229 réponses à ce sujet

[Atheosis]

Drummernate wrote...

Bronze is for N7 level 1-50. Learning MP basics.

Silver is for your Average Joe looking to have fun while playing but still get some creds to upgrade stuff.

Gold is for masochist who enjoy extreme difficulty and dying painfully and often to some pretty bull$#% staggers.

Silver is the way to go when testing weapons... until they release Onyx difficulty levels!

There's nothing masochistic about Gold.  It's not that hard.

[Atheosis]

double post

Modifié par Atheosis, 30 mars 2012 - 02:51 .

[zephuurs]

TexasToast712 wrote...

zephuurs wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

I'm judging by the ability to survive and kill. Score is irrelevant. This is a coop game. 

So in your mind a soldier with your weapon of choice has equal suvivability/ability to kill on gold compared to a Salarian Infiltrator with a Black Widow/Widow/Javelin. What a joke 

So what build is this mythical soldier using and how is he able to kill....let's say an Atlas/Geth Prime as fast as the SI? Oh, and what build is this soldier using to be as good as a medic the SI can be? Oh, and what build is this soldier using to survive compared to a SI that can cloak and reposition?

Adrenaline Rush + Revenant + Pierce + extended mag = dead prime real fast. 

You want to keep arguing yourself into a hole? I can do this all night, pal.

You really didn't answer my entire question but I understand this because you don't have a good answer. As for your solution, a SI kills it faster with higher burst damage due to higher armor penetration. The DPS of the soldier is irrelevant because it is hard to sustain that DPS without taking cover, thus burst damage is favored here.The SI doesn't have to re-expose himself often as he doesn't have to empty a whole clip to do relatively mediocre damage. I would explain using the armor fomula as well as the weapon damage statistics of the weapons but since you don't really use logic to substantiate your claims it's really not worth the time 

Modifié par zephuurs, 30 mars 2012 - 02:54 .

[Drummernate]

Atheosis wrote...

Drummernate wrote...

Bronze is for N7 level 1-50. Learning MP basics.

Silver is for your Average Joe looking to have fun while playing but still get some creds to upgrade stuff.

Gold is for masochist who enjoy extreme difficulty and dying painfully and often to some pretty bull$#% staggers.

Silver is the way to go when testing weapons... until they release Onyx difficulty levels!

There's nothing masochistic about Gold.  It's not that hard.

On Firebase Ghost/Reactor without any Salarians or Adepts, it can be quite hard.

Especially when you have to roll with level 12's because they refuse to use level 20's.

[TexasToast712]

zephuurs wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

zephuurs wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

I'm judging by the ability to survive and kill. Score is irrelevant. This is a coop game. 

So in your mind a soldier with your weapon of choice has equal suvivability/ability to kill on gold compared to a Salarian Infiltrator with a Black Widow/Widow/Javelin. What a joke 

So what build is this mythical soldier using and how is he able to kill....let's say an Atlas/Geth Prime as fast as the SI? Oh, and what build is this soldier using to be as good as a medic the SI can be? Oh, and what build is this soldier using to survive compared to a SI that can cloak and reposition?

Adrenaline Rush + Revenant + Pierce + extended mag = dead prime real fast. 

You want to keep arguing yourself into a hole? I can do this all night, pal.

You really didn't answer my entire question but I understand this because you don't have a good answer. As for your solution, a SI kills it faster with higher burst damage due to higher armor penetration. The SI also doesn't have to expose himself often as he doesn't have to empty a whole clip to do relatively mediocre damage. I would explain using the armor fomula as well as the weapon damage statistics of the weapons but since you don't really use logic to substantiate your claims it's really not worth the time 

I answered your question. You fail at reading. A properly spec'd soldier will kill just as well as a SI. Your "logic" as failed as it is won't change this fact. You seem to have problems with your soldiers considering how horrible you clearly are with them.

[zephuurs]

Drummernate wrote...

Atheosis wrote...

Drummernate wrote...

Bronze is for N7 level 1-50. Learning MP basics.

Silver is for your Average Joe looking to have fun while playing but still get some creds to upgrade stuff.

Gold is for masochist who enjoy extreme difficulty and dying painfully and often to some pretty bull$#% staggers.

