62 réponses à ce sujet

[jrus018]

in SP soldier is mostly top 3rd tier on all class, while in MP... blows!

[thegamefreek78648]

In SP, Soldiers are the only class that can carry every gun and not have it impact their abilities much, high health, high shields.

[RGFrog]

I think the main problem was that the dev's said the soldier would be able to carry 4 weap's without punishment... What they failed to mention that it would require level X weapons and the 4 would have to be the worst possible weapons if you wanted to use any powers at all.

Having said that, though, with ammo powers, your cooldowns aren't even necessary and you can go into the red while carrying what you want. Soldier is a pure gun toting shooter. However, if you want tech powers you have to specialize somewhat to make the powers usable.

That's the excuse I gave myself on my soldier run through. Did just fine without using my own powers much at all. Spammed squad powers a bit. That wasn't too bad either, when they weren't running back to level starts or ignoring my targeting/cover commands.

[Omega-202]

How many weapons did you honestly use in ME2 on your Soldier? I NEVER found that there was any reason to use anything besides the Widow and Mattock.

With those two (or two similar guns) you an still be around or below 0% depending spec.

But the answer to your question of "How did the Soldier class get compensated" is Tech Bursts and Inferno Ammo. Any decent rifle with Disruptor Ammo 6 + Concussive Shot spam = Lightning Storm. Or if fire is more your speed, Revenant/GPR/Phaeston with Incendiary Ammo 6 w/ the explosion evolution = long range fire bombs.

The side effect of the weight system was bringing Adrenaline Rush in line and then they buffed the heck out of the ammo powers and their side effects.

[capn233]

Maxed incendiary ammo does ridiculous damage, and Disruptor Ammo now effects organics. CS can detonate tech bursts.

All in all, yes soldier is a bit more gimmicky than before. It is still a fun class, and worth playing to actually learn about the maps and decent strategy other then biotically exploding everything.  I do agree with the notion that having 4 or 5 weapons is somewhat pointless, and it was in ME1 and ME2 as well, but it was something of a neat feature.

To make it better, Soldier should have much more weight capacity, and the weapon weight and damage needs to be rescaled, with a large disaparity in weight between the heaviest and lightest weapons, as well as damage output that is proportional to weight. The highest damage weapons should NOT be viable on any caster class that wants a reasonable cooldown (which also means removing "cooldown reset on biotic detonation" whereever it exists). You could still take these weapons of course, but you should have to suffer with very long CD's. Of course, Infiltrator and Vanguard should have enough capacity to take one "heavy" weapon and a backup of a lighter variety.

Modifié par capn233, 18 avril 2012 - 09:30 .

[JaegerBane]

capn233 wrote...
To make it better, Soldier should have much more weight capacity, and the weapon weight and damage needs to be rescaled, with a large disaparity in weight between the heaviest and lightest weapons, as well as damage output that is proportional to weight. The highest damage weapons should NOT be viable on any caster class that wants a reasonable cooldown (which also means removing "cooldown reset on biotic detonation" whereever it exists). You could still take these weapons of course, but you should have to suffer with very long CD's. Of course, Infiltrator and Vanguard should have enough capacity to take one "heavy" weapon and a backup of a lighter variety.

I have to admit that I despise the entire idea about restricting weapons from the 'caster' classes in any way, and I'll keep despising it so long as the more combat orientated-classes get the same number of powers. Ultimately I don't have an issue with driving some kind of difference in the style of the classes, but I would expect that difference to treat the different classes equally. Up until now things have been heavily weighted in the combat class's favour.

Personally I think powers and weapons should have either no correlation at all or be two different sides of the same coin. I don't think all classes should have the same amount of powers but only some have access to more weapons, as it just stifles gameplay.

[Jestina]

I used like two weapons with soldiers in the past...so whoopee they have the ability to be a mule now. That doesn't compensate for taking away their weapons skills and giving it to all the other classes or stripping down adrenaline rush.

[pingupower]

Soldier is so far my favourite class. I loved it in ME2 and still do. I have my big ass revenant maxed and adrenaline rush maxed + fortification active for more resistance. And then I shred everyone with incendiary ammo.

[Disciple888]

Omega-202 wrote...

