232 réponses à ce sujet

[Mysterious Stranger 0.0]

GodlessPaladin wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...
Not familiar with how to do it i believe you need something called a video capture card. or just use a video camera

Or you can just take some pics with a camera of the scoreboard and a few during the match(of wave 10 soloing the objective is the most important pic)

I won't care if it's crappy quality.

Heres a post responding to your claims of soloing gold with multiple classes.

I'm waiting.

Aren't capture cards expensive?  IF so, I'm unwilling to shell out an excessive amount of money to impress some guy on the internet.

Anyways, if you really don't care about bad quality, I can do that, but don't say I didn't warn you. It's really bad :-

I will post videos as soon as I get some time to make new runs.

Off a quick google search i see what i think are capture cards for as low as 9 dollars. Although i don't know the quality or know how they work ect...


But dosen't matter i'll accept your low quality proof once you have it. 

[GodlessPaladin]

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...  Congratulations you just misused the term straw man arguement.

No, I didn't.  You "countered" my argument by countering a position I didn't actually express, which is a straw man argument.  And I also spelled argument right.

I claimed that Asari can kill Cerberus enemies, with the express exception of Atlasses, faster than Salarian Infiltrators under any realistic conditions.  Which is true.  Especially against Phantoms, unless you claim to have *actually perfect* aim and always get a headshot on a Phantom in full motion.  Or know some super secret method for reliably targeting their heads at any time of day that I don't.

You argued against this claim by... claiming that they don't kill Atlasses or non-Cerberus enemies as fast.  Which doesn't actually counter the claim I made.  <_<

http://www.nizkor.or.../straw-man.html

Modifié par GodlessPaladin, 07 avril 2012 - 09:11 .

[Mysterious Stranger 0.0]

Varthun wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

Varthun wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

You can't seriously think 4 biotics is going to be an easier match than 4 infillies simply because it will be faster? The Infillies have slighlty lower dps and no Aoe. thats why it's slower. not because it's more difficult for them. 

Just as an interjection, the rationalization behind using an Infiltrator both in the tier list thread, and even in this thread is because they made the run "faster".

The tier list thread was for score potential. 
This thread only asked for the tier list which i provided. 

This is not, strictly speaking, true. When Infiltrators and the tier list started coming under fire, the counter-argument produced relied on speedruns of gold, and the fact that the ones currently publicized contained classes from T1-1.2

True and i posted what i consider to be a perfect speed run team earlier. But do not consider that to be a viable factor for the tier list and the list holds up just as well. 

[Varthun]

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

Varthun wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

Varthun wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

You can't seriously think 4 biotics is going to be an easier match than 4 infillies simply because it will be faster? The Infillies have slighlty lower dps and no Aoe. thats why it's slower. not because it's more difficult for them. 

Just as an interjection, the rationalization behind using an Infiltrator both in the tier list thread, and even in this thread is because they made the run "faster".

The tier list thread was for score potential. 
This thread only asked for the tier list which i provided. 

This is not, strictly speaking, true. When Infiltrators and the tier list started coming under fire, the counter-argument produced relied on speedruns of gold, and the fact that the ones currently publicized contained classes from T1-1.2

True and i posted what i consider to be a perfect speed run team earlier. But do not consider that to be a viable factor for the tier list and the list holds up just as well. 

Actually... it doesn't. There's only a finite amount of points in a game, so a team of 4 Salarian infiltrators will earn just as many if not less points than a team of random classes. The only variable that changes is how fast the run goes. "Easy" is not a variable in part because it cannot be measured and also in part because communication determines ease, not class type.

[Mysterious Stranger 0.0]

GodlessPaladin wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...  Congratulations you just misused the term straw man arguement.

No I didn't.  You "countered" my argument by countering a position I didn't actually express, which is a straw man argument.  And I also spelled argument right.

From wikipedia
"
A straw man[/b] is a component of an argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.[1][2] "

You claimed Asari weapon dps was better. I countered with the fact that it's not in anyway shape or form. That a infilly using the carn could out dps a Asari using one and that a infilly using the widow could outdps the asari using the carn against the enemies that are actually tough. 

So do tell if i was doing a strawman arguement what was i misuderstanding about your position it seemed pretty clear you thought a asari with carn had higher weapon damage than the infilly. 

[GodlessPaladin]

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

GodlessPaladin wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...  Congratulations you just misused the term straw man arguement.