Silver is the way to go when testing weapons... until they release Onyx difficulty levels!

There's nothing masochistic about Gold.  It's not that hard.

On Firebase Ghost/Reactor without any Salarians or Adepts, it can be quite hard.

Especially when you have to roll with level 12's because they refuse to use level 20's.

But...But...
TexasToast712  said that human soldiers are equally as good! So of course you don't need Salarians or Adepts! 

[zephuurs]

TexasToast712 wrote...

zephuurs wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

zephuurs wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

I'm judging by the ability to survive and kill. Score is irrelevant. This is a coop game. 

So in your mind a soldier with your weapon of choice has equal suvivability/ability to kill on gold compared to a Salarian Infiltrator with a Black Widow/Widow/Javelin. What a joke 

So what build is this mythical soldier using and how is he able to kill....let's say an Atlas/Geth Prime as fast as the SI? Oh, and what build is this soldier using to be as good as a medic the SI can be? Oh, and what build is this soldier using to survive compared to a SI that can cloak and reposition?

Adrenaline Rush + Revenant + Pierce + extended mag = dead prime real fast. 

You want to keep arguing yourself into a hole? I can do this all night, pal.

You really didn't answer my entire question but I understand this because you don't have a good answer. As for your solution, a SI kills it faster with higher burst damage due to higher armor penetration. The SI also doesn't have to expose himself often as he doesn't have to empty a whole clip to do relatively mediocre damage. I would explain using the armor fomula as well as the weapon damage statistics of the weapons but since you don't really use logic to substantiate your claims it's really not worth the time 

I answered your question. You fail at reading. A properly spec'd soldier will kill just as well as a SI. Your "logic" as failed as it is won't change this fact. You seem to have problems with your soldiers considering how horrible you clearly are with them.

Reading comprehension, do you have it? Apparently not. 

[TexasToast712]

zephuurs wrote...

Drummernate wrote...

Atheosis wrote...

Drummernate wrote...

Bronze is for N7 level 1-50. Learning MP basics.

Silver is for your Average Joe looking to have fun while playing but still get some creds to upgrade stuff.

Gold is for masochist who enjoy extreme difficulty and dying painfully and often to some pretty bull$#% staggers.

Silver is the way to go when testing weapons... until they release Onyx difficulty levels!

There's nothing masochistic about Gold.  It's not that hard.

On Firebase Ghost/Reactor without any Salarians or Adepts, it can be quite hard.

Especially when you have to roll with level 12's because they refuse to use level 20's.

But...But...
TexasToast712  said that human soldiers are equally as good! So of course you don't need Salarians or Adepts! 

Run out of logic so you resort to insults. I see how far your intelligence goes.

[TexasToast712]

zephuurs wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

zephuurs wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

zephuurs wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

I'm judging by the ability to survive and kill. Score is irrelevant. This is a coop game. 

So in your mind a soldier with your weapon of choice has equal suvivability/ability to kill on gold compared to a Salarian Infiltrator with a Black Widow/Widow/Javelin. What a joke 

So what build is this mythical soldier using and how is he able to kill....let's say an Atlas/Geth Prime as fast as the SI? Oh, and what build is this soldier using to be as good as a medic the SI can be? Oh, and what build is this soldier using to survive compared to a SI that can cloak and reposition?

Adrenaline Rush + Revenant + Pierce + extended mag = dead prime real fast. 

You want to keep arguing yourself into a hole? I can do this all night, pal.

You really didn't answer my entire question but I understand this because you don't have a good answer. As for your solution, a SI kills it faster with higher burst damage due to higher armor penetration. The SI also doesn't have to expose himself often as he doesn't have to empty a whole clip to do relatively mediocre damage. I would explain using the armor fomula as well as the weapon damage statistics of the weapons but since you don't really use logic to substantiate your claims it's really not worth the time 

I answered your question. You fail at reading. A properly spec'd soldier will kill just as well as a SI. Your "logic" as failed as it is won't change this fact. You seem to have problems with your soldiers considering how horrible you clearly are with them.

Reading comprehension, do you have it? Apparently not. 

You seem to lack the comprehension.

[We Tigers]

zephuurs wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

I'm judging by the ability to survive and kill. Score is irrelevant. This is a coop game. 

