182 réponses à ce sujet

[RazRei]

Sabbatine wrote...
It's easy to be underwhelmed by weapons you do not know how to use.

Sorry troll can't hear you over Kimbra.

[Shadowsword8]

The only thing really wrong with weapon balance is that armor should reduce XX% of incoming damage, not a flat amount per bullet.

[ElementL09]

Weapon Balance isn't fine the way it is now.

[Sabbatine]

RazRei wrote...

Sabbatine wrote...
It's easy to be underwhelmed by weapons you do not know how to use.

Sorry troll can't hear you over Kimbra.

Such a typical response from someone who knows his argument was just shot to pieces.  Can't refute the argument so you resort to petty insults towards the person behind it.

[Arppis]

Wait so Katana is useless on gold?

[RazRei]

Sabbatine wrote...
Such a typical response from someone who knows his argument was just shot to pieces.  Can't refute the argument so you resort to petty insults towards the person behind it.

Nope, because most of the weapons in this game are trash.  When you enter gold you'll have people using the lightest weight weapon for power users.  NO point other than that for that weapon.  For actual WEAPON users you'll always see the same weapons because this games weapons are "balanced."

I've used the scorpion to my liking on my engineer class but it sure as hell wsn't optimal. 

And please don't try to assume that I don't know how to use the weapon "right."

[Talikurppa]

I think weight should affect a lot of how weapon dmg goes, ofc rarity etc have to be taken into account. But for example i wouldnt mind having some very heavy AR's, shotguns that while gimping your power spam, actually boosted your overall weapon dmg. Which in turn would allow you to compete vs biotics etc with purely guns (or doesnt such niche playstyle belong to this game?). Currently you can have good weapon dmg, while beign light with headshot weapons, this naturally amplify even more strong biotic users. How about having some guns beign heavy and not relying on headshots, lower even the headshot dmg of them if it matters. But really i want to see stuff with punch other than using heavy pistols like Paladin or sniper rifles like Black widow.

[Lycidas]

The elitism that goes round in this thread is disgusting.
Expecting all weapons to be perfectly equal in viability on Gold does not make sense at all.
1. Rare weapons should always outperform common ones. That's the entire point of rarity system.
2. The highest difficulty is always for cookie cutter period. You simply should not expect every skill/weapon build to be equally effective.

Shadowsword8 wrote...

The only thing really wrong with weapon balance is that armor should reduce XX% of incoming damage, not a flat amount per bullet.

Have you actually put some thought into this? While it _might_ help AR's and SMG's (depending on the %) it would gimp every high damage per hit weapon like sniper rifles.

Modifié par Lycidas, 02 avril 2012 - 08:10 .

[squidney2k1]

Aranha wrote...

Sabbatine wrote...

Plerion wrote...

Seriously, why is the lightweight Phalanx pistol at equal or better DPS than most of the assualt rifles? 
Most of the weapons, including all of the SMGs, are completely obsolete.

Really?  List five non-SMG weapons that are completely obsolete.

Plerion wrote... 

The Carnifex, Black Widow, Geth Plasma Shotgun basically dominate the multiplayer.

Wow really?  You'd think everyone would be using them if this were the case...

Plerion wrote... 

There is a short list of alternative weapons that are arguably useful in certain circumstances, but for the most part, many of the other weapons are entirely useless.

Ok, list five more (that do not appear on your other list) non-smg weapons that are entirely useless.

Sounds like you havent started playing gold yet mate. 80% or auto ARs and SMGs hit armored targets for 5 damage per bullet as there is a 50 damage reduced per shot without Armor Pierce. Useless!

Everyone is using the Carniflex, Black Widow and Geth Plasma Shotgun those are the most used guns in the game + Widow, Paladin.

