228 réponses à ce sujet

[Sevrun]

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

Sevrun wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

 AR's are fine. Pistols are NOT op. Pistols aren't going to be nerfed. GET OVER IT. I take a AR all the time and do just fine. I seriously think people use a weapon one time only then come here and cry.

Pistols are not OP. Except maybe the Paladin. 


But ARs suck donkey balls and need a serious buff. 

LOL. Paladin isn't OP. It is just a slightly stronger Carnifex. Besides, Phalanx > Carnifex/Paladin. 

It is like the .45 ACP of Mass Effect now. Great balance between firepower, accuracy, and mag size.

+1 for the Toast!

If I pull a pistol, that's the pistol of choice for me for exactly that reason, and I have the Paladin.

P.S. nothing wrong with ARs except the people who can't use them properly

We've told you exactly whats wrong with ARs multiple times now and why skill has nothing to do with it, you simply just cover your hears and shout "L2play" 

Slow fire weapons are better in literally everyway, does that mean ARs are useless? no. Does it mean they are inferior? Yes. 

Then dig your fingers outta your own ears and stop shouting nananananananana!

Now if we're done being childish, see my previous post.

[Ediblestarfish]

I just don't know. I don't do very well with a sniper rifle or shotgun, or the slow pistols, but I can really rack up the kills with an AR to the face. It's just how I play, and I like it. I use an Avenger X of all things, and it works OK for me between tech casts.

Keeping cover is not quite as necessary on a H engineer, so I have ample opportunities to unload that thing.

[Mysterious Stranger 0.0]

Sevrun wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

 AR's are fine. Pistols are NOT op. Pistols aren't going to be nerfed. GET OVER IT. I take a AR all the time and do just fine. I seriously think people use a weapon one time only then come here and cry.

Pistols are not OP. Except maybe the Paladin. 


But ARs suck donkey balls and need a serious buff. 

LOL. Paladin isn't OP. It is just a slightly stronger Carnifex. Besides, Phalanx > Carnifex/Paladin. 

It is like the .45 of Mass Effect now. Great balance between firepower, accuracy, and mag size.

I haven't looked at the Phanlax dps numbers so i can't comment on it.

But the Paladin is silly powerful, and it's weight is silly low. There's no reason not to use it over the carnifex unless your a really bad shot or don't know the location of ammo boxes. It needs a downside. 

Something to keep in mind... those DPS numbers don't account for playstyle.  

Then thats your problem.
But i don't see how you could handle recoil/aim on the rev but not the paladin, may take some getting used to but learning to use the different styles of guns isn't hard. And even if you can't snipe properly that leaves HPs which are arguably the easiest guns in the game to aim and have little recoil and great all purpose scopes. 

Auto fire weapons are generally going to have more recoil/be harder to aim. It's hard to miss with the paladin after you play a few matches with it. So i don't think playstyle is much of an arguement for the defense of ARs utility. 

[Mysterious Stranger 0.0]

Sevrun wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

Sevrun wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

 AR's are fine. Pistols are NOT op. Pistols aren't going to be nerfed. GET OVER IT. I take a AR all the time and do just fine. I seriously think people use a weapon one time only then come here and cry.

Pistols are not OP. Except maybe the Paladin. 


But ARs suck donkey balls and need a serious buff. 

LOL. Paladin isn't OP. It is just a slightly stronger Carnifex. Besides, Phalanx > Carnifex/Paladin. 

It is like the .45 ACP of Mass Effect now. Great balance between firepower, accuracy, and mag size.

+1 for the Toast!

If I pull a pistol, that's the pistol of choice for me for exactly that reason, and I have the Paladin.

P.S. nothing wrong with ARs except the people who can't use them properly

We've told you exactly whats wrong with ARs multiple times now and why skill has nothing to do with it, you simply just cover your hears and shout "L2play" 

Slow fire weapons are better in literally everyway, does that mean ARs are useless? no. Does it mean they are inferior? Yes. 

Then dig your fingers outta your own ears and stop shouting nananananananana!

Now if we're done being childish, see my previous post.

Childish? i've listened to every word you said and it's utter and complete bull. Your arguement for why ARs are equal to HPs and snipers is because some people suck at using those weapons? That's a terrible reason to keep ARs at their current status. 

[Sevrun]

Then you're not listening to the heart of my point, which was illustrated in the comment just before.