No I didn't.  You "countered" my argument by countering a position I didn't actually express, which is a straw man argument.  And I also spelled argument right.

From wikipedia
"
A straw man[/b] is a component of an argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.[1][2] "

  And that is an accurate description of what you just did.  you "attacked" my position by saying that infiltrators did more damage against Atlasses and non-Cerberus enemies, thus making my claim preposterous, whereas my actual and unequivalent claim was that Asari eliminated Cerberus enemies faster with the exception of Atlasses.  Therefore, you were arguing against a highly distorted version of my argument and not actually refuting the original position.

You claimed Asari weapon dps was better. I countered with the fact that it's not in anyway shape or form. That a infilly using the carn could out dps a Asari using one and that a infilly using the widow could outdps the asari using the carn against the enemies that are actually tough. 

So do tell if i was doing a strawman arguement what was i misuderstanding about your position it seemed pretty clear you thought a asari with carn had higher weapon damage than the infilly.

I said that it kills Cerberus enemies (except Atlasses) faster.  You're STILL using straw man arguments.
Raw weapon DPS is not a PRACTICAL measurement of damage rate, because it does not account for things like wasted overflow damage.

Modifié par GodlessPaladin, 07 avril 2012 - 09:16 .

[Mysterious Stranger 0.0]

Varthun wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

Varthun wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

Varthun wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

You can't seriously think 4 biotics is going to be an easier match than 4 infillies simply because it will be faster? The Infillies have slighlty lower dps and no Aoe. thats why it's slower. not because it's more difficult for them. 

Just as an interjection, the rationalization behind using an Infiltrator both in the tier list thread, and even in this thread is because they made the run "faster".

The tier list thread was for score potential. 
This thread only asked for the tier list which i provided. 

This is not, strictly speaking, true. When Infiltrators and the tier list started coming under fire, the counter-argument produced relied on speedruns of gold, and the fact that the ones currently publicized contained classes from T1-1.2

True and i posted what i consider to be a perfect speed run team earlier. But do not consider that to be a viable factor for the tier list and the list holds up just as well. 

Actually... it doesn't. There's only a finite amount of points in a game, so a team of 4 Salarian infiltrators will earn just as many if not less points than a team of random classes. The only variable that changes is how fast the run goes. "Easy" is not a variable in part because it cannot be measured and also in part because communication determines ease, not class type.

I disagree, A classes ability to accomplish difficult task should be the main factor when designing the tier list even if it is not measurable. 

[GodlessPaladin]

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote... I disagree, A classes ability to accomplish difficult task should be the main factor when designing the tier list even if it is not measurable.

Everything that is observable is measurable.  If it's not observable... then it is impossible for there to be evidence to support your claim.

Ease of use is measurable.  However, by general convention, the ease of learning to use a class is not considered when constructing tier lists (the very idea is laughed at in things like fighting game forums).  If it was, then people would object to, say, Magneto being top tier in MvC2 because tri-jumps are hard to execute.

Modifié par GodlessPaladin, 07 avril 2012 - 09:28 .

[Mysterious Stranger 0.0]

GodlessPaladin wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

"Not true!  Asari headshots will kill faster than they do against Cerberus.  With equipment, it's 3 carnifex shots for Phantoms, 2 for shielded enemies, 1 for unshielded, and I don't care how bloody well you can aim... you can aim better, faster, and more often with Stasis.  And heck, if you're slick, you can do things like catch 4 enemies at a time... stasis, divide a few shots amongst the group, and then charge to send the whole group flying. "
Actually i've responded multiple times and you've not shown the proof i'd love to see it.

  Where?  I see no responses to my multiple direct queries to you about how I should go about getting you a video.

and asari headshots<<<<<<<Cloaked infilly shots. Thats not even close. Especially considering half of the toughest enemies don't even have head multipliers.

  Congratulations, you have just proved that math does not matter to you.  You fail.  The end.

Widow or BW vs unshielded Cerberus goon:  1 shot.
Carnifex vs unshielded Cerberus  goon:  1 shot, and it's FASTER, both because of the guns capacity/fire rate and because you aren't waiting for cloak cooldowns.

Widow or BW vs shielded Cerberus goon:  2 shots.
Carnifex vs unshielded Cerberus  goon:  2 shots, and it's FASTER, both because of the gun's capacity/fire rate and because you aren't waiting for cloak cooldowns.

