive shot.
So the biggest problem for me during rush is I can't use concussive shot, or if I spec all the way into it, only can use it once during it. So it sound great on paper, but rush actually LOWERS my damage and defense.
If they change the rank 6 Power Use ability to allow the use of as many other powers as we'd like, then I'd basically use rush whenever its available. I think thats fair, since you'd have to choose between your other powers or super high survival.

Added. Tell me if there is an issue with my summary. I'll do my best to address it.

[elferin91]

Berkilak wrote...

elferin91 wrote...

class: sentinel
Species: human/turian
Issue: tech armor
Suggestion:
1. on 4. rank buff up explosion dmg and radius to 50% and add 5% bonus hp and shield on protection
2. on 5. rank melee dmg buff to 50% and maybe, but only maybe add weapon damage on power damage option
3. add 10% hp and shield on protection

edit: i don't really think turian needs this kind of buff, but human def does

Added. I hope you don't mind my summarizing - I like to leave the specifics of the changes to the developers. I hope I kept the spirit of your suggestions intact. 

it's ok, personally i'm having a blast with sentinel

[themaxzero]

Berkilak wrote...

themaxzero wrote...

Would you base balance decisions on the amount of SP content we have played? Of course not. So why do it for something even more tenuous and subjective in MP balance?

Against Geth a Quarian Infiltrator is going to dominate Geth more then the Asari does Cerberus now. People don't know how stupid Sabotage actually is.

If I note that something is off in the single-player demo, of course I would mention it. And people have. This is a slice of the game, not something separately cooked up and totally inapplicable. If your solution to "X is terrible," is "Use Y when the game comes out," something is very wrong. If an issue with something exists, it will persist. Avoiding an issue does not fix said issue.

Thats the thing though. If we had a Quarian Infiltrators instead of Asari Adepts and Geth as the enemy type would people be complaining about them instead?

If we had a heavy armour enemy type (Scion and Praetorian heavy Collector's for example) no one would say jack about the Asari.

Modifié par themaxzero, 26 février 2012 - 06:44 .

[Random citizen]

My spontaneous reaction to what I have seen is just: Do not be afraid of making some classes/races weaker combat wise then others and more specialized.  social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/343/index/9470740/5#9479845

Modifié par Random citizen, 26 février 2012 - 06:47 .

[Berkilak]

themaxzero wrote...

Berkilak wrote...

themaxzero wrote...

Would you base balance decisions on the amount of SP content we have played? Of course not. So why do it for something even more tenuous and subjective in MP balance?

Against Geth a Quarian Infiltrator is going to dominate Geth more then the Asari does Cerberus now. People don't know how stupid Sabotage actually is.

If I note that something is off in the single-player demo, of course I would mention it. And people have. This is a slice of the game, not something separately cooked up and totally inapplicable. If your solution to "X is terrible," is "Use Y when the game comes out," something is very wrong. If an issue with something exists, it will persist. Avoiding an issue does not fix said issue.

Thats the thing though. If we had a Quarian Infiltrators instead of Asari Adepts and Geth as the enemy type would people be complaining about them instead?

If we had a heavy armour enemy type (Scion and Praetorian heavy Collector's for example) no one would say jack about the Asari.

No one is complaining (well, a few are, but they shouldn't be). They're just noting where they excel. And they'd excel in these areas even if more options were available. Likewise, certain classes have shortcomings. And they're going to have shortcomings in these areas come the full game, even if they excel within some specific niche elsewhere.

[Random citizen]

Berkilak wrote...

themaxzero wrote...

Berkilak wrote...

themaxzero wrote...

Would you base balance decisions on the amount of SP content we have played? Of course not. So why do it for something even more tenuous and subjective in MP balance?

Against Geth a Quarian Infiltrator is going to dominate Geth more then the Asari does Cerberus now. People don't know how stupid Sabotage actually is.

If I note that something is off in the single-player demo, of course I would mention it. And people have. This is a slice of the game, not something separately cooked up and totally inapplicable. If your solution to "X is terrible," is "Use Y when the game comes out," something is very wrong. If an issue with something exists, it will persist. Avoiding an issue does not fix said issue.