PLAYSTYLE MATTERS

I cannot say it any more plainly. Nevermind the fact that your entire point that they need a buff comes from a document you trust to be valid, and I'm assuming haven't thoroughly crosschecked or developed yourself? A document you reference only vaguely so I have no way to be certain if it's the one I'm looking at when I google. And could very well be the one that's been quoted by others in other threads with the immediately following caveat that it's not accurate.

But at least you're honest enough to say you think I'm full of ****. I can respect that much at least.

[TexasToast712]

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

Childish? i've listened to every word you said and it's utter and complete bull. Your arguement for why ARs are equal to HPs and snipers is because some people suck at using those weapons? That's a terrible reason to keep ARs at their current status. 

It is totally valid. Everyone complaining about AR's want them to be super death machines because they do less DPS than snipers or semi's. They take a AR expecting to go in and just dominate. It doesn't work that way. It never should. They have their uses. They will never be the powerhouses people think they should be, however.

[Mysterious Stranger 0.0]

Sevrun wrote...

Then you're not listening to the heart of my point, which was illustrated in the comment just before.

PLAYSTYLE MATTERS

I cannot say it any more plainly. Nevermind the fact that your entire point that they need a buff comes from a document you trust to be valid, and I'm assuming haven't thoroughly crosschecked or developed yourself? A document you reference only vaguely so I have no way to be certain if it's the one I'm looking at when I google. And could very well be the one that's been quoted by others in other threads with the immediately following caveat that it's not accurate.

But at least you're honest enough to say you think I'm full of ****. I can respect that much at least.

I've used enough of every gun to have basic ideas of their dps,denying the paladin does more DPS than the Avenger is silly to the max. And devs have also confirmed that Rapid fire weapons are utter and complete trash against armor(different words of course) 

And your arguement moved from "ARs don't suck you use them right" to "ARs don't suck because some people suck with snipers" No ones saying you can't have more fun with an AR. We're saying that if you use an AR and a HP at comparitive ability the HP will almost always win in the numbers race by a long shot. Especially when facing armored opponets. 

I don't understand why your so opposed to admitting ARs are inferior if they're your favorite weapon type then i'd think you'd enjoy a buff to make them not be trash against armor. 

[MacKegg]

Spraying my revenant with increased clip and stability is my favorite feeling ever, slowly walking forwards while mowing down reg troopers is just a great feeling, sadly requires cover against stronger enemies.

[Mysterious Stranger 0.0]

TexasToast712 wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

Childish? i've listened to every word you said and it's utter and complete bull. Your arguement for why ARs are equal to HPs and snipers is because some people suck at using those weapons? That's a terrible reason to keep ARs at their current status. 

It is totally valid. Everyone complaining about AR's want them to be super death machines because they do less DPS than snipers or semi's. They take a AR expecting to go in and just dominate. It doesn't work that way. It never should. They have their uses. They will never be the powerhouses people think they should be, however.

What is the use of an AR over a HP or a sniper? 

Tell me. And  don't say Supressing fire because we all know that's Bull since the falcon was the only gun that could ever actually do that. 

[Sevrun]

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

Sevrun wrote...

Then you're not listening to the heart of my point, which was illustrated in the comment just before.

PLAYSTYLE MATTERS

I cannot say it any more plainly. Nevermind the fact that your entire point that they need a buff comes from a document you trust to be valid, and I'm assuming haven't thoroughly crosschecked or developed yourself? A document you reference only vaguely so I have no way to be certain if it's the one I'm looking at when I google. And could very well be the one that's been quoted by others in other threads with the immediately following caveat that it's not accurate.

But at least you're honest enough to say you think I'm full of ****. I can respect that much at least.

I've used enough of every gun to have basic ideas of their dps,denying the paladin does more DPS than the Avenger is silly to the max. And devs have also confirmed that Rapid fire weapons are utter and complete trash against armor(different words of course) 

And your arguement moved from "ARs don't suck you use them right" to "ARs don't suck because some people suck with snipers" No ones saying you can't have more fun with an AR. We're saying that if you use an AR and a HP at comparitive ability the HP will almost always win in the numbers race by a long shot. Especially when facing armored opponets. 

I don't understand why your so opposed to admitting ARs are inferior if they're your favorite weapon type then i'd think you'd enjoy a buff to make them not be trash against armor. 

My argument hasn't changed in the slightest.  My stance has ever been this:  That the ARs are just fine for what they are designed to be, and that when _used properly_ are just fine.

