493 réponses à ce sujet

[Vertigogo]

Right now my favorites are definitely Vorcha sentinel and bubble Asari. Vorcha due to survivability and close range damage potential (less useful against one-hit-kill enemies) with the new shotgun. Asari because I love the strategy involved with bubble placement.

[Malditor]

haha, just totally invalidated that other person's argument that it wasn't a subjective question. Now we can get back to the regularly scheduled program of answering said question.

[xROLLxTIDEx]

Human Adept (Original)

[gethinych]

Most effective I've played: GI with a GPS.  Charge > Cloak > Shoot-Shoot-Shoot.  (After a very short while this becomes Charge > Cloak > Shoot-Shoot-Yawn.)  Next up: SI with a Valiant.  (The yawns take a little longer to set in.)

It's odd that, for me, the most effective classes seem to be the least fun to play.  I've tried AA a few times: Warp-Throw/Warp-Throw/Yawn-Yawn.  The only excitement comes when someone Overloads on top of your Warp, and in the blink of an eye you need to switch to the entirely new tactic of Warp-Throw-Throw.  Woo.  The most effective damager that I've SEEN (and not even tried because I've played enough now that I know I'd not enjoy it for very long) is a QMI with arc grenades and a Krysae.  With one of those on your team it can become a desperate hunt for something to shoot before everything goes 'BOOM': an interesting challenge in itself, but for me anyway not one with a great deal of longevity.

However, many seem to really enjoy playing with these (undoubtedly effective) builds & tactics, so fair play to them.  They don't entice me, but I wouldn't try and tell anyone else how they should be enjoying themselves.

Most fun for me: both Drell & KSol or KSent, followed by Human Engineers & Soldiers.  I also have a soft spot for both Turians.  Battlemaster would get used a lot more if it weren't for the glitch (I have a good but temperamental internet connexion so only host if it's the dead of night, as a rule).  Again for me, there's a great deal of variety & fun to be had away from the really effective builds, so kudos on that score.  And thanks for asking!

[Animate]

Geth Infiltrator, usually with a valiant but i enjoy using GPS and Scorpion at times. Usually only go with one weapon.

Geth Engineer with flame turret. Using Geth SMG and Rifle at times.

Drell or Asari Adept with whatever AR I'm testing out

[xxHiDa SuFixx]

I love the infiltrators but if you ask any of my friends I've always been a sniper.

CS, TF, Halo, CoD, BF, and now ME3

Thing I love about the ME3 infiltrators though is that I get a variety just within the class.
I'm not the camping type of sniper ... never have been.
ME3 gives me the options of ...
Salarian - my do it all sniper rifle sniper
Geth - used to use it as a sniper rifle sniper but seemed redundant with the SI, now its Claymore Hunter mode
Quarian Female - I love watching mobs just fall over dead (Derek, when will sabotage backfire give points?)
Quarian Male - Claymore grenadier
Human ... um cryo blast is useless to me lol

However the infiltrator is not the class I have the most fun with ...
the class I have the most fun with ... is variable from session to session
I used to love biotics and working together with another biotic to set off a bombardment of explosions.
Then I was all about getting up in mobs faces with the stunlocking Batarian Soldier.
Right now my favorite class/build is my Turian Soldier with Revenant X ... only thing that is limiting my use of this build is I need more consumables

[Gockey]

Derek Hollan wrote...

MrDaniels1985 wrote...

Well Derek, it was a good attempt at a quality thread, but alas it has turned into a flame war like most of the threads on this board. Oh well, s**t happens.

Thanks 

True, I did deliberately put in the word "your" in order to keep it purely subjective.  I think we are all well aware it is very difficult to keep things 100% objective.  We all come at a subject with particular biases and they are difficult to put aside.

If you feel, for example, you are most effective when you are killing enemies, then you will inject the bias of damage output being key which dominates score moreso than objectives.  On the other hand, if you are the one debuffing the enemies for your buddies and you feel more effective that way, then you won't get as many kills but your team still benefits tremendously.

Perception is half the issue, especially when you are not given all the details regarding the internal workings of a particular product.

Cheers!

 

The problem isn't the word 'your'.  The problem is the word effective.  Correct me if I am wrong, but effective means  successful in producing a desired or intended result.  So what we are doing is debating degrees of effectiveness.  

Since the only metric that matters in MP is comepletion of a round (11 waves), we are debating time.  Killing things faster means more effective.  How is anyone debating this?

Malditor wrote...

