133 réponses à ce sujet

[Amano Kazumi]

Stardusk wrote...

 

Yes, it has very bad range...BUT...

it has low weight, requires no aim and instant kills almost anything...

How is that not broken?

You missed X3 damage to shields.

I actually don't think it's "broken" in the sense that the game massively changes and balance is thrown out the window. You have to get too close to the opponent with it; it's akin to the GI melee builds, high risk/high reward. The only guns I truly think fit that mold are the GPS and Krysae Sniper Rifle, able to be used from any class from any distance, with safety, and with extreme prejudice.

[Feneckus]

A Claymore can't kill two hunters in 2 seconds.

A Claymore can't take out an Atlas' shield in 3 seconds.

Yes you do have to be pretty close, but that's a non issue with a GI/Drell Vanguard. Especially with an Adrenaline Module III.

[Indenter]

Instantly?
Claymore kills instantly. Look up "instant" on google.

Reeger takes a second if not longer.

Claymore also does it at longer ranges, with less effort.


Close thread.

Modifié par Indenter, 30 mai 2012 - 11:21 .

[A Wild Snorlax]

It sucks against armor and has really short range. It's really only good on vanguards, infiltrators and vorcha(on small maps). Really strong, but balanced imo.

[Sacrificial Bias]

 Actually I might get what the issue is.  If the electrical visual effect is any indication, this gun might have a massive damage bonus against shields/barriers.  Might explain why I was able to get an Atlas' shields down to about 25% with one clip on my GI with Proxy Mine and no bonus consumables.  Assuming a 3x multiplier, I would say I did 16,130 damage to the Atlas with a single clip(13.441 with a 2.5x multiplier).  Not a bad number if I do say so myself, though you would almost certainly die without teammates distracting the boss given that you have to be REALLY close.

Kind of makes overload, ED, and Arc Grenades useless IMO.  Nerf the multiplier down to 1.5x.

[Kenadian]

Sacrificial Bias wrote...

 Actually I might get what the issue is.  If the electrical visual effect is any indication, this gun might have a massive damage bonus against shields/barriers.  Might explain why I was able to get an Atlas' shields down to about 25% with one clip on my GI with Proxy Mine and no bonus consumables.  Assuming a 3x multiplier, I would say I did 16,130 damage to the Atlas with a single clip(13.441 with a 2.5x multiplier).  Not a bad number if I do say so myself, though you would almost certainly die without teammates distracting the boss given that you have to be REALLY close.

Kind of makes overload, ED, and Arc Grenades useless IMO.  Nerf the multiplier down to 1.5x.

Yea, no. No nerf. Don't say silly things.

[Ronnie Blastoff]

Feneckus wrote...

A Claymore can't kill two hunters in 2 seconds.

A Claymore can't take out an Atlas' shield in 3 seconds.

Yes you do have to be pretty close, but that's a non issue with a GI/Drell Vanguard. Especially with an Adrenaline Module III.

I've killed 2 hunters a pyro and a rocket trooper with one claymore shot. Use armor piercing ammo III and a shredder with barrel on the usuall squad of geth on FBW.

A clamore can't take out an atlas shields in 3 seconds, but it can take out the entire atlus in 8. (Try reload canceling)

[MrRag]

Not any more broken than a Claymore which can headshot enemies across the map.

The Reegar is good against shields and health, but it doesn't seem to be all that great against armor. Considering its range and clip, it needs some ups or nobody would be using it after all.

[Zkyire]

Sacrificial Bias wrote...

Reegar Carbine does 1452 damage per clip. The Claymore does 1648 damage per clip and can shoot at things from across the map. Armor damage reduction is 50 damage per shot, Carbine does 66 damage per shot, AP ammo will not fully negate it.

I would agree that it doesn't seem to "miss" much, sort of like a typical shotgun at close range, but it doesn't seem to matter where the "pellets" hit.

I still feel the Krysae Sniper is on an entirely different league from it. More damage than a Black Widow at equal upgrades with AoE and 3 shots AND less weight too? From a Rare weapon? Utterly unacceptable. NERF IT.