Entirely useless on Gold:

[*]M-3 Predator[*]M-23 Katana[*]M-4 Shuriken
[*]M-8 Avenger
[/list][*]M-22 Eviscerator[*]M-9 Tempest[*]M-12 Locust[*]M-13 Raptor[*]M-27 Scimitar[*]M-97 Viper[*]M-29 Incisor
[*]Phaeston
[/list][*]Geth Pulse Rifle
[*]Arc Pistol
[*]M-37 Falcon[*]M-76 Revenant[/list]Pretty much by picking any of these weapons gimps your team on GOLD!

The Scimitar, Revenant, Eviscerator, & Phaeston do not deserve to be one that list. They are all very viable weapons on Gold. The Avenger is also a decent weapon choice just because of its low weight.

[nicethugbert]

Oh, this again. I don't care about balance. It has nothing to do with fun.

For all the complaining about balance, I've never seen someone suggest a better alternative. It's all just a bunch of number pushing because some weapons are popular and some are not. Whatever.

[KarmaZ]

How about you try killing some banshees and primes with Locust X or Shuriken X, then come back telling me SMGs are fine.
Or go ahead crush some phantom buttocks with Geth Pulse Rifle hows that?

[BiO]

Geth Pulse Rifle is pretty baws at lvl II, even on Gold. I don't know what you guys are talking about. Never seen a weapon have such healing capabilities like that. I even used it once to heal a Banshee and she came over and hugged me.

Tsk tsk.

[Maria Caliban]

Sabbatine wrote...

The Carnifex, Black Widow, Geth Plasma Shotgun basically dominate the multiplayer.

Wow really?  You'd think everyone would be using them if this were the case...

If they could buy them, yes, we'd see a ton of them in MP. The reason they're rare is because unlocks are random.

RazRei wrote...

Sorry troll can't hear you over Kimbra.

/googles 'kimbra'
/finds youtube videos
/falls in love

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 02 avril 2012 - 09:06 .

[EVILFLUFFMONSTER]

Everyone is using a banshee to compare how good a weapon is. Yes, an assault rifle or SMG will be inferior against that enemy - but if you have a crowd of un-armoured enemies around you you can chew through them faster than some guy with a widow or geth shotgun ever could. This balance is upset however because the armoured and sheilded enemies are often the biggest threats, and on gold there is a crazy amount of these - forcing the team to specialize more towards being able to kill them rather than "normals".

On silver or bronze however I can pretty easily take out large groups of enemies fast using some of these "awful" weapons on my soldier class. Last time I played I was re-levelling my soldier as I had just promoted him and taking the headshot bonuses in marksman and training for the turian, combined with the marksman powers accuracy boost made AR's simply decimate groups fast. I didnt even find sheilded enemies to be much of a problem either - and as soon as I tried picking ammo equipment alongside I was soon chewing through brutes and banshees. I cant wait until I unlock armour peircing mods, which make assault rifle perfectly viable choices when levelled up.

Granted Pistols still have the upper hand in terms of damage to weight, but just because a build isnt optimal doesnt mean a good player cannot do well with it. My point is - AR's and SMG's have a niche - clearing away the non-special enemies, whilst applying ammo effects to whole groups. Alongside people who specialise in taking down the power enemies you will both become more efficient.

The balance shift on gold towards power enemies rather than vastly increasing the amounts of normals takes away from the usability of these weapons - if instead you had huge swarms of husks and cannibals on some waves the usefulness of AR's and SMG's would become apparent, while your widow/GPS users struggle to take out targets fast enough and would quickly get overwhelmed (though this comparison is purposely ignoring the fact that a carnifex weilding adept/vanguard would clear house - how effective biotics are should not really factor into a weapon comparison unless I am focusing on the benefits of lighter weights). As it is, gold currently favours hit and run strategies using power weapons because of the choice of enemy balance, not because AR's are rubbish. If Bioware simply added much more normal unshielded unarmoured targets on some waves the balance would be restored somewhat.

[Chrumpek]

By the way, you guys that want buffs and stuff, you guys clear gold right? If so, what is the problem?