How many weapons did you honestly use in ME2 on your Soldier? I NEVER found that there was any reason to use anything besides the Widow and Mattock.

With those two (or two similar guns) you an still be around or below 0% depending spec.

But the answer to your question of "How did the Soldier class get compensated" is Tech Bursts and Inferno Ammo. Any decent rifle with Disruptor Ammo 6 + Concussive Shot spam = Lightning Storm. Or if fire is more your speed, Revenant/GPR/Phaeston with Incendiary Ammo 6 w/ the explosion evolution = long range fire bombs.

The side effect of the weight system was bringing Adrenaline Rush in line and then they buffed the heck out of the ammo powers and their side effects.

That's pretty much how I played Soldier, but I'm thinking about doin' another Insanity run with the class, and focusing purely on Tech Bursts by taking Carnage (spec'd for damage).  Since Fire Bursts and Cryo Bursts only trigger if a direct damage power kills the enemy, I'd take the Level 6 free power evolution of Adrenaline Rush and use Carnage only during Rush to finish an enemy and detonate bursts that I set up with my Ammo powers.

Dunno if this works yet, I'll give it a go, but theoretically the concept seems to have the best synergy with the class.  I suppose you could use Frag Grenades to achieve the same outcome, but I really wanna spam Bursts to see if it's viable.

[idspisp0pd]

Kronner wrote...

Soldier should have had a much larger carrying capacity(200-250, at least). That's the biggest issue imho.

This.

[capn233]

JaegerBane wrote...

I have to admit that I despise the entire idea about restricting weapons from the 'caster' classes in any way, and I'll keep despising it so long as the more combat orientated-classes get the same number of powers. Ultimately I don't have an issue with driving some kind of difference in the style of the classes, but I would expect that difference to treat the different classes equally. Up until now things have been heavily weighted in the combat class's favour.

Personally I think powers and weapons should have either no correlation at all or be two different sides of the same coin. I don't think all classes should have the same amount of powers but only some have access to more weapons, as it just stifles gameplay.

I must be misunderstanding you.

First off "up until now things have been heavilyy weighted in the combat class's favour."  Can't agree with this at all considering Adept was the most powerful class in ME1, and was still very good (when played correctly) in ME2.  If we focus on ME2 the classes were the most balanced of any of the three games.  And in that one it is arguable which is "best," but it certainly was not the Soldier.  Vanguard was "best" for the majority of the game, relatively weak against "bosses."  Sentinel was nearly unkillable though and could make the best use of squad powers.  Engineer and Adept were the best at crowd control, and had all the weapons they needed and get another one after DCC.

Then what is the bit about "getting the same number of powers?"  Sort an odd comment.  Why wouldn't Shepard have the same number of powers regardless of class?  And lest we forget that on a "combat" class 2 or 3 powers are actually just ammo so in reality you get less of the "win button" powers that the casters do.

Finally on to weapon restriction.  Don't recall stating that weapon classes should be restricted again.  However, given that weapons are integral to combat classes and simply are not to a caster, where is the real hangup?  The advantage of a weapon master class should in fact be better weapons.  Or the ability to carry more of the better weapons.  And my suggestion was not to make it impossible for a caster to carry a heavy weapon, just make a real penalty for it.  I ran Revenant or Black Widow with a cooldown bonus.  Sentinel or Adepts are worse offenders because of their magic cooldown resets that they can use.  As far as stifling gameplay, it will not.  You still have the option to take whatever weapon you want.  You just will have lower biotic or tech damage output to compensate for your increased weapon output.

In reality weapon restrictions in ME2 were in fact better for the game than the current weight capacity system as far as making each class an actual balanced alternative to each other with different styles of game play.  Just because I couldn't play an Adept with Inferno Ammo, Overload, Claymore and Revenant didn't mean that I was stifled in a meaningful manner.  it meant I had something of a challange and more fun adapting to different classes.

[Disciple888]

A Sentinel can run a Revenant X + Hornet X at 200% cool-down. Don't use it much, b/c I much prefer the Vindicator/Paladin/Disciple loadout, but yeah, I get what capn is saying w/ regards to weapon restrictions. I think Soldier might be the only class that can carry the Black Widow or Claymore at 200% tho, not sure.