The qualifier "your" means everything in this discussion. Not everyone is going to be their most effective with the same set up, it really doesn't matter what prejudice you have on the matter. You could say, and I think you have, if they don't do their best with that set up they are doing it wrong, but that is exactly the point. Maybe they can't "do it right" so they do better with another set up. That makes it the most effective set up for them. Stop trying to impose your view on other people.

Your wrong.  Your certainly entitled to that opinion however, the facts dictate that an infiltrator is the best class and, assuming ceteris paribus, it will be the same for anyone as a result.  

By extension if someone can't do it right, as you put it, with an infiltrator, then they can't do it right with another class.  The argument isn't what people like, or what people feel more proficient with.  The argument is what class people are most effective with.  That would be an infiltrator.

The only possible scenario where someone could do it right with another class would be a power spam like a AA or a Ex-Cerb Adept etc.  I fully admit the scenario exists that someone could be completely incapable of aiming a gun and that a power doesnt require them to aim.  Except there's this gun called the Krysae.  

But hey, having looked at your post history, your just here to be argumentative anyways.

Malditor wrote...

haha, just totally invalidated that other person's argument that it wasn't a subjective question. Now we can get back to the regularly scheduled program of answering said question.

 

^ As I said, argumentative.  Sorry that I fed the troll.  

Modifié par Gockey, 18 juin 2012 - 08:12 .

[Bhatair]

Most effective combination for me would have to be claymore wielding infiltrator. Is it my favorite?

I think my favorite right now is the Vorcha soldier using an eviscerator. I haven't locked it down for gold, I think I'd rather have the wraith at a high level for gold but for everything else it fits my playstyle perfectly. All hit and run, very in your face, shrugging off most small damage, and so much fire. Yeah, vorcha soldier with a light shotgun is so much fun.

[1490]

Have been a big fan of the Asari adept since the game came out, and I think that is still my favorite class (6/6/6/5/3). Mainly because if you are doing randoms, she is good for pretty much any enemy and fits into any team. Need a massive damage dealer? No problem: lots of biotic explosions. Need team support? Got it covered: stasis bubble. I've also always preferred the faster characters, and though she is fragile, I can get out of the way of most stuff quick enough to avoid dying much.

[Jernau11]

Derek Hollan wrote...
Perception is half the issue, especially when you are not given all the details regarding the internal workings of a particular product.

I tried to not make this a flame attempt, and keep it to more constructive. I'm not sure I succeeded. I hope you can take this as the ernest attempt to better the game that it was intended to be.

I think the concious decision to avoid providing us with the details of whats going on with the mechanics was a poor one. In my previous post on this topic I tried to explain what I love about the classes I play and I pointed out the sense of discovery that I get when I try something new and it works. What I didn't point out is the sense of disappointment I get when it doesn't work. Many of these attempts have been foiled by my own misexpectations, but the sad majority of them have been foiled by stuff just not working the way it says it will.

A good example of this is when I tried to couple cold ammo with the fire level 6 projectile. It was a great plan, and would have been a great build, but when I noted there was no difference between fireblasting a chilled opponent with and without the evolution I felt cheated of the time it took me to create and impliment that build. Latter on someone pointed out on the forums that it only works against frozen and not chilled opponents I did the math and concluded it was completely useless given no red bar creatures have enough life for it to matter.

Ultra Light materials and the vanguard glitch are other good examples of this. You guys say it works, it doesn't. Couple this with the increadibly ambigious descriptions of abilities and weapon descriptions that have no sembilence to reality (Cerberus harrier is the most resent one) and I feel frustrated as heck.

Over the last four months I've been playing ME3 Multi I've sort of grown to have an extreme skeptisism of a lot of this stuff to the point where people will put together long involved posts on balance and as soon as they start using your numbers on stuff I emediately point out that the numbers you guys provide don't always co-inside with reality.

The only way I can think of actually repairing this rift at this point is to give us more accurate descriptions. In the mean time I'll just have to poke fun at it though my STG reports.

Modifié par Jernau11, 18 juin 2012 - 08:14 .

[Maeson]

Effective/favorite: Human Male Soldier. 6/4/6/6/4.
Adrenaline Rush is speced for defense, Frag Grenades for quantity and anti-armor, Alliance Training for endurance (health, shields).
Weaponry: my trusty fallback is always the Mattock. I color the build a bit more with either pistols, SMGs or shotguns. Usually through a bit of experimentation, but I like the standard weapons.

As for fun? Toss a random gun on to a random character and just roll with it.