Widow or BW vs Phantom:  2 headshots if you have perfect aim and they aren't using their abilities successfully.
Carnifex vs Phantom:  3 shots, and stasis means you have perfect aim and they aren't using their abilities period.  Oh yeah, and you still get out shots with the Carnifex faster!

Here are your original statments  no where is the atlas mentioned by you. 
You simply say the asari can kill cerebrus faster than the Infilly which is not true. 

[Varthun]

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

I disagree, A classes ability to accomplish difficult task should be the main factor when designing the tier list even if it is not measurable. 

And how do you decided (in a non-arbitrary way) what is difficult? I may find killing banshees extraordinarily difficult, but a biotic detonating Asari Adept may find them easy.

Modifié par Varthun, 07 avril 2012 - 09:20 .

[TLK Spires]

tier list? are you ****ing serious? go back to SRK where you can complain about frame data and shotokans, this is a co-op, 4 player, non-competitive, sci-fi rpg/shooter, not a fighting game.


NOW it's getting a little silly.

[GodlessPaladin]

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

GodlessPaladin wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

"Not true!  Asari headshots will kill faster than they do against Cerberus.  With equipment, it's 3 carnifex shots for Phantoms, 2 for shielded enemies, 1 for unshielded, and I don't care how bloody well you can aim... you can aim better, faster, and more often with Stasis.  And heck, if you're slick, you can do things like catch 4 enemies at a time... stasis, divide a few shots amongst the group, and then charge to send the whole group flying. "
Actually i've responded multiple times and you've not shown the proof i'd love to see it.

  Where?  I see no responses to my multiple direct queries to you about how I should go about getting you a video.

and asari headshots<<<<<<<Cloaked infilly shots. Thats not even close. Especially considering half of the toughest enemies don't even have head multipliers.

  Congratulations, you have just proved that math does not matter to you.  You fail.  The end.

Widow or BW vs unshielded Cerberus goon:  1 shot.
Carnifex vs unshielded Cerberus  goon:  1 shot, and it's FASTER, both because of the guns capacity/fire rate and because you aren't waiting for cloak cooldowns.

Widow or BW vs shielded Cerberus goon:  2 shots.
Carnifex vs unshielded Cerberus  goon:  2 shots, and it's FASTER, both because of the gun's capacity/fire rate and because you aren't waiting for cloak cooldowns.

Widow or BW vs Phantom:  2 headshots if you have perfect aim and they aren't using their abilities successfully.
Carnifex vs Phantom:  3 shots, and stasis means you have perfect aim and they aren't using their abilities period.  Oh yeah, and you still get out shots with the Carnifex faster!

Here are your original statments  no where is the atlas mentioned by you.

Those are not my original statements.  Look earlier in the thread.

Incidentally, you're correct in saying that those posts DO NOT mention that Asari kill Atlasses faster.  BECAUSE I NEVER BLOODY CLAIMED THEY DID.

You simply say the asari can kill cerebrus faster than the Infilly which is not true.

Except... yeah it is.  They will kill off the Cerberus army faster than the Infiltrator.  The only thing they don't do faster than the infiltrator is finishing off the two Atlasses that are left after all the respawns have stopped.  By contrast, Infiltrators have a much harder time dealing with swarms of Cerberus's most important unit:   Phantoms.

Modifié par GodlessPaladin, 07 avril 2012 - 09:26 .

[Mysterious Stranger 0.0]

GodlessPaladin wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote... I disagree, A classes ability to accomplish difficult task should be the main factor when designing the tier list even if it is not measurable.

Everything that is observable is measurable.  If it's not observable... then there it is impossible for there to be evidence to support your claim.

The soloing of gold only being done by Infillies is the only observable evidence i have. And i think thats enough until you show your proof of soloing gold with the other classes. 

Bioware could also release statistics regarding gold which i imagine would provide further evidence to the difficulty of various classes accomplishing gold although it would be highly circumstantial. 

[Varthun]

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

GodlessPaladin wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote... I disagree, A classes ability to accomplish difficult task should be the main factor when designing the tier list even if it is not measurable.

Everything that is observable is measurable.  If it's not observable... then there it is impossible for there to be evidence to support your claim.

The soloing of gold only being done by Infillies is the only observable evidence i have. And i think thats enough until you show your proof of soloing gold with the other classes. 

