229 réponses à ce sujet

[We Tigers]

This notion of "ONLY GOLD MATTERS" is silly. This game has sold over a million copies and will sell quite a few more. There are a lot of people with lots of different preferences playing. Merely on the amount of time it takes me to find a gold match, I can tell you that many more people are playing silver and bronze.

Balance issues should be considered across all levels. They affect gold the most, but they will affect all levels. The notion that gold is "easy" to your average player is fairly hyperbolic.  The only time gold is anything approaching "easy" is if you have four well-selected level 20 characters with good loadouts, probably with equipment, and you know the map and enemy you'll be facing accordingly.  Change any of those variables--keeping in mind that it does take a bit of time for any players to get a class up to level 20--and you're looking at a significantly different experience.  I know you don't need the EXP bonus from random enemy/random map once you're level 20, but there's a significant difference from doing Geth/Firebase White with a team of QI/HE/SE, and a random pull with that same team that gives you the Reapers on Glacier.

So, yes.  Modify the armor and damage gating mechanics on Gold if that's appropriate, but don't pretend that global changes won't significantly alter the experience on bronze and silver as well--and remember that playing bronze and silver are wholly valid choices for a very large portion of the userbase, and thus shouldn't be dismissed.

Modifié par We Tigers, 29 mars 2012 - 05:04 .

[Aranha]

We Tigers wrote...

This notion of "ONLY GOLD MATTERS" is silly. This game has sold over a million copies and will sell quite a few more. There are a lot of people with lots of different preferences playing. Merely on the amount of time it takes me to find a gold match, I can tell you that many more people are playing silver and bronze.

Balance issues should be considered across all levels. They affect gold the most, but they will affect all levels. The notion that gold is "easy" to your average player is fairly hyperbolic.

Gold doesnt affect Bronze or Silver! Just look at the latest patch notes where ONLY Gold viable builds got buffed and not those that actually needed it (SMG/AR).

SMG & AR are still weak guns in bronze and silver and Soldier is the weakest class there aswell...

If Gold is balanced, Silver and Bronze will be aswell.

Modifié par Aranha, 29 mars 2012 - 05:00 .

[HippyGiJoe]

A game imo should be balanced from the top down, you dont balance something on easy or normal.
If you do that then things get broken in higher difficulties. Lets say all classes are viable on silver, then you go gold and half of those are rubbish,that is what is happening atm. If they balance stuff to be viable in gold, then automatically they would be good on silver/bronze.

[RiflemanUK]

Hyunsai wrote...

Aerius wrote...

Hyunsai wrote...
If you case reflects the majority, no problem.

Neither one of us has a clue what the majority of the player base is doing.

Well, the 1% of games finished in Gold should help, so we have to wait for Bioware to reveal more stats on it.

That's not even reliable as people just let themselves die after completing wave 10 and recieving credits.

[Mysterious Stranger 0.0]

You can complete silver with any class against any faction and do very well if your skill is high enough.

The same does not apply to gold. *Cough* Krogan Vs Geth *Cough* *Cough*

[niko20]

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

You can complete silver with any class against any faction and do very well if your skill is high enough.

The same does not apply to gold. *Cough* Krogan Vs Geth *Cough* *Cough*

and why should such a thing be viable? krograns meleeing things with uber armor? i mean it doesnt make sense. i just donr get this whole thing about weapons needing to be buffed because they suck on gold. of course they suck the enemies have tons more health/armor/shields! thats the point of gold! balancing weapons to work on gold would just make them overpowered on everything else. and then gold becomes the new silver . you just end up in a viscious cycle. 

Modifié par niko20, 29 mars 2012 - 05:18 .

[mrcanada]

We Tigers wrote...

This notion of "ONLY GOLD MATTERS" is silly. This game has sold over a million copies and will sell quite a few more. There are a lot of people with lots of different preferences playing. Merely on the amount of time it takes me to find a gold match, I can tell you that many more people are playing silver and bronze.

