216 réponses à ce sujet

[astheoceansblue]

Especially when it's co-op team based play as it is with ME3 MP.

This entire game is built around team balance. If a player isn't carrying their weight, the game can feel like it's lacking pace, if someone is using a class or build that kills too quickly there's no sense of team achievement or challenge.

Next time you think to write "Over-powered doesn't matter, this is co-op", please think a little harder.

Modifié par astheoceansblue, 27 mai 2012 - 12:14 .

[xtorma]

Agree, except balance is an illusion in a game like this.

[Klokos]

But thinking makes my head hurt D:

[Relix28]

inb4sh!tstorm *grabs a bowl of popcorn*

Modifié par Relix28, 27 mai 2012 - 12:12 .

[nicethugbert]

Disagree. You have choices. Pick the one that best suits you. I do not care if someone can clear a map faster or slower than me. I don't care if another class is more powerful. I play AA most of the time. It is not the most powerful. I could play more powerful classes. But I do not care to. I have fun with AA despite that fact that a claymore or javelin geth could do it faster.  I score better with AJA, but, I don't feel like playing all the time.

Whatever you call balance matters to you, not me. So don't try to pass off your opinion as universal truth because it is not.

Modifié par nicethugbert, 27 mai 2012 - 12:17 .

[kmmd60]

I agree to OP statement about class balance in MP. More balance means more build/race diversity. No one want to be in a match with 3 Geth infiltrators, since you can go AFK in some corner of the map.

The game need build diversity to be interesting.

However, I got nothing to complain about the diversity right now. I never join a match with 4 players use the same class before.

[Wesus]

Nope.

[astheoceansblue]

nicethugbert wrote...

Whatever you call balance matters to you, not me. So don't try to pass off your opinion as universal truth because it is not.

Right.

Except that it's a well known universal truth. If it wern't then game devs wouldn't bother ever trying to balance their games post release.

You might not find it off-puting that certain classes/weapons are woefully sub-par when controlled by the average gamer, or that some can destroy the entire map before others get a chance to react, but these things do affect the game in a negative way for those of us interested in team synergy.

[-Severian-]

nicethugbert wrote...
I play AA most of the time. It is not the most powerful..

Laughed my ass off, then stopped reading. This alone de-values your entire post.

[krknight]

astheoceansblue wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

Whatever you call balance matters to you, not me. So don't try to pass off your opinion as universal truth because it is not.

Right.

Except that it's a well known universal truth. If it wern't then game devs wouldn't bother ever trying to balance their games post release.

You might not find it off-puting that certain classes/weapons are woefully sub-par when controlled by the average gamer, or that some can destroy the entire map before others get a chance to react, but these things do affect the game in a negative way for those of us interested in team synergy.

a.  you can choose what team you want to play on at any given point by quitting and joining a different lobby.

b.  no matter what, everyone gets the same amount of credits and experience points in the end every single time.

c.  there are people who like to play with a variety of different characters sometimes to challenge themselves and other times to blow through the match as quickly as possible for that last psp for the night.  

although it is true devs balance things post-release, it is also true that they do so in small increments.  as long as all characters are gold viable, that's all that matters to most everyone who plays multiplayer.  if every character always did the same amount of damage with every gun, people who like to challenge themselves would move on.

how is team synergy lost in a game when you have ample amounts of options to create whatever team you want prior to going into battle?  your only reasoning for balance is easily remedied at the very beginning of every match.  

Modifié par krknight, 27 mai 2012 - 01:15 .

[Grimy Bunyip]

people are having such a hard time agreeing with you.

[A Wild Snorlax]

Lol no it does not. You may care if something is slightly OP, I do not, as I can perform well with any class and someone else using the ''OP** classes has no negative inpact on me.

If it was PVP however I would care.

[paperbook]

Completely agree.

[AnthonyDraft]

Balance in a co-op game is different from PvP balance.

In co-op you need balance that is fair towards everything that is available to the player, while remaining everything different as well, by not making something powerful. In ME3 though it is slightly different, because by opening packs, you have a chance of getting something, whether you want it or not, which makes people play longer and different class/gear/equipment usage.
There will always be cookie-cutter builds no matter what. Deal with it. ME3 MP content is rather balanced IMO.

[FlamboyantRoy]

It does need to be balanced. Especially in regards to who gets credit for kills. It's very skewed. I do all the work and they want to get all the credit.