Bioware could also release statistics regarding gold which i imagine would provide further evidence to the difficulty of various classes accomplishing gold although it would be highly circumstantial. 

Gimicky gameplay does not a good class make. Example: There is a rogue in World of Warcraft that can, through various environmental tricks and clever gameplay, solo bosses which prior to those attempts were considered unsoloable. Does that mean rogues are the best class in the game?

[Mysterious Stranger 0.0]

Varthun wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

I disagree, A classes ability to accomplish difficult task should be the main factor when designing the tier list even if it is not measurable. 

And how do you decided (in a non-arbitrary way) what is difficult? I may find killing banshees extraordinarily difficult, but a biotic detonating Asari Adept may find them easy.

Based on utility. 

Like i said it's hard to argue doing most things is harder with an Infilly than an asari.  Objectives,soloing, and reviving are all considered easier to do with the Infilly by most more so than anyother class. It''s not measurable by anything other than by testimony and opinion. Although that is of course arbitrary but if you ignore  all arbirtrary information then tier list are completley irrelevant always because anyone could suck at doing what ever is considered the best way to handle things. 

[Mysterious Stranger 0.0]

Varthun wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

GodlessPaladin wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote... I disagree, A classes ability to accomplish difficult task should be the main factor when designing the tier list even if it is not measurable.

Everything that is observable is measurable.  If it's not observable... then there it is impossible for there to be evidence to support your claim.

The soloing of gold only being done by Infillies is the only observable evidence i have. And i think thats enough until you show your proof of soloing gold with the other classes. 

Bioware could also release statistics regarding gold which i imagine would provide further evidence to the difficulty of various classes accomplishing gold although it would be highly circumstantial. 

Gimicky gameplay does not a good class make. Example: There is a rogue in World of Warcraft that can, through various environmental tricks and clever gameplay, solo bosses which prior to those attempts were considered unsoloable. Does that mean rogues are the best class in the game?

So long as those enviormental tricks are not considered exploits If then yes at least for handling those bosses. 

[Varthun]

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

Varthun wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

I disagree, A classes ability to accomplish difficult task should be the main factor when designing the tier list even if it is not measurable. 

And how do you decided (in a non-arbitrary way) what is difficult? I may find killing banshees extraordinarily difficult, but a biotic detonating Asari Adept may find them easy.

Based on utility. 

Like i said it's hard to argue doing most things is harder with an Infilly than an asari.  Objectives,soloing, and reviving are all considered easier to do with the Infilly by most more so than anyother class. It''s not measurable by anything other than by testimony and opinion. Although that is of course arbitrary but if you ignore  all arbirtrary information then tier list are completley irrelevant always because anyone could suck at doing what ever is considered the best way to handle things. 

This is verifiably untrue. No other tier list that is even remotely respectable has anything to do with opinion or testimony. LoL tier lists, MMO BiS lists (mechanically the same thing) are created based on hard data. No one says "I felt like I had a better game because I used Swain" or "because I had a blue hat". It is based exclusively on data.

People ignore arbitrary data all the time in a tier list. When you rate one hero from HoN against another, any arbitrary data (like player skill) is discarded because to include such a thing would make the list impossible to create.

I'm sorry, but this is just simply not true.

[Mysterious Stranger 0.0]

GodlessPaladin wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

Atheosis wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

RazRei wrote...

DRUNK_CANADIAN wrote...

Well in general the top tier characters are Asari Adept, Salarian Infiltrator.

Everything else is inferior on gold, but on a per class basis, Krogan sentinel, Human Vanguard, Quarian Engineer (could argue Salarian on this one), Turian Soldier (again could argue Krogan soldier).

Sorry but the Salarian Engineer and Human Engineer are Top Tier.

Actually speaking all the Infiltrator's are great.  The Human is all around good, Salarian is the "HOLD THE LINE," and the Quarian is situational.  

Human Sent specced out of Tech Armor is basicly a Human Adept, and the Turian Sent is good also.  I would consider them Mid/High

I would hold all soldiers in the Mid Tier.  The Turian is okay and I have to finally agree that ifyou're the host the Turian Soldier with a Falcon is a monster.  The BF3 Soldier > Korgan.

Vanguards and especially the NovaGuard is silver tier with them showing some use in Gold with a lot of restranit and team work with Adepts....