Secondly comparing the Paladin to the Avenger is patently absurd for a variety of reasons, and if that is what you want out of an Avenger that it should match an N7, then you're in for a LONG wait.  At least try to match rarities when making some of these comparisons.

Oh, and quit trying to twist my position.  It's a cheap trick and this discussion truly deserves better.

[TexasToast712]

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

Childish? i've listened to every word you said and it's utter and complete bull. Your arguement for why ARs are equal to HPs and snipers is because some people suck at using those weapons? That's a terrible reason to keep ARs at their current status. 

It is totally valid. Everyone complaining about AR's want them to be super death machines because they do less DPS than snipers or semi's. They take a AR expecting to go in and just dominate. It doesn't work that way. It never should. They have their uses. They will never be the powerhouses people think they should be, however.

What is the use of an AR over a HP or a sniper? 

Tell me. And  don't say Supressing fire because we all know that's Bull since the falcon was the only gun that could ever actually do that. 

You should never use a AR against armor. That has been a basic rule since ME2. That isn't going to change. The AR's we have shred health, and shields as intended. THAT is how you should use them.

Modifié par TexasToast712, 23 mars 2012 - 01:33 .

[Mysterious Stranger 0.0]

TexasToast712 wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

Childish? i've listened to every word you said and it's utter and complete bull. Your arguement for why ARs are equal to HPs and snipers is because some people suck at using those weapons? That's a terrible reason to keep ARs at their current status. 

It is totally valid. Everyone complaining about AR's want them to be super death machines because they do less DPS than snipers or semi's. They take a AR expecting to go in and just dominate. It doesn't work that way. It never should. They have their uses. They will never be the powerhouses people think they should be, however.

What is the use of an AR over a HP or a sniper? 

Tell me. And  don't say Supressing fire because we all know that's Bull since the falcon was the only gun that could ever actually do that. 

You should never use a AR against armor. That has been a basic rule since ME2. That isn't going to change. The AR's we have shred health, and shields as intended.

Armor wasn't completley Immune to ARs in ME2 you could still do decent damage with headshots. And HPs and snipers can tear though shields/Health faster than any AR can. 

[Mysterious Stranger 0.0]

Sevrun wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

Sevrun wrote...

Then you're not listening to the heart of my point, which was illustrated in the comment just before.

PLAYSTYLE MATTERS

I cannot say it any more plainly. Nevermind the fact that your entire point that they need a buff comes from a document you trust to be valid, and I'm assuming haven't thoroughly crosschecked or developed yourself? A document you reference only vaguely so I have no way to be certain if it's the one I'm looking at when I google. And could very well be the one that's been quoted by others in other threads with the immediately following caveat that it's not accurate.

But at least you're honest enough to say you think I'm full of ****. I can respect that much at least.

I've used enough of every gun to have basic ideas of their dps,denying the paladin does more DPS than the Avenger is silly to the max. And devs have also confirmed that Rapid fire weapons are utter and complete trash against armor(different words of course) 

And your arguement moved from "ARs don't suck you use them right" to "ARs don't suck because some people suck with snipers" No ones saying you can't have more fun with an AR. We're saying that if you use an AR and a HP at comparitive ability the HP will almost always win in the numbers race by a long shot. Especially when facing armored opponets. 

I don't understand why your so opposed to admitting ARs are inferior if they're your favorite weapon type then i'd think you'd enjoy a buff to make them not be trash against armor. 

My argument hasn't changed in the slightest.  My stance has ever been this:  That the ARs are just fine for what they are designed to be, and that when _used properly_ are just fine.

Yes AR are fine but they are not on par with slow fire weapons. 
 There's a difference between viable and optimal. ARs are viable but not optimal in any situation. 

[TexasToast712]

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

Childish? i've listened to every word you said and it's utter and complete bull. Your arguement for why ARs are equal to HPs and snipers is because some people suck at using those weapons? That's a terrible reason to keep ARs at their current status. 

It is totally valid. Everyone complaining about AR's want them to be super death machines because they do less DPS than snipers or semi's. They take a AR expecting to go in and just dominate. It doesn't work that way. It never should. They have their uses. They will never be the powerhouses people think they should be, however.

What is the use of an AR over a HP or a sniper? 

Tell me. And  don't say Supressing fire because we all know that's Bull since the falcon was the only gun that could ever actually do that. 

You should never use a AR against armor. That has been a basic rule since ME2. That isn't going to change. The AR's we have shred health, and shields as intended.