You ignored that the Krysae has:

- No headshot damage bonus.
- No armour penetration.
- Often detonates bullets right in front of you, if you try to fire from cover, rather than actually shooting the enemy.

[Pitznik]

Krogan Vanguard with Reegar X has 200% cd bonus, range isn't an issue, only downside is low clip if you go barrel/shredder. So you're both next to immortal and can cause really heavy damage. Silver atlas in two charge/clip/reload cycles. This weapon is sick, I expect it to be nerfed, unless that is Bioware's way of making the game easier.

[sliverofamoon]

I think the extremely short range required MORE than compensates for it's power. My Claymore or Wraith are much better at distance, and do more damage.

[Core_Commander]

Zkyire wrote...

You ignored that the Krysae has:

- No headshot damage bonus.
- No armour penetration.
- Often detonates bullets right in front of you, if you try to fire from cover, rather than actually shooting the enemy.

It's balanced (or "balanced") for not having the first two, like GPS. All that it effectively means is you don't have to aim with those weapons.

Modifié par Core_Commander, 30 mai 2012 - 11:32 .

[GodlessPaladin]

Reegar Carbine = another obvious Geth Infiltrator buff.  You don't even care about its range or armor damage because you can just carry another weapon.  Weight doesn't matter to GIs.

Modifié par GodlessPaladin, 30 mai 2012 - 11:34 .

[molecularman]

Hey, solution! Remove that shield multiplier and we can all be happy!

[Zkyire]

What I love though, is how lore wise, these new weapons are supposed to be better than the others. They're new. They're state-of-the-art.

And it's a co-op game, you're fighting WITH, not competing AGAINST each other.

..yet people complain that a brand new, state-of-the-art weapon is more powerful than old weapons.

Hell, lore wise, the Widow is supposed to be what, 300 years old? Why wouldn't there be much better weapons out?

Modifié par Zkyire, 30 mai 2012 - 11:35 .

[ryoldschool]

Sacrificial Bias wrote...

Reegar Carbine does 1452 damage per clip. The Claymore does 1648 damage per clip and can shoot at things from across the map. Armor damage reduction is 50 damage per shot, Carbine does 66 damage per shot, AP ammo will not fully negate it.

I would agree that it doesn't seem to "miss" much, sort of like a typical shotgun at close range, but it doesn't seem to matter where the "pellets" hit.

I still feel the Krysae Sniper is on an entirely different league from it. More damage than a Black Widow at equal upgrades with AoE and 3 shots AND less weight too? From a Rare weapon? Utterly unacceptable. NERF IT.

Krysae NO nerf.   It plays about as well as a claymore on my GI, and I want to use up my sniper rails I have been saving.

[GodlessPaladin]

Zkyire wrote...
..yet people complain that a brand new, state-of-the-art weapon is more powerful than old weapons.

Yeah, how dare they care about balanced, fun gameplay! 

[Ronnie Blastoff]

Zkyire wrote...
You ignored that the Krysae has:

- No headshot damage bonus.
- No armour penetration.
- Often detonates bullets right in front of you, if you try to fire from cover, rather than actually shooting the enemy.

You know you guys and these reasons its not overpowerd aren't makeing any sense. I don't think you realize

-THERE IS HEADSHOT damage. Shoot a marauder in the head. He's dead, near dead. Shoot him in the body, you only drop shields. STOP MISSING THE HEAD AND YOU WILL NOTICE.
-Who needs armor penetration when you can shoot the wall behind something with armor as say, a pack of gardians. And kill 3 of them and anything else close enough with the spash damage. ALSO! YOU DON"T NEED ARMOR PENETRATION FOR COVER ENEMIES. Shoot above they're heads while they are in cover. THEY STILL GET HIT, WITH A HEADSHOT!
-Your 3rd point is not a gun flaw, its a game programming flaw. Simular to all other projectile weapons. (Falcon,Striker, Graal)

Now please come up with a REAL reason this gun isn't a pocket nuke... PLEASE!