[EVILFLUFFMONSTER]

People want variety in weapon choice and class. If you pick certain weapons or classes you get kicked from most gold lobbies because those classes/weapons are considered a team liability.
Its annoying when you actually know how to use the class well, but someone else disagree's with your choices and decides to kick you - I even had it on bronze the other day when I was trying to use a level 1 character just after promoting. people kept kicking me until I chose a level 19 character..and changed back when they were all readied up to start the game! I actually did better than two of them with my level 1 than they did with their high level characters and I had to keep coming to revive THEM, and I wasnt far behind the top guy either. Its even worse though if you are trying to play Gold with a class other people dont like, or weapons they dont think are good.

[tvih]

Shadowsword8 wrote...

The only thing really wrong with weapon balance is that armor should reduce XX% of incoming damage, not a flat amount per bullet.

This is the biggest issue, agreed.

However it's still not the only balance issue by far. All weapons should be viable, like they are in, say, Battlefield 3. But take something like the Hornet and compare it with a Locust. If spreadsheets are to be trusted, the former does 936 DPS at level I, while the latter does 360 at level X. How's that for balance? And it's hardly the one comparison to make.

[SeanThen1]

I would say the Widow is the most commonly used weapon I see besides the avenger, but I think people use that thing a lot because it is your default weapon.

[SeanThen1]

Also, what the heck do people have against the Raptor? I love that gun. Even if it takes me 2-3 shots to equal the damage of your 1, I have the rate of fire to land them and then some. It is like the Mattock's big brother.

[Elecbender]

I will say this:

If you COULD kill a Banshee with a Locust, the weapon balance is more screwed up than it was initially.

[Autochthon]

I use basic weapons at X

Which is why I play Vanguard, Sentinel, Adept

[Lycidas]

tvih wrote...

Shadowsword8 wrote...

The only thing really wrong with weapon balance is that armor should reduce XX% of incoming damage, not a flat amount per bullet.

This is the biggest issue, agreed.

However it's still not the only balance issue by far. All weapons should be viable, like they are in, say, Battlefield 3. But take something like the Hornet and compare it with a Locust. If spreadsheets are to be trusted, the former does 936 DPS at level I, while the latter does 360 at level X. How's that for balance? And it's hardly the one comparison to make.

You can not compare a luck based unlock (drop) system (most RPG's) with a level based one (BF3). Tell me one RPG where a rare/ultra rare weapon is remotely comparable to a common one of the same level.

[BaeBunni]

I have a quick question for everyone that says Ar's suck. Does anyone take into account assault rifles have bonuses towards shields and barriers while pistols and snipers don't and only do extra armor damage? Is it possible that people can use assault rifles to deal with the more common enemies or shields/barriers while "pistols and snipers" can take out health and armor? As if we are playing some form of tactical cohesive team based game?

[RicHSAD]

The weapon balance is definitely bizarre in ME3. They added a weight system into the game, so you would think that weapons that weight more would be more powerful, but it is rarely the case. Most "heavy" pistols weight very little and they also do high damage per bullet. On top of that, you can just add a scope on them and they become nearly as accurate as snipers. Most Assault Rifles weight more than pistols, but yet they do less damage and are less accurate than the pistols. The way things are balanced just doesn't make any logical sense whatsoever.

BaeBunni wrote...
I have a quick question for everyone that says Ar's suck. Does anyone take into account assault rifles have bonuses towards shields and barriers while pistols and snipers don't and only do extra armor damage? Is it possible that people can use assault rifles to deal with the more common enemies or shields/barriers while "pistols and snipers" can take out health and armor? As if we are playing some form of tactical cohesive team based game?

Shields and barriers are a non issue. Powers like Overload and E-drain is all you need to deal with them. If shields and barriers weren't so easy to deal with, then perhaps there would be some value in using some the weapons, but the reality is that they are easily stripped using powers. The other issue is with the armor mechanic. Most of the dangerous enemies happen to be armor based and the way armor works in ME3 makes many weapons completely ineffective against it. Using a weapon that is ineffective against armor is really just gimping yourself and your team.

Modifié par RicHSAD, 02 avril 2012 - 01:36 .