Balance issues should be considered across all levels. They affect gold the most, but they will affect all levels. The notion that gold is "easy" to your average player is fairly hyperbolic.  The only time gold is anything approaching "easy" is if you have four well-selected level 20 characters with good loadouts, probably with equipment, and you know the map and enemy you'll be facing accordingly.  Change any of those variables--keeping in mind that it does take a bit of time for any players to get a class up to level 20--and you're looking at a significantly different experience.  I know you don't need the EXP bonus from random enemy/random map once you're level 20, but there's a significant difference from doing Geth/Firebase White with a team of QI/HE/SE, and a random pull with that same team that gives you the Reapers on Glacier.

So, yes.  Modify the armor and damage gating mechanics on Gold if that's appropriate, but don't pretend that global changes won't significantly alter the experience on bronze and silver as well--and remember that playing bronze and silver are wholly valid choices for a very large portion of the userbase, and thus shouldn't be dismissed.

Gold is the only standard that matters for balancing the game.  But anyone that says only Gold matters to play is an idiot.  Play whatever difficulty and whatever build you want, but the balances should only be based on Gold difficulties gameplay.

[Star fury]

BNRasec wrote...

Gold is the standard. If you can't play it, get better or quit.

Or play bronze and silver. Casuals can destroy all challenge.

[mrcanada]

niko20 wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

You can complete silver with any class against any faction and do very well if your skill is high enough.

The same does not apply to gold. *Cough* Krogan Vs Geth *Cough* *Cough*

and why should such a thing be viable? krograns meleeing things with uber armor? i mean it doesnt make sense. 

Krogan's melee everything in Mass Effect.  The melee as much as they shoot and it should be relatively viable if they choose to build for that.  The current balancing and builds on Gold do not unfortunately and that is something that I think should be addressed.  If you go for a full melee build, you should be effectvie, but you are gimping other areas so you would have a very specific style of play only.

[Star fury]

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

You can complete silver with any class against any faction and do very well if your skill is high enough.

The same does not apply to gold. *Cough* Krogan Vs Geth *Cough* *Cough*

I'd change *Krogan vs any enemy* on Gold. You can melee during first three waves then you have to switch to your widow and sit in cover. While infiltrators & adepts pwn everything.

[Segameister]

BNRasec wrote...

Gold is the standard. If you can't play it, get better or quit.

Wow, that's a wannabe elitist comment.


Play what you enjoy!  If you need your ego stroked regularly or need to constantly challenged, play a lot of gold!  If not, play the other challenge levels that you enjoy instead.

[Highlord Heian]

Yes, why take values of maximum effectiveness from the mode where maximum effectiveness is most important?

[Dannomight]

I want to join the chorus of voices saying 'Gold should be the standard by which you balance the game'. I say this as someone who has only played Gold once or twice, and certainly never finished a Gold run.

If the game works at the hardest difficulty level and every class or weapon is viable (and what is the point of a class or weapon that isn't viable?), then every class or weapon is going to be usable at the lower difficulty levels. Having a class only work in bronze or silver is silly, and reflects either poor balance or poor design goals.

[molecularman]

Why are you still keeping this thread alive.

[Dannomight]

molecularman wrote...

Why are you still keeping this thread alive.

Oh crap sorry! I forgot to ask your permission before sharing my opinion. 

[Ridonkulous]

It's really not that difficult to do gold people, it requires that you have a semi decent weapon that is in some way compatible with your character. I've completed gold full extraction @ lvl 2. It's not because someone carried me, but its because I understand the concept of a team game and playing to each others strengths and weaknesses.

To play gold successfully its not a matter of min/maxing its a matter of teamwork.

-You should not queue for gold without understanding the defend-able positions for whatever map you are choosing.

-You should bring a character that you are familiar with, preferably one with a roll mechanic. This character should bring something to the party, ie Decoy, Sabotage, Stasis, Bio Explosions, Tech Explosions.