[Jestina]

Sentinel is the new soldier and adept all rolled into one...plus some engineer thrown in.

[Jog0907]

Jestina wrote...

Sentinel is the new soldier and adept all rolled into one...plus some engineer thrown in.

well the sentinel is designed to be the jack of all trades master of none and it is,

anyway while I find that the soldier could use some more weight capacity I still find it to be a really good class mostly because of tech combo potential with proper ammo, power and squadmate use, plus it can still handle a good set of weapons if properly built though NG+ becomes necessary for you to see all the weapon loadouts a soldier can use.

[CapnCruuunch]

I didn't play soldier in ME2 admittedly, so I may be missing some important context. But I'm not sure why you need more power for the soldier. It already melts through enemies so damn quickly.

That said, I think gunplay is a lot of fun in ME3. More guns the better I guess. You just want to be able to carry all the guns with less penalty, right?

I kind of naturally settle into one or two weapons, so I may not be fully feeling the limitations that you are up against.

Also off-topic...love the soldier class. Never gave it a proper chance previously. Glad I did.

[Aimi]

kw0lf wrote...

Soldier was easily the strongest class in both ME1 (remember Immunity?) and ME2 (AR+Revenant+Inferno = All Enemies Melt) ... they had to gimp it for ME3 ... it does not do anything that other classes cannot do as well or better anymore.

Nah.

In ME1, all classes had some sort of high survivability option, but only Immunity had a duration longer than its cooldown. Soldiers weren't even the only class with Immunity; Infiltrators had it too, and Infiltrators also had those great tech powers and the ability to open any crate, locker, or door. And Adepts had such a comically easy time stunlocking every enemy on the field that they didn't need their barrier. Both of those classes were clearly superior. So Soldiers were third strongest at best.

In ME2, the Sentinel was easily the cheesiest class option - Tech Armor made you an invincible controller of the battlefield, and your ability to crack any protection made you unstoppable against any enemy. The Infiltrator remained a strong option with Cloak; although an Infiltrator could never do the sheer amount of single-shot damage a Soldier could (Widow Soldier in Heightened AR did significantly more damage than a Widow Infiltrator in Assassination Cloak), Cloak made survival effectively trivial. Vanguard was the most destructive, but it at least required a minimum of player skill to play effectively on the higher difficulties: a proper high-risk, high-reward class. Soldier was either second or third, depending on your opinion of the Infiltrator, and even then, the optimal build for destruction wasn't the Viper/Revenant Soldier, but the Widow/Mattock one, since the Mattock fired ridiculously quickly under Adrenaline Rush, permitting ridiculous damage per shot and damage per second.

So it's not like the pre-ME3 Soldier was a superclass that needed to be gimped. If anything, the ME2 Soldier was not overpowered, but under-interesting: it was basically just a shooty class, and doing anything else was suboptimal. This did not substantially change for ME3: you still basically just do the shooting, and your squad basically is just there for power debuffs. The main difference is that Adrenaline Rush was gimped, decreasing damage done inside AR and also decreasing the time dilation it gives. I, personally, noticed such a minuscule difference between shooting inside Adrenaline Rush and shooting out of it that I rarely remembered to activate it when I played Soldier in the ME3 single-player campaign; it certainly wasn't the sine qua non that it was in ME2, even on Insanity.

Really, the OP has a point: the Soldier of ME3 is a shadow of its former self. Weapon usage is constricted by the encumbrance mechanic, and the weapons that you do have aren't as good as they used to be because Adrenaline Rush is weaker in every way. So you have fewer guns, and those guns don't do as much as they used to. But the class still fundamentally revolves on shooting stuff to kill it, or shooting stuff to debuff it. It's worse at doing most stuff, and it's not better at doing anything else.

Improving the Soldier's weight capacity would go a long way towards making it as interesting as it used to be - restoring weapon options, at least - but wouldn't give the Soldier anything new to do.

Modifié par daqs, 19 avril 2012 - 05:35 .

[Disciple888]

daqs wrote...

kw0lf wrote...

Soldier was easily the strongest class in both ME1 (remember Immunity?) and ME2 (AR+Revenant+Inferno = All Enemies Melt) ... they had to gimp it for ME3 ... it does not do anything that other classes cannot do as well or better anymore.