Armor wasn't completley Immune to ARs in ME2 you could still do decent damage with headshots. And HPs and snipers can tear though shields/Health faster than any AR can. 

Armor isn't completely immune to AR's in ME3 either. You can also still do decent headshot damage with them. Also, lets see who tears through a Atlas' or Banshee's sheilds/barriers faster. A Carnifex or a Revenant? The Revenant. Every weapon has it's uses and is completely effective in the right hands. The sooner you learn this the quicker we can get on with playing our game and enjoying it for being the balanced MP that it is.

[Father Alvito]

You should never use a AR against armor. That has been a basic rule since ME2. That isn't going to change. The AR's we have shred health, and shields as intended. THAT is how you should use them.

Yes, but there are two realities here:

- There are better ways to deal with shields than an AR
- With the exception of Geth Hunters and Phantoms, the stuff that makes you die has Armor

If these things were different, the ARs might be stronger than they presently are.

[TexasToast712]

Father Alvito wrote...

You should never use a AR against armor. That has been a basic rule since ME2. That isn't going to change. The AR's we have shred health, and shields as intended. THAT is how you should use them.

Yes, but there are two realities here:

- There are better ways to deal with shields than an AR
- With the exception of Geth Hunters and Phantoms, the stuff that makes you die has Armor

If these things were different, the ARs might be stronger than they presently are.

This is why they should just bring back modifiers.

[Sevrun]

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

Sevrun wrote...

My argument hasn't changed in the slightest.  My stance has ever been this:  That the ARs are just fine for what they are designed to be, and that when _used properly_ are just fine.

Yes AR are fine but they are not on par with slow fire weapons. 
 There's a difference between viable and optimal. ARs are viable but not optimal in any situation. 

Neither is your Carnifex, but you make it work.  I have steadfastly maintained that I can work my Revenant in any situation, not that it is perfect in all of them.  I can do this with shotguns or sniper rifles as well, ARs are my preferred weapon however as the tradeoffs are the least egregious for me.

And no, I don't want them buffed... as if that happens it's likely they'll get nerfed later and may end up _worse_ than when they started.  I'm a little concerned that they buffed my Revenant, tbh for just that reason.  I cringe when they start playing with any reasonable weapon.  I thought they may have gone overboard with the Falcon til I saw it in use.  Not so much afterward.

[Mysterious Stranger 0.0]

TexasToast712 wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

Childish? i've listened to every word you said and it's utter and complete bull. Your arguement for why ARs are equal to HPs and snipers is because some people suck at using those weapons? That's a terrible reason to keep ARs at their current status. 

It is totally valid. Everyone complaining about AR's want them to be super death machines because they do less DPS than snipers or semi's. They take a AR expecting to go in and just dominate. It doesn't work that way. It never should. They have their uses. They will never be the powerhouses people think they should be, however.

What is the use of an AR over a HP or a sniper? 

Tell me. And  don't say Supressing fire because we all know that's Bull since the falcon was the only gun that could ever actually do that. 

You should never use a AR against armor. That has been a basic rule since ME2. That isn't going to change. The AR's we have shred health, and shields as intended.

Armor wasn't completley Immune to ARs in ME2 you could still do decent damage with headshots. And HPs and snipers can tear though shields/Health faster than any AR can. 

Armor isn't completely immune to AR's in ME3 either. You can also still do decent headshot damage with them. Also, lets see who tears through a Atlas' or Banshee's sheilds/barriers faster. A Carnifex or a Revenant? The Revenant. Every weapon has it's uses and is completely effective in the right hands. The sooner you learn this the quicker we can get on with playing our game and enjoying it for being the balanced MP that it is.

The carnifex would beat the rev against the banshee due to the better accuracy and quicker reload. Atlas i'm not sure.
But the if you want to down shields on the big guys thats what snipers are for. Let's see what would tear through shields barriers faster a mantis or a Rev....
And although Armor isn't completley immune to ARs in ME3 it's much more resistant to the point where it might as well be. And you can only do headshot damage against certain enemies unlike in ME2 where everything had a head. And even with headshots the HPs/Snipers will still outpreform the ARs. 

[Father Alvito]

TexasToast712 wrote...

This is why they should just bring back modifiers.

I absolutely support this and have since the demo.

Sevrun wrote...

I thought they may have gone overboard with the Falcon til I saw it in use.  Not so much afterward.

It needed a nerf.  It didn't need to get hit with the Bob Barker shears from Robot Chicken.

Modifié par Father Alvito, 23 mars 2012 - 01:47 .