- The 3 main controlling aspects are Decoy [Salarian Engineer] Sabotage [Quarian Infiltrator] and Stasis [ Asari and others].

- When making a group for gold, have at least one of these in your group, with importance relevant to the enemy you face, stasis > phantoms, decoy > all, sabotage > geth/cerberus.

-Equipment, use it.

- Work together, every map has a position where you can defend, grab ammo, and not get spawn flanked. Find them, use them.


These are only a couple of tips, but what I would really suggest is to stop assuming you can do gold @ N7-20. Gold requires that you take some time, learn the game, the mechanics, and to get some items / exp. Gold is not meant for you to start early, its the part of the MP where you put your hard work to the test. This isn't switching gameplay, it changes the game. Low weapons, no teamwork, no mods, no equipment... this will get your through Bronze and maybe even Silver, but don't expect to get anywhere near gold full extraction.

[ibench1000lbs]

I don't see why this is even being discussed. Gold can be done. Some of you are acting like it is over the top difficult like LASO on Halo. No, it just requires you to make strategy and rely on teamwork which is something Mass Effect has always held in high regard. Like someone said before, get good or play another difficulty level. Nothing on gold should be made easier, nor should things on silver or bronze. Though that is just my opinion I guess

[DrekorSilverfang]

You balance around gold because if you balance around gold you can have proper balance at the highest levels and perhaps a few underpowered things at lower levels that are only as a result of poor skill, which would somewhat encourage improvement. If you balance around silver/bronze you have abilities or weapons that are completely overpowered on gold and trivialize the content.

Balancing from the top is the ideal way to go about things. As a great example starcraft 2 is balanced top down... if you balanced for bronze league players it wouldn't even be an esport anymore it would be so bad.

[Mazandus]

Edalborez wrote...

bloodDragon80 wrote...
it shouldn't be easy with anything but all classes should be equally effective

It's nice to wish for, but this is flawed. Perfect balance in a multi-class system is nigh-impossible to reasonably obtain. Some classes will be better than others. Others will be perceived as better because of a lower skill barrier, higher efficiencey, or exploiting behavioral patterns. Why? Perfect balance is boring, and that's not a bad thing.

This post is unfortunately true of many game designers and their products. But it is also misleasding. The assertion that balanace is nigh impossible is completely untrue. Every numerical value of any weapon/power/shield whatever in this game (or any game) is determined by a developer. They are not naturally ocurring phenomena. They are decided upon. As such they are subject to the opinions and "philosophies" of the designer. The guy who had the final say in this game obviously likes his sidearms and doesn't care much for automatic weapons, for example. There is no naturally occuring phenomena in nature where an assault rifle fires a smaller and thus less powerful round than does a handgun, but in ME3, this is in fact the case. Hence, balance, is subjective.

The second assertion that something will always be the best and that "perfect balance is boring and that's not a bad thing" is unfortunately what accounts for "depth" and "strategy" these days not only in the minds of developers, but is especially true of players. I, for one, do not see the "depth" when one class performs at bronze, then suffers at silver, then becomes a handicap at gold while another class excels at all three. Thats not depth or strategy that's simply planned inferiority and acceptance empowered by elitism, or what I like to call "coooool kidddzzzzz" who figure out on day one that FMG9's and Undead Rogues and BF2 jets have little drawbacks and incredibly high rewards.

I understand that flavor is important, that giving unique characteristics to a class is important, but I feel that there are other ways to accomplish this than planned inferiority.

[Mazandus]

Furthermore, I fail to see how "fun" is achieved when half the classes and most of the weapons become sub optimal at a certain level of difficulty. If anything this tired way of balance is limiting rather than enriching. It is indeed mistaking a shallow puddle for a deep lake.

[Aranha]

Mazandus wrote...