So in your mind a soldier with your weapon of choice has equal suvivability/ability to kill on gold compared to a Salarian Infiltrator with a Black Widow/Widow/Javelin. What a joke 

So what build is this mythical soldier using and how is he able to kill....let's say an Atlas/Geth Prime as fast as the SI? Oh, and what build is this soldier using to be as good as a medic the SI can be? Oh, and what build is this soldier using to survive as well as a SI that can cloak and reposition?

So...what's your point here?  If your point is that Salarian Infiltrator is the best class/your favorite class--and really, it sounds more like you're saying Any Infiltrator, but especially the Salarian because of energy drain--then...so what?  Do all classes have to deal damage at the same rate now?  What balance upgrades would you suggest to make a soldier as good as a Salarian Infiltrator? 

I don't think it's bad to want soldiers to be more effective--I suppose you could buff adrenaline rush or make some ARs do more damage--but is anything really going to be make it better than an infiltrator from your perspective?  No.  The idea of a soldier having to be able to kill as fast as the SI or be as good a medic as the SI or survive as well as the SI is great, but this isn't Cloak Effect 3.  Even if we doubled the bonuses you get from Adrenaline Rush, wouldn't you still be saying the same thing?  

Modifié par We Tigers, 30 mars 2012 - 02:59 .

[Cyonan]

We Tigers wrote...
So...what's your point here?  If your point is that Salarian Infiltrator is the best class/your favorite class--and really, it sounds more like you're saying Any Infiltrator, but especially the Salarian because of energy drain--then...so what?  Do all classes have to deal damage at the same rate now?  What balance upgrades would you suggest to make a soldier as good as a Salarian Infiltrator? 

I don't think it's bad to want soldiers to be more effective--I suppose you could buff adrenaline rush or make some ARs do more damage--but is anything really going to be make it better than an infiltrator from your perspective?  No.  The idea of a soldier having to be able to kill as fast as the SI or be as good a medic as the SI or survive as well as the SI is great, but this isn't Cloak Effect 3.  Even if we doubled the bonuses you get from Adrenaline Rush, wouldn't you still be saying the same thing?  

Given that all a Soldier really brings is damage(They could spec for CS but then they aren't doing damage anymore), I would hope that the class that also has god like survivability can't also do significantly more dps than the Soldier.

I do think that Soldiers can do just fine though, but they need to fix a few game mechanics such as armour punishing faster weapons to the point where things like the GPR are just irrelevant vs an armoured target.

[Atheosis]

Drummernate wrote...

Atheosis wrote...

Drummernate wrote...

Bronze is for N7 level 1-50. Learning MP basics.

Silver is for your Average Joe looking to have fun while playing but still get some creds to upgrade stuff.

Gold is for masochist who enjoy extreme difficulty and dying painfully and often to some pretty bull$#% staggers.

Silver is the way to go when testing weapons... until they release Onyx difficulty levels!

There's nothing masochistic about Gold.  It's not that hard.

On Firebase Ghost/Reactor without any Salarians or Adepts, it can be quite hard.

Especially when you have to roll with level 12's because they refuse to use level 20's.

Under certain circumstances yes, it can be hard.  I'm just saying it's not a masochistic level of hard.  Personally I've beaten Gold dozens of times playing with PUG's with no mic while playing classes that don't fall into the power class category.  If PUG's are regularly beating Gold without voice, it's not that hard.

[CheetahZ1]

TexasToast712 wrote...

Run out of logic so you resort to insults. I see how far your intelligence goes.

This is starting to get off topic, but I can still enjoy the fact that everyone who disagrees with you is bad. Then saying this is just ironic.

[TexasToast712]

Yes, this topic has gone to hell.

Modifié par TexasToast712, 30 mars 2012 - 03:09 .

[Drummernate]

Soldiers are fine now... Infiltrators are good at killing single enemies, but when you need the group of 6 people killed fast....

Call the soldier and his frags, adrenaline, marksman, and weapon damage bonuses.

Your pitiful Widow does nothing against 3 phantoms in CQB.

The assault rifles and frags do.

Modifié par Drummernate, 30 mars 2012 - 03:12 .

[Silvair]

zephuurs wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

zephuurs wrote...

TexasToast712 wrote...

I'm judging by the ability to survive and kill. Score is irrelevant. This is a coop game. 