[Grimy Bunyip]

good balance means more incentive to play more characters.
and that means more gameplay variety, more fun, yada yada.

[neteng101]

There's an important distinction between balance and sameness... too much sameness is incredibly boring. Having a selection from great to not so great provides variety to the gameplay.

Team synergy is not dependent on balance - its dependent on how each individual in the team plays. Those kill stealers/hogs are going to continue killing all they can without regard to team synergy no matter what they're playing.

[sirjimmus86]

I would agree if I wasn't able to top the scoreboard consistently whatever class I use. Some easier than others against certain races, some harder, some depend on having the right teammates, sometimes if up against 3 guys who snipe everything before I get to them, I don't do as well, whatever.

I think it is fairly well balanced.

[Descy_]

FlamboyantRoy wrote...

It does need to be balanced. Especially in regards to who gets credit for kills. It's very skewed. I do all the work and they want to get all the credit.

Okay, now that I just find silly.

Its a Co-Op game, everyone gets the same XP at the end, personal score doesnt matter, so why do you want credit for a kill? Bragging rights?

Yeah, try posting a thread on here with a pic of your super high score. See how it's received.

[Nereithr]

Balance is highly important. There is no "perfect balance", something is always a bit weaker or a bit stronger, but what we have now is unacceptable. Especially the majority of automatic weaponry.

[FlamboyantRoy]

Descy_ wrote...

FlamboyantRoy wrote...

It does need to be balanced. Especially in regards to who gets credit for kills. It's very skewed. I do all the work and they want to get all the credit.

Okay, now that I just find silly.

Its a Co-Op game, everyone gets the same XP at the end, personal score doesnt matter, so why do you want credit for a kill? Bragging rights?

Yeah, try posting a thread on here with a pic of your super high score. See how it's received.

Ah yes "Co-op game", a style of gameplay that emphasizes teamwork rather than individual efforts. We have dismissed that claim. 

Lets be honest here, I'm sure there are plenty of players out there who feel the same way. An example, a salarian engineer gets an atlas down to 1 bar of armor by himself and then an asari swoops in with a warp and gets credit for it. That's not right. There isn't an "I" in team, but there certainly is a "me". 

What I'm trying to say is that the scores of the game should reflect who put the most work in. Not who was in the right place at the right time to steal credit from someone else. I'm all for being a "teamplayer" but when my teammates go to captilize on something that I worked on by myself. We have a problem. 

[Distilled Poison]

FlamboyantRoy wrote...

It does need to be balanced. Especially in regards to who gets credit for kills. It's very skewed. I do all the work and they want to get all the credit.

Kid, I think you bought the wrong game. What you were looking for was Call of Duty.


OT- Nerfing powerful classes comes after all bugs being fixed, new enemies, and buffs to bad weapons and characters. Until then, quit crying that you can't keep up.

[Relix28]

FlamboyantRoy wrote...

Descy_ wrote...

FlamboyantRoy wrote...

It does need to be balanced. Especially in regards to who gets credit for kills. It's very skewed. I do all the work and they want to get all the credit.

Okay, now that I just find silly.

Its a Co-Op game, everyone gets the same XP at the end, personal score doesnt matter, so why do you want credit for a kill? Bragging rights?

Yeah, try posting a thread on here with a pic of your super high score. See how it's received.

Ah yes "Co-op game", a style of gameplay that emphasizes teamwork rather than individual efforts. We have dismissed that claim. 

Lets be honest here, I'm sure there are plenty of players out there who feel the same way. An example, a salarian engineer gets an atlas down to 1 bar of armor by himself and then an asari swoops in with a warp and gets credit for it. That's not right. There isn't an "I" in team, but there certainly is a "me". 

What I'm trying to say is that the scores of the game should reflect who put the most work in. Not who was in the right place at the right time to steal credit from someone else. I'm all for being a "teamplayer" but when my teammates go to captilize on something that I worked on by myself. We have a problem. 

Read the bolded part and think on it for a minute.

[Klokos]

Distilled Poison wrote...

OT- Nerfing powerful classes comes after all bugs being fixed, new enemies, and buffs to bad weapons and characters. Until then, quit crying that you can't keep up.

 No balancing must be constant, being nerf or buff. Are you trying to say that balance change slow down content/bugfixes ? because that's entirely false. I don't get why BSN is so upset witth nerf everything that has been nerfed was still usable after it.