Thats the thing though. If we had a Quarian Infiltrators instead of Asari Adepts and Geth as the enemy type would people be complaining about them instead?

If we had a heavy armour enemy type (Scion and Praetorian heavy Collector's for example) no one would say jack about the Asari.

No one is complaining (well, a few are, but they shouldn't be). They're just noting where they excel. And they'd excel in these areas even if more options were available. Likewise, certain classes have shortcomings. And they're going to have shortcomings in these areas come the full game, even if they excel within some specific niche elsewhere.

Isnt that a good thing, that certain classes have shortcommings?

[themaxzero]

Berkilak wrote...

themaxzero wrote...

Berkilak wrote...

themaxzero wrote...

Would you base balance decisions on the amount of SP content we have played? Of course not. So why do it for something even more tenuous and subjective in MP balance?

Against Geth a Quarian Infiltrator is going to dominate Geth more then the Asari does Cerberus now. People don't know how stupid Sabotage actually is.

If I note that something is off in the single-player demo, of course I would mention it. And people have. This is a slice of the game, not something separately cooked up and totally inapplicable. If your solution to "X is terrible," is "Use Y when the game comes out," something is very wrong. If an issue with something exists, it will persist. Avoiding an issue does not fix said issue.

Thats the thing though. If we had a Quarian Infiltrators instead of Asari Adepts and Geth as the enemy type would people be complaining about them instead?

If we had a heavy armour enemy type (Scion and Praetorian heavy Collector's for example) no one would say jack about the Asari.

No one is complaining (well, a few are, but they shouldn't be). They're just noting where they excel. And they'd excel in these areas even if more options were available. Likewise, certain classes have shortcomings. And they're going to have shortcomings in these areas come the full game, even if they excel within some specific niche elsewhere.

Yes and that's called balance. How will you be able to tell which classes are competitive on Gold if the majority of enemy types are not playable?

[Berkilak]

Random citizen wrote...

Isnt that a good thing, that certain classes have shortcommings?

Not if they do not have a niche role, it isn't. The more stark the shortcomings, the greater the power needs to be when a niche is fulfilled. Likewise, no class should ever be in a situation wherein it cannot exploit its niche while avoiding said shortcomings.

There's a difference between knowing your weakness and overcoming them and having weaknesses than render your strengths moot.

[Berkilak]

themaxzero wrote...

Yes and that's called balance. How will you be able to tell which classes are competitive on Gold if the majority of enemy types are not playable?

I simply do not understand why you think it permissable that certain classes be more-or-less useless on certain enemy groups. Sure, give someone an advantage or disadvantage when matched against a certain type of enemy, but when you are rendered moot for the entire match because you're playing against an enemy group that entirely counters your class?

And you speak of balance while promoting such situations?

[D.Kain]

Random citizen wrote...

Isnt that a good thing, that certain classes have shortcommings?

Every class should be ABLE to solo and be ABLE to not relly on anyone but themselves. Then those competent classes should come together into an effiecient group multiplying their effectivness  to deal with high difficulties and challanges.

[Random citizen]

Berkilak wrote...

Random citizen wrote...

Isnt that a good thing, that certain classes have shortcommings?

Not if they do not have a niche role, it isn't. The more stark the shortcomings, the greater the power needs to be when a niche is fulfilled. Likewise, no class should ever be in a situation wherein it cannot exploit its niche while avoiding said shortcomings.

There's a difference between knowing your weakness and overcoming them and having weaknesses than render your strengths moot.

You can have a race (for example human) that is not best at anything, but decent in every class. Niche = support if there are better specialists around.

You can have races that are strong in one niche (like quarians being good at tech, like hacking, uploading, downloading, disarming etc, faster then other races) but less good at dishing out damage and having low health.

[Berkilak]

Random citizen wrote...

You can have a race (for example human) that is not best at anything, but decent in every class. Niche = support if there are better specialists around.

You can have races that are strong in one niche (like quarians being good at tech, like hacking, uploading, downloading, disarming etc, faster then other races) but less good at dishing out damage and having low health.

You are speaking in idealistic generalities that do not apply to the actual game. Unless you want to cite specific example, there is no discourse to be had here.