So in your mind a soldier with your weapon of choice has equal suvivability/ability to kill on gold compared to a Salarian Infiltrator with a Black Widow/Widow/Javelin. What a joke 

So what build is this mythical soldier using and how is he able to kill....let's say an Atlas/Geth Prime as fast as the SI? Oh, and what build is this soldier using to be as good as a medic the SI can be? Oh, and what build is this soldier using to survive compared to a SI that can cloak and reposition?

Adrenaline Rush + Revenant + Pierce + extended mag = dead prime real fast. 

You want to keep arguing yourself into a hole? I can do this all night, pal.

You really didn't answer my entire question but I understand this because you don't have a good answer. As for your solution, a SI kills it faster with higher burst damage due to higher armor penetration. The DPS of the soldier is irrelevant because it is hard to sustain that DPS without taking cover, thus burst damage is favored here.The SI doesn't have to re-expose himself often as he doesn't have to empty a whole clip to do relatively mediocre damage. I would explain using the armor fomula as well as the weapon damage statistics of the weapons but since you don't really use logic to substantiate your claims it's really not worth the time 

I love how you think that taking cover matters so much.  That's only situational

That's the beauty to soldiers, is that they can kill things just as fast as they can kill you.  They have maximum firepower. :happy:

Between grenades, concussive shot, adrenaline rush, revenant and weapon upgrades, not much else can compete in terms of pure sustained offensive power.  Salarians/others have to do hit and run with burst damage, while Soldiers can just mow things down.

Do you understand now? 

[Silvair]

ANYHOO, back on topic.

Silver is Normal, and should be the standard everything is based upon.

Gold is an extreme only played by the minority, so its almost counterproductive to the overall game to use it as the standard.

[aimlessgun]

Silvair wrote...

ANYHOO, back on topic.

Silver is Normal, and should be the standard everything is based upon.

Gold is an extreme only played by the minority, so its almost counterproductive to the overall game to use it as the standard.

I havn't read a convincing reason why. Just because something is "normal" means nothing to me. I think the assumption that changing things for gold will screw up other difficulties is unwarranted. 

Modifié par aimlessgun, 30 mars 2012 - 04:26 .

[Silvair]

aimlessgun wrote...

Silvair wrote...

ANYHOO, back on topic.

Silver is Normal, and should be the standard everything is based upon.

Gold is an extreme only played by the minority, so its almost counterproductive to the overall game to use it as the standard.

I havn't read a convincing reason why. Just because something is "normal" means nothing to me. I think the assumption that changing things for gold will screw up other difficulties is unwarranted. 

How is it unwarranted?  By adjusting and scaling everything according to gold, it effectively makes Bronze and Silver totally obsolete.  The weapons and powers are based on the toughest enemies (gold).  So, people find the single quickest way to take out a Gold.  Which will be an INSTANT takeout on the regular difficulties.

It just removes all SENSE of difficulty.  If everything is based on gold, then everything is too easy on Bronze and Silver to the point of negligence, and Gold itself is no longer hard.

Not to mention,
Gold can't be the standard, because it's the hardest difficulty.  You literally can't have a "standard" without something weaker (bronze) and stronger (gold) to scale it with.  There's no point of reference if you only focus on the top end.

[Dannomight]

How is it unwarranted?  By adjusting and scaling everything according to gold, it effectively makes Bronze and Silver totally obsolete.  The weapons and powers are based on the toughest enemies (gold).  So, people find the single quickest way to take out a Gold.  Which will be an INSTANT takeout on the regular difficulties.

It just removes all SENSE of difficulty.  If everything is based on gold, then everything is too easy on Bronze and Silver to the point of negligence, and Gold itself is no longer hard.

That simply isn't true. That would mean that whatever currently is viable on Gold would currently be too good on silver or bronze. Asari adepts and infiltrators are considered viable on Gold, but don't ruin bronze or silver.

If something is viable on Gold then the top tier players can use it there, and the more casual ones can use it on bronze and silver, the way it is now. Making everything usable on Gold won't ruin bronze and silver, because player skill is a factor.

Not to mention,
Gold can't be the standard, because it's the hardest difficulty.  You literally can't have a "standard" without something weaker (bronze) and stronger (gold) to scale it with.  There's no point of reference if you only focus on the top end.