Nah.

In ME1, all classes had some sort of high survivability option, but only Immunity had a duration longer than its cooldown. Soldiers weren't even the only class with Immunity; Infiltrators had it too, and Infiltrators also had those great tech powers and the ability to open any crate, locker, or door. And Adepts had such a comically easy time stunlocking every enemy on the field that they didn't need their barrier. Both of those classes were clearly superior. So Soldiers were third strongest at best.

In ME2, the Sentinel was easily the cheesiest class option - Tech Armor made you an invincible controller of the battlefield, and your ability to crack any protection made you unstoppable against any enemy. The Infiltrator remained a strong option with Cloak; although an Infiltrator could never do the sheer amount of single-shot damage a Soldier could (Widow Soldier in Heightened AR did significantly more damage than a Widow Infiltrator in Assassination Cloak), Cloak made survival effectively trivial. Vanguard was the most destructive, but it at least required a minimum of player skill to play effectively on the higher difficulties: a proper high-risk, high-reward class. Soldier was either second or third, depending on your opinion of the Infiltrator, and even then, the optimal build for destruction wasn't the Viper/Revenant Soldier, but the Widow/Mattock one, since the Mattock fired ridiculously quickly under Adrenaline Rush, permitting ridiculous damage per shot and damage per second.

So it's not like the pre-ME3 Soldier was a superclass that needed to be gimped. If anything, the ME2 Soldier was not overpowered, but under-interesting: it was basically just a shooty class, and doing anything else was suboptimal. This did not substantially change for ME3: you still basically just do the shooting, and your squad basically is just there for power debuffs. The main difference is that Adrenaline Rush was gimped, decreasing damage done inside AR and also decreasing the time dilation it gives. I, personally, noticed such a minuscule difference between shooting inside Adrenaline Rush and shooting out of it that I rarely remembered to activate it when I played Soldier in the ME3 single-player campaign; it certainly wasn't the sine qua non that it was in ME2, even on Insanity.

Really, the OP has a point: the Soldier of ME3 is a shadow of its former self. Weapon usage is constricted by the encumbrance mechanic, and the weapons that you do have aren't as good as they used to be because Adrenaline Rush is weaker in every way. So you have fewer guns, and those guns don't do as much as they used to. But the class still fundamentally revolves on shooting stuff to kill it, or shooting stuff to debuff it. It's worse at doing most stuff, and it's not better at doing anything else.

Improving the Soldier's weight capacity would go a long way towards making it as interesting as it used to be - restoring weapon options, at least - but wouldn't give the Soldier anything new to do.

Agree with everything you wrote, except regarding ME1.  Immunity was clearly game-breaking.  The only thing that could kill you was Husk shock attacks (btw, where did those go?)  A Soldier built around Immunity could melee Thresher Maws on Insanity (forgot who did all the tests, but they were hilarious).  Infiltrators also had access to Immunity, and greater flexibility, but a Shock Trooper Soldier was by far and away the better tank.  They could also take Singularity as a bonus power and abuse Adrenaline Rush to reset cool-downs.

Speaking of which, the Vanguard was also a better biotic than the Adept in the first game, because of Adrenaline Rush resetting cool-downs.

[Aimi]

Disciple888 wrote...

Agree with everything you wrote, except regarding ME1.  Immunity was clearly game-breaking.  The only thing that could kill you was Husk shock attacks (btw, where did those go?)  A Soldier built around Immunity could melee Thresher Maws on Insanity (forgot who did all the tests, but they were hilarious).  Infiltrators also had access to Immunity, and greater flexibility, but a Shock Trooper Soldier was by far and away the better tank.  They could also take Singularity as a bonus power and abuse Adrenaline Rush to reset cool-downs.

Speaking of which, the Vanguard was also a better biotic than the Adept in the first game, because of Adrenaline Rush resetting cool-downs.

Yeah, a Soldier could tank better than an Infiltrator in ME1, but at that point it was overkill; a minimally competent Infiltrator could survive anything just fine without the buffs to Immunity that a Shock Trooper Soldier got. The Soldier might've been better at it, but either way you were pretty much never going to die. It's like comparing the Widow and the Black Widow in ME3: sure, the Widow does more damage per shot fired, but the Black Widow's damage per shot is still good enough to headshot anything that can be headshotted without wasting colossal amounts of damage due to shield gating, and its other advantages compared to the Widow push it over the top.