Edalborez wrote...

bloodDragon80 wrote...
it shouldn't be easy with anything but all classes should be equally effective

It's nice to wish for, but this is flawed. Perfect balance in a multi-class system is nigh-impossible to reasonably obtain. Some classes will be better than others. Others will be perceived as better because of a lower skill barrier, higher efficiencey, or exploiting behavioral patterns. Why? Perfect balance is boring, and that's not a bad thing.

This post is unfortunately true of many game designers and their products. But it is also misleasding. The assertion that balanace is nigh impossible is completely untrue. Every numerical value of any weapon/power/shield whatever in this game (or any game) is determined by a developer. They are not naturally ocurring phenomena. They are decided upon. As such they are subject to the opinions and "philosophies" of the designer. The guy who had the final say in this game obviously likes his sidearms and doesn't care much for automatic weapons, for example. There is no naturally occuring phenomena in nature where an assault rifle fires a smaller and thus less powerful round than does a handgun, but in ME3, this is in fact the case. Hence, balance, is subjective.

The second assertion that something will always be the best and that "perfect balance is boring and that's not a bad thing" is unfortunately what accounts for "depth" and "strategy" these days not only in the minds of developers, but is especially true of players. I, for one, do not see the "depth" when one class performs at bronze, then suffers at silver, then becomes a handicap at gold while another class excels at all three. Thats not depth or strategy that's simply planned inferiority and acceptance empowered by elitism, or what I like to call "coooool kidddzzzzz" who figure out on day one that FMG9's and Undead Rogues and BF2 jets have little drawbacks and incredibly high rewards.

I understand that flavor is important, that giving unique characteristics to a class is important, but I feel that there are other ways to accomplish this than planned inferiority.

Please have my firstborn child. Great post couldnt have said it better!

[Mazandus]

Honestly, if all BW did was nerf the damage of pistols across the board, significantly, to current smg/ar levels and buff smg's and ar's, to pistol levels, this game would be vastly better for it.

You would still always want an adept for biotic explosions, you would still always want an engineer/sentinel for overload, but the soldier could come to the party without feeling like a fat kid at a marathon.

[Silvair]

Liana Nighthawk wrote...

If you use gold as the "standard" bronze will become even easier than it is now and silver will be the new bronze.

Gold should certainly be accounted for, but if you balance purely by gold you're simply ensuring power creep destroys the other two.

Exactly...wish I'd said that in the original opening post.

[Silvair]

HolyAvenger wrote...

Gold with public lobbies is more and more doable. My completion rate on public gold matches is probably over 50% in the last few days as compared to 10% a week or so ago.

Gold is becoming the standard. Bronze and silver feel like super-easy and easy-mode rather than easy and normal...

Balancing around gold makes sense to me.

That is EXACTLY the problem here.  With people only focusing on gold...it's no longer hard, it's just "normal", and Bronze and Silver have become WAAAYYYY too easy.

Gold is supposed to be the "super-hard" mode.  It should not be getting easier to do.

Like last night, I played a Silver Reaper match with my friends.  Afterwards, one went "Wait....we just did Reapers on Silver with no problems.  That used to be a nightmare!"

As things are focused on becoming easier in Gold, that means that you are becoming godlike in Bronze and Silver.  That defeats the entire PURPOSE of having 3 difficulty levels.

[Silvair]

Keldaurz wrote...

Silvair wrote...

NOTHING is as it should be on Gold.  With gold, only a few things are "very" effective.

And most people don't play gold because of that.  They have to drop everything and just do the "most" effective.  Most weapons are pointless, most powers are pointless, because enemies are cranked up so high.


Please, stop using Gold as a point of reference for how weapons/powers should work.  It is an extreme, not the standard.

Truth is what works well on gold, works well on silver. And whatever doesn't work on gold, you start to see it a bit lackluster on silver.

So your point is null.

No, you were close.  What works well on gold, works WAY too well on Silver.  NOTHING should just be "Working Well" on Gold.  Gold is supposed to be the "Hard" mode.

So if something is tweaked to/already "Working Well" on Gold, then that means it just dominates on Silver and massacres on Bronze.  That's a bad thing.