Anything can be the 'standard' in something like this. Standard is whatever you decide it is, not whatever falls exactly in the middle. 

[Waykam]

I still think the fact that high level weapons like the Black Widow gives less weight encumberance so you get a higher CD bonus is stupid. You shouldn't be able to cloak, snipe, reload, cloak, snipe, reload for example.... It totally removes the need to think tactically about your biotics/weapons.

You're able to take one of the most powerful weapons, level it up to X so it can give you an even greater advantage. There is no balance between power and weight encumberance, the type of balance that would help the weapon classes by forcing a choice between high weapon damage or high biotic damage rather than giving a player both.

Soldiers having more powerful weapons (bonus to carry weight becomes useful) and less biotic abilities can have a low CD bonus thanks to grenades and then biotics become more situational rather than spamming AR or Marksman as often as possible to boost DPS.

Weapon damage could be increased as having a more powerful weapon would actually hinder your biotic abilities, you want to cloak snipe every shot take a lower power rifle which actually needs the cloak boost. Want to snipe then use cloak to relocate once enemies start closing and you can take the Widow/BW. Same goes for Adepts, enemies get too close to use biotics effectively and you're out of luck because you have less weapon damage.

Krogans would get a much needed boost for lower skilled players in Silver and Gold (yes, we know everyone says they're a gaming god that can kill a Prime on Gold with a spoon but thats not possible for the majority) as with greater weight carrying ability the could carry 2 extremely powerful weapons that would be impossible/unfeasable for other characters. From what I've seen the character weight limits are pointless as there are no 2 weapons together that would exceed the maximum weight.

[january42]

Not to mention,
Gold can't be the standard, because it's the hardest difficulty.  You literally can't have a "standard" without something weaker (bronze) and stronger (gold) to scale it with.  There's no point of reference if you only focus on the top end.

You can make Gold the standard. Make gold the standard at it's current difficulty.

What people are saying is you could increase the variety of builds that are viable on gold without really making it easier. You don't need to increase the power of the stuff that works(nor do you need to nerf it).  

What should be done is fix the stuff that doesn't work.

[GodlessPaladin]

TexasToast712 wrote...
You seem to lack the comprehension.

...You answered his question with "nuh-uh" and a restatement of your original unsubstantiated conclusion.  I've never seen you actually provide logical support for your claims, and he's right to point out that you did not answer his full question (which considered other factors than just weapon damage).  Saying that you did indicates a lack of reading comprehension.

TexasToast712 wrote...
Run out of logic so you resort to insults. I see how far your intelligence goes.[smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/lol.png[/smilie]

From a neutral outsider's point of view, it looks an awful lot like you started throwing insults first, and moreover were using them as if they somehow supported your arguments, which is a logical fallacy (argument ad hominem).

___

That said, this game designer's thoughts on the argument are basically thus:  When you can feel the indecision between two choices, that's balance, right there.  If one choice is clearly better than another, then it is imbalanced by definition.  What exactly do people think the word balance means if they make statements like "If one weapon is far worse than another, it's still balanced" (a sentiment I've seen multiple times on this thread)?  Said posters seem to throw around the word "balance" as if it was a magical buzzword for "the way I like it."  If you aren't talking about competitive viability of options, then what the heck does the word balance MEAN to you?

Modifié par GodlessPaladin, 30 mars 2012 - 02:03 .

[Homey C-Dawg]

Due to my excessive amount of time spent playing RTS games, I tent to believe in a top-down approach to game balance. Most of the time I find that balancing for the hardest difficulty balances the lower difficulties at well, but the reverse usually isn't true.

[Dorje Sylas]

Unlike economies, game pay balances best top down. Just look at established physical sports. While they began at bottom level, you can see the biggest impact rule changes at the professional level.

Gold is ME3 MPs "pro" level. If there was ever going to be an E-sport cast of speed runs or point totals (stretching out event waves as long as possible) it would be Gold that would be used because it would be the most exciting "skillful" to watch.

Even as a primarily PuG Silver player I agree that Gold should be where BioWare looks to the efficacy of classes, skills, and weapons. However some folks may not like that fact that some options are intended to be weaker then others, and thus will by design not be as viable.