Forgot about the Vanguard, too - good point.

[JaegerBane]

capn233 wrote...

I must be misunderstanding you.

That would be my guess.

First off "up until now things have been heavilyy weighted in the combat class's favour."  Can't agree with this at all considering Adept was the most powerful class in ME1, and was still very good (when played correctly) in ME2.

This is nonsense. A correctly specced ME1 Soldier could quite easily melee a thresher maw to death. And the fact that it was physically possible to complete ME2 using an Adept is completely irrelevant to whether the class was strong or not, since no class made it impossible to complete.

If anything, the strongest biotic class in both prior games was actually the Vanguard.

 If we focus on ME2 the classes were the most balanced of any of the three games.  And in that one it is arguable which is "best," but it certainly was not the Soldier.  Vanguard was "best" for the majority of the game, relatively weak against "bosses."  Sentinel was nearly unkillable though and could make the best use of squad powers.  Engineer and Adept were the best at crowd control, and had all the weapons they needed and get another one after DCC.

'Restrictive' is more of an accurate word than balanced. The fact of the matter was that the Soldier had an active power with a stupidly fast cooldown that augmented every single aspect of their character, and was usable in each and every situation. Add to that three of the best ammo powers in the game, with one even affecting surrounding enemies through defences (Inferno). Don't even get me started on the full weapons load they could carry.

Your assertion that Adepts and Engineers were the best at crowd control is largely theorycrafting. Literally, yes, their signature powers could CC through defences, but the simple fact was that Stasis was a far superior CC power than both and was available to anyone.

Then what is the bit about "getting the same number of powers?"  Sort an odd comment.  Why wouldn't Shepard have the same number of powers regardless of class?  And lest we forget that on a "combat" class 2 or 3 powers are actually just ammo so in reality you get less of the "win button" powers that the casters do.

Because the whole point behind the reason the Adept has less weapons in ME2 was due to their specialisation on powers. Its patently daft to have a situation where the alleged weapon specialist has just as many powers as other classes, as that isn't their focus.

Finally on to weapon restriction.  Don't recall stating that weapon classes should be restricted again.  However, given that weapons are integral to combat classes and simply are not to a caster, where is the real hangup?  The advantage of a weapon master class should in fact be better weapons.  Or the ability to carry more of the better weapons.  And my suggestion was not to make it impossible for a caster to carry a heavy weapon, just make a real penalty for it.  I ran Revenant or Black Widow with a cooldown bonus.  Sentinel or Adepts are worse offenders because of their magic cooldown resets that they can use.  As far as stifling gameplay, it will not.  You still have the option to take whatever weapon you want.  You just will have lower biotic or tech damage output to compensate for your increased weapon output.

PErhaps I should have made that clearer - I do not like the implicit assumption that casters should not be able to wield as many weapons (or the same weapons) as combat classes do when the convention only works one way. If the combat classes had less powers, or less potent powers, then there would be no problem, but in ME2 the soldier basically had its cake and could eat it too. That just isn't balanced.

In reality weapon restrictions in ME2 were in fact better for the game than the current weight capacity system as far as making each class an actual balanced alternative to each other with different styles of game play.  Just because I couldn't play an Adept with Inferno Ammo, Overload, Claymore and Revenant didn't mean that I was stifled in a meaningful manner.  it meant I had something of a challange and more fun adapting to different classes.

I'm in two minds about it. I like the concept of the weight, just not its implemetation. The weight limits of classes that depend on weapons are too low and the weight-to-power ratio is totally inconsistent. I would argue fixing that would do a better job than going back to the highly-restricitive model of ME2.

[Jestina]

Bioware tried to implement a classless system into a class based system and what we ended up with is garbage.

[Petrikles]

They should reinstall the old immunity from ME1, only for multiplayer.

Here is why: Working under adrenaline rush is supposed to make you so fast that nobody can really harm you. Since a slowdown can not be implemented in multiplayer, immunity is the closest alike you can get. This would also make soldiers very powerful again, as they were in ME1 and ME2.

[Fortack]

JaegerBane wrote...