[GodlessPaladin]

ryoldschool wrote...

Sacrificial Bias wrote...

Reegar Carbine does 1452 damage per clip. The Claymore does 1648 damage per clip and can shoot at things from across the map. Armor damage reduction is 50 damage per shot, Carbine does 66 damage per shot, AP ammo will not fully negate it.

I would agree that it doesn't seem to "miss" much, sort of like a typical shotgun at close range, but it doesn't seem to matter where the "pellets" hit.

I still feel the Krysae Sniper is on an entirely different league from it. More damage than a Black Widow at equal upgrades with AoE and 3 shots AND less weight too? From a Rare weapon? Utterly unacceptable. NERF IT.

Krysae NO nerf.   It plays about as well as a claymore on my GI, and I want to use up my sniper rails I have been saving.

I actually think they should nerf the Sniper Rifle Damage Bonus from rank 6 tactical cloak, then buff most sniper rifles' damage (not the Krysae) so that they even out for Infiltrators but are better for other characters.

Modifié par GodlessPaladin, 30 mai 2012 - 11:38 .

[Zkyire]

GodlessPaladin wrote...

Zkyire wrote...
..yet people complain that a brand new, state-of-the-art weapon is more powerful than old weapons.

Yeah, how dare they care about balanced, fun gameplay! 

COOP game.

Fighting with.

Not competing against.

Balance isn't that important.

If it were competitive play then balance would be utterly and irrefutably important.

But it isn't.

Modifié par Zkyire, 30 mai 2012 - 11:39 .

[ryoldschool]

Ronnie Blastoff wrote...

Zkyire wrote...
You ignored that the Krysae has:

- No headshot damage bonus.
- No armour penetration.
- Often detonates bullets right in front of you, if you try to fire from cover, rather than actually shooting the enemy.

You know you guys and these reasons its not overpowerd aren't makeing any sense. I don't think you realize

-THERE IS HEADSHOT damage. Shoot a marauder in the head. He's dead, near dead. Shoot him in the body, you only drop shields. STOP MISSING THE HEAD AND YOU WILL NOTICE.
-Who needs armor penetration when you can shoot the wall behind something with armor as say, a pack of gardians. And kill 3 of them and anything else close enough with the spash damage. ALSO! YOU DON"T NEED ARMOR PENETRATION FOR COVER ENEMIES. Shoot above they're heads while they are in cover. THEY STILL GET HIT, WITH A HEADSHOT!
-Your 3rd point is not a gun flaw, its a game programming flaw. Simular to all other projectile weapons. (Falcon,Striker, Graal)

Now please come up with a REAL reason this gun isn't a pocket nuke... PLEASE!

Why not just ask for a special code that nerfs it for you?  It honestly plays about the same as the claymore.

[GodlessPaladin]

Zkyire wrote...

GodlessPaladin wrote...

Zkyire wrote...
..yet people complain that a brand new, state-of-the-art weapon is more powerful than old weapons.

Yeah, how dare they care about balanced, fun gameplay! 

COOP game.

Fighting with.

Not competing against.

Balance isn't that important.

If it were competetive play then balance would be utterly and irrefutably important.

But it isn't.

You flaunt your ignorance like a trophy.  Balance is an essential part of game design for almost every type of game, be it competitive, cooperative, or single player.  It is crucial for establishing meaningful choices, flow, depth, and so forth.

Modifié par GodlessPaladin, 30 mai 2012 - 11:40 .

[3XT3RM1N4TUS]

So we need weapon that deals terrible damage, weights a lot and etc, OP?

[Zkyire]

GodlessPaladin wrote...

You flaunt your ignorance like a trophy.  Balance is an essential part of game design for almost every type of game, be it competitive, cooperative, or single player.

Oh no, my teammate that is helping me fight the enemy is scoring slightly higher than me.

[jahaa]

The Reegar is great, but the Claymore is still better, or at least more versatile. Sure the Reegar is easier to use, but the Claymore is the best shotgun in the long run.