[elessarz]

The Hurricane seems to be pretty damn good at tearing down shields, but that's hardly an assault rifle. I don't know. When I play my Turian Sentinel I do more damage with the Phaeston than with the Revenant. It's just so damn inaccurate, whereas with the Phaeston I can produce a steady spray of fire aimed at the head that does far more damage. The Revenant itself is pretty beastly, but its accuracy really damns it. Not to mention, it's far heavier.

[Mysterious Stranger 0.0]

Sevrun wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

Sevrun wrote...

My argument hasn't changed in the slightest.  My stance has ever been this:  That the ARs are just fine for what they are designed to be, and that when _used properly_ are just fine.

Yes AR are fine but they are not on par with slow fire weapons. 
 There's a difference between viable and optimal. ARs are viable but not optimal in any situation. 

Neither is your Carnifex, but you make it work.  I have steadfastly maintained that I can work my Revenant in any situation, not that it is perfect in all of them.  I can do this with shotguns or sniper rifles as well, ARs are my preferred weapon however as the tradeoffs are the least egregious for me.

And no, I don't want them buffed... as if that happens it's likely they'll get nerfed later and may end up _worse_ than when they started.  I'm a little concerned that they buffed my Revenant, tbh for just that reason.  I cringe when they start playing with any reasonable weapon.  I thought they may have gone overboard with the Falcon til I saw it in use.  Not so much afterward.

The falcon was the only optimal AR, it still may be optimal in very rare situations
The carnifex is near Optimal far closer than any AR could claim. although I don't use it i use the true Optimal HP the paladin. 

[CHAw]

TexasToast712 wrote...

You should never use a AR against armor. That has been a basic rule since ME2. That isn't going to change. The AR's we have shred health, and shields as intended. THAT is how you should use them.

Untrue. In ME2, the standard assault rifle bonus was 25% against all defenses (shields, barriers, AND armor). Then another 25% when you researched the upgrade.

The only assault rifle that was "ineffective" against armor was the Geth Pulse Rifle, which had a lesser BONUS against armor, but a larger one against shields and barriers. In contrast, both the Revenant and the Mattock had a smaller bonus against shields and barriers, but a LARGER one against armor.

[TexasToast712]

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

The carnifex would beat the rev against the banshee due to the better accuracy and quicker reload. Atlas i'm not sure.
But the if you want to down shields on the big guys thats what snipers are for. Let's see what would tear through shields barriers faster a mantis or a Rev....
And although Armor isn't completley immune to ARs in ME3 it's much more resistant to the point where it might as well be. And you can only do headshot damage against certain enemies unlike in ME2 where everything had a head. And even with headshots the HPs/Snipers will still outpreform the ARs. 

A revenant would beat the Carnifex in the shield/barrier bust contest against Atlas/Banshee.

[Sevrun]

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

The carnifex would beat the rev against the banshee due to the better accuracy and quicker reload. Atlas i'm not sure.
But the if you want to down shields on the big guys thats what snipers are for. Let's see what would tear through shields barriers faster a mantis or a Rev....
And although Armor isn't completley immune to ARs in ME3 it's much more resistant to the point where it might as well be. And you can only do headshot damage against certain enemies unlike in ME2 where everything had a head. And even with headshots the HPs/Snipers will still outpreform the ARs. 

I have to disagree with the first part, as I've seen guys with the Carnifex start spraying from the hip and squealing like little girls when she shows up.  My accuracy there is pretty good.

In relation to the second, the Vindicator can counter the advantage you'd expect from the basic headshots of HPs/Snipers until you start to account for those players likely taking the buff to headshot damage.

In this area you're starting to get into situations where playstyle skews the numbers... validating my point that playstyle matters.

[Mysterious Stranger 0.0]

TexasToast712 wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

The carnifex would beat the rev against the banshee due to the better accuracy and quicker reload. Atlas i'm not sure.
But the if you want to down shields on the big guys thats what snipers are for. Let's see what would tear through shields barriers faster a mantis or a Rev....
And although Armor isn't completley immune to ARs in ME3 it's much more resistant to the point where it might as well be. And you can only do headshot damage against certain enemies unlike in ME2 where everything had a head. And even with headshots the HPs/Snipers will still outpreform the ARs. 

A revenant would beat the Carnifex in the shield/barrier bust contest against Atlas/Banshee.

If it could then it's not by much. And a sniper could still beat the Rev at taking down any large enemy.