Then you have the Adept especially the Asari + Drell combo that can explode their way to the top.

Sorry Infillys are the only top tier classes. Nothing stacks up to the utility of cloak even decoy and combat drone pale in comparison. 

If you are talking about solo runs by extremely good players, this statement is true.  If you are talking about actually playing the game in a coop manner, this statement is beyond ridiculous.

No it's not.

Infillys have the highest weapon damage of all classes, are the best at capturing objectives, the best medics, and have the best Suvivability. There's no question that the Infillys are a large step ahead of all other classes. 

-Infiltrators are pretty much the best heavy weapons-reliant class, sure, but that doesn't cut things like Adepts or Vanguards out of the game.  Even when you are just looking at weapon performance, an Asari Vanguard pops just about as many heads against Cerberus as a highly skilled Black Widow infiltrator (heck, phantoms are just 3 carnifex bullets if you're using equipment boosts.  Unshielded enemies are 1, and shielded enemies like Centurions are 2).

This is all i could find relating to asari weapon dps. And it's another terrible arguement. You claim that the asari vanguard is equal in weapon preformance because she can kill a few enemies at almost the same speed as the infilly. Infillies aren't the best heavy weapons class. They are the best weapons class period.

[Varthun]

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

Varthun wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

GodlessPaladin wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote... I disagree, A classes ability to accomplish difficult task should be the main factor when designing the tier list even if it is not measurable.

Everything that is observable is measurable.  If it's not observable... then there it is impossible for there to be evidence to support your claim.

The soloing of gold only being done by Infillies is the only observable evidence i have. And i think thats enough until you show your proof of soloing gold with the other classes. 

Bioware could also release statistics regarding gold which i imagine would provide further evidence to the difficulty of various classes accomplishing gold although it would be highly circumstantial. 

Gimicky gameplay does not a good class make. Example: There is a rogue in World of Warcraft that can, through various environmental tricks and clever gameplay, solo bosses which prior to those attempts were considered unsoloable. Does that mean rogues are the best class in the game?

So long as those enviormental tricks are not considered exploits If then yes at least for handling those bosses. 

Except we have data to support that rogues were the worst class in the game against that boss. Least damage delt, least utility provided. Could they perhaps end up solo'ing the boss through clever usage of ability? Perhaps. But in a practical situation, they were worse than any other class.

Gimicky gameplay does not a good class make.

[GodlessPaladin]

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...
Like i said it's hard to argue doing most things is harder with an Infilly than an asari.  Objectives,soloing, and reviving are all considered easier to do with the Infilly by most more so than anyother class.

  I don't think anyone contested infiltrators having an advantage in things like device objectives.

It''s not measurable by anything other than by testimony and opinion.

  This isn't true.

[robarcool]

Dasher1010 wrote...

I'm going to guess that Human Vanguard and Asari Adept are at the top and Human Soldier and Drellguard are at the bottom.

Well, add Salarian Infiltrator to the top tier and we are in business.

[GodlessPaladin]

So I suck at this video thing.

>_< I just accidentally deleted the last ten minutes of an Asari Vanguard gold solo when editing it into 15 minute chunks for Youtube to accept. So I only have the first 30 minutes. Guess I'll have to run it again :-\\

Said first attempt of the day had me fail at Wave 10 anyways because I got a device objective and ran out of time on the fourth device (the ONE thing that gives me trouble soloing as a non-infiltrator).  I never said I had a 100% success rate when soloing. 

Had ZERO issues with two hacking circle objectives, though, which is shown in the video I didn't accidentally destroy. 

Modifié par GodlessPaladin, 07 avril 2012 - 09:41 .

[Mysterious Stranger 0.0]

Varthun wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

Varthun wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

I disagree, A classes ability to accomplish difficult task should be the main factor when designing the tier list even if it is not measurable. 

And how do you decided (in a non-arbitrary way) what is difficult? I may find killing banshees extraordinarily difficult, but a biotic detonating Asari Adept may find them easy.

Based on utility. 

Like i said it's hard to argue doing most things is harder with an Infilly than an asari.  Objectives,soloing, and reviving are all considered easier to do with the Infilly by most more so than anyother class. It''s not measurable by anything other than by testimony and opinion. Although that is of course arbitrary but if you ignore  all arbirtrary information then tier list are completley irrelevant always because anyone could suck at doing what ever is considered the best way to handle things. 