I'm in two minds about it. I like the concept of the weight, just not its implemetation. The weight limits of classes that depend on weapons are too low and the weight-to-power ratio is totally inconsistent. I would argue fixing that would do a better job than going back to the highly-restricitive model of ME2.

It cannot be fixed. The only remedy is to remove this terrible system completely.

The thing it tries to achieve - chosing between powers and weapons - does not work at all. If BW wants something like that they should have added the option to use skillpoints to improve weight capacity. You want more weapons, fine, but you will end up with less (evolved) powers. I am not talking about passives, but a simple trash bin to dumb skillpoints in to increase carrying capacity (nothing else). So your [insert class] wants to go to town with the Claymore, Revenant, Black Widow, Paladin and Hornet? Sure why not, but you'll only have a fraction of the total number of skillpoints available for the skilltree.

[JaegerBane]

Fortack wrote...

JaegerBane wrote...

I'm in two minds about it. I like the concept of the weight, just not its implemetation. The weight limits of classes that depend on weapons are too low and the weight-to-power ratio is totally inconsistent. I would argue fixing that would do a better job than going back to the highly-restricitive model of ME2.

It cannot be fixed. The only remedy is to remove this terrible system completely.

The thing it tries to achieve - chosing between powers and weapons - does not work at all. If BW wants something like that they should have added the option to use skillpoints to improve weight capacity. You want more weapons, fine, but you will end up with less (evolved) powers. I am not talking about passives, but a simple trash bin to dumb skillpoints in to increase carrying capacity (nothing else). So your [insert class] wants to go to town with the Claymore, Revenant, Black Widow, Paladin and Hornet? Sure why not, but you'll only have a fraction of the total number of skillpoints available for the skilltree.

As I said, I'm not convinced that it is an inherently terrible system. I've have yet to see anything that would suggest such.

The biggest issue I can see is that the positive and negative bonuses are just too extreme. This feature seems to be the root issue with virtually every problem people have mentioned on here with regards to weapons. Personally, I don't think there should be any positive bonus at all, and the negative bonus should be capped at -25%. It's just impossible to realistically balance a set of powers when their cooldowns can be shortened and extended by a factor of four, its too much variance.

The issue I have with spending skill points on carrying more weapons is that Bioware have already shifted the system so that every class has the same number of powers. I don't actually think its a bad idea (hell, ME1 basically did this by tying the majority of the soldier's powers to specific weapons, hence establishing a much more practical situation between how a character's weapons and powers balanced each other out), I just think that it basically achieves the same goal but requires a lot more work.

Jestina wrote...

Bioware tried to implement a classless system into a class based system and what we ended up with is garbage.

I fully agree. I've said several times that Bioware have tried to move in two directions at once and tried to make the classes as different as possible while making the gameplay as similar as possible, and it hasn't worked. I'd rather they take a step back and simplify the classes.

To be honest, they did a cracking job with the Dragon Age games. I don't know why they felt the need to stick with six different classes - they should have just had tech, combat and biotic characters and left the weapons load, power choice and skill crossover up to the player

Modifié par JaegerBane, 19 avril 2012 - 04:29 .

[Abraham_uk]

Disciple888 wrote...

Agree with everything you wrote, except regarding ME1.  Immunity was clearly game-breaking.  The only thing that could kill you was Husk shock attacks (btw, where did those go?)  A Soldier built around Immunity could melee Thresher Maws on Insanity (forgot who did all the tests, but they were hilarious).  Infiltrators also had access to Immunity, and greater flexibility, but a Shock Trooper Soldier was by far and away the better tank.  They could also take Singularity as a bonus power and abuse Adrenaline Rush to reset cool-downs.

Speaking of which, the Vanguard was also a better biotic than the Adept in the first game, because of Adrenaline Rush resetting cool-downs.

That sounds pretty cool. Did soldiers have adrenaline rush in ME 1? I know they had adrenaline burst. I never unlocked adrenaline rush as soldier in ME 1.

[zambingo]

ashwind wrote...

umm... I suppose they get the coolest looking heavy melee as compensation... the omni-blade soldiers get are just wicked awesome. The other heavy melees just arent as cool...

I love the Engineer's saw blade thing the best.