This is verifiably untrue. No other tier list that is even remotely respectable has anything to do with opinion or testimony. LoL tier lists, MMO BiS lists (mechanically the same thing) are created based on hard data. No one says "I felt like I had a better game because I used Swain" or "because I had a blue hat". It is based exclusively on data.

People ignore arbitrary data all the time in a tier list. When you rate one hero from HoN against another, any arbitrary data (like player skill) is discarded because to include such a thing would make the list impossible to create.

I'm sorry, but this is just simply not true.

What about conflicting stats? If a  character has 7 Stat A,and 9 Stat B but another character has 9 Stat A , and 7 stat B how do they break down which is better without making an arbitrary arguement that Stat A is better than Stat B or vice versa assuming both stats are situational.

[GodlessPaladin]

Varthun wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

Varthun wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

I disagree, A classes ability to accomplish difficult task should be the main factor when designing the tier list even if it is not measurable. 

And how do you decided (in a non-arbitrary way) what is difficult? I may find killing banshees extraordinarily difficult, but a biotic detonating Asari Adept may find them easy.

Based on utility. 

Like i said it's hard to argue doing most things is harder with an Infilly than an asari.  Objectives,soloing, and reviving are all considered easier to do with the Infilly by most more so than anyother class. It''s not measurable by anything other than by testimony and opinion. Although that is of course arbitrary but if you ignore  all arbirtrary information then tier list are completley irrelevant always because anyone could suck at doing what ever is considered the best way to handle things. 

This is verifiably untrue. No other tier list that is even remotely respectable has anything to do with opinion or testimony. LoL tier lists, MMO BiS lists (mechanically the same thing) are created based on hard data. No one says "I felt like I had a better game because I used Swain" or "because I had a blue hat". It is based exclusively on data.

People ignore arbitrary data all the time in a tier list. When you rate one hero from HoN against another, any arbitrary data (like player skill) is discarded because to include such a thing would make the list impossible to create.

I'm sorry, but this is just simply not true.

Exactly.  As I've said many times before, by common and entirely reasonable convention player execution is assumed to be very high for the sake of tier lists, and as such Stranger's feelings about how "easy to use right" the Salarian Infiltrator is is irrelevant.

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...
What about conflicting stats?
If a  character has 7 Stat A,and 9 Stat B but another character has 9
Stat A , and 7 stat B how do they break down which is better without
making an arbitrary arguement that Stat A is better than Stat B or vice
versa assuming both stats are situational.

If the situations are different ENOUGH, then they might actually break it into different tier lists, such as an MMO having a separate tier list for PvE and PvP.  An example for ME3 would be a separate tier list for fighting Geth, Cerberus, and Reapers.

Modifié par GodlessPaladin, 07 avril 2012 - 09:48 .

[Mysterious Stranger 0.0]

Varthun wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

Varthun wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote...

GodlessPaladin wrote...

Mysterious Stranger 0.0 wrote... I disagree, A classes ability to accomplish difficult task should be the main factor when designing the tier list even if it is not measurable.

Everything that is observable is measurable.  If it's not observable... then there it is impossible for there to be evidence to support your claim.

The soloing of gold only being done by Infillies is the only observable evidence i have. And i think thats enough until you show your proof of soloing gold with the other classes. 

Bioware could also release statistics regarding gold which i imagine would provide further evidence to the difficulty of various classes accomplishing gold although it would be highly circumstantial. 

Gimicky gameplay does not a good class make. Example: There is a rogue in World of Warcraft that can, through various environmental tricks and clever gameplay, solo bosses which prior to those attempts were considered unsoloable. Does that mean rogues are the best class in the game?

So long as those enviormental tricks are not considered exploits If then yes at least for handling those bosses. 

Except we have data to support that rogues were the worst class in the game against that boss. Least damage delt, least utility provided. Could they perhaps end up solo'ing the boss through clever usage of ability? Perhaps. But in a practical situation, they were worse than any other class.

Gimicky gameplay does not a good class make.

How can they have the least utility when they can solo the boss? 
I wouldn't call that gimicky gameplay rather situational. But really dosen't apply to infillies since cloak is useful all around for dps,Survivability,Objectives, and reviving. 

If we cut out all arbitrary info then the infilly will be around tier 3 which is just going to be a mistake. Cloak isn't comparable to other powers through base numbers that dosen't make the poweuseless.