[Vanelsa]

Here are my most effective characters:

Geth Infiltrator with Talon IV

Geth Infiltrator with Claymore X

Increased accuracy and firing rate make the Talon a beast on the GI. Been experimenting with the melee bonus of TC Rank 4, but generally have played the GI as a melee-centric build yet. The Claymore is hard to beat when you have mastered reload cancelling.

Asari Adept with Paladin VIII

The Paladin has replaced the Carnifex X as my go-to gun for my caster classes.

And my current fun characters:

Female Quarian Engineer

A fire and ice queen, but she's not as effective as the GI and AA. Phantoms don't frighten me when I'm playing those characters, but the FQE gets the shivers when one, two, or three Phantoms are dancing towards her.

Male Quarian Engineer

He gives the gift of Hunter Mode to his teammates with Tactical Scan Rank 6 Area Scan.

Modifié par Vanelsa, 18 juin 2012 - 08:14 .

[Stance Punk]

Geth Infiltrator specced for melee

[Leviathan898]

I quite like the support roles and feel like it adds a better multiplayer experience (especially since I play with randoms). I've liked those added ago far, but they all lack a definitive support role which I wish they had. Now I know damage output is considered to be primary importance, but if support roles were implemented in more effective way it could add so much to the feel of multiplayer.

There needs to be some effective support besides what we have so far. The Justicar's bubble is pretty flawed if trying to maximise ally protection during normal waves and is usually better for just the player themself. Geth turret is pretty good, though I recall someone on the board swaying it can only heal teammates singly (if this is the case it drops in benefit). Tac scan is useful with area scan, but other than debuffing/highlighting boss enemies/turrets it's not a major support role. Many a time have I seen it forgotten or passed over and even when used its more of a 'filler' power than the main thing.

Also, the FQE. Not only does is its support subpar... I've tried using her and enjoyed it somewhat but the majority o the time I felt useless. Am Lookin forward to seeing the balance changes!

[Mr. Heavy]

Most effective in killing things? Probably a GI or SI w/ krysae X, sniper amp equipment and gear, and warp ammo. Not particularly fun, but everything gets blow'd up. I much prefer my AA or AJ though. And the KV with Reager and shotgun amp is a close second in effectiveness, in addition to sometimes just plain forgetting to die.

[UKStory135]

Ektogamut wrote...

The most effective yet unsatisfying class for me is the Geth Infiltrator, especially with the claymore. I suspect withe a Krysae its even worse but I have been avoiding that sniper rifle on infiltrators. GI is a one trick pony.

I feel that I am somewhat effective with the JA/falcon and PV/pistol, but the play style is so circumstantial and versatile that I enjoy them a lot more.

Even before the buff, the Claymore and GPS GI's were better than the Krysae ones.

[Malditor]

Gockey wrote...

Derek Hollan wrote...

MrDaniels1985 wrote...

Well Derek, it was a good attempt at a quality thread, but alas it has turned into a flame war like most of the threads on this board. Oh well, s**t happens.

Thanks 

True, I did deliberately put in the word "your" in order to keep it purely subjective.  I think we are all well aware it is very difficult to keep things 100% objective.  We all come at a subject with particular biases and they are difficult to put aside.

If you feel, for example, you are most effective when you are killing enemies, then you will inject the bias of damage output being key which dominates score moreso than objectives.  On the other hand, if you are the one debuffing the enemies for your buddies and you feel more effective that way, then you won't get as many kills but your team still benefits tremendously.

Perception is half the issue, especially when you are not given all the details regarding the internal workings of a particular product.

Cheers!

 

The problem isn't the word 'your'.  The problem is the word effective.  Correct me if I am wrong, but effective means  successful in producing a desired or intended result.  So what we are doing is debating degrees of effectiveness.  

Since the only metric that matters in MP is comepletion of a round (11 waves), we are debating time.  Killing things faster means more effective.  How is anyone debating this?

Malditor wrote...

The qualifier "your" means everything in this discussion. Not everyone is going to be their most effective with the same set up, it really doesn't matter what prejudice you have on the matter. You could say, and I think you have, if they don't do their best with that set up they are doing it wrong, but that is exactly the point. Maybe they can't "do it right" so they do better with another set up. That makes it the most effective set up for them. Stop trying to impose your view on other people.

Your wrong.  Your certainly entitled to that opinion however, the facts dictate that an infiltrator is the best class and, assuming ceteris paribus, it will be the same for anyone as a result.  

By extension if someone can't do it right, as you put it, with an infiltrator, then they can't do it right with another class.  The argument isn't what people like, or what people feel more proficient with.  The argument is what class people are most effective with.  That would be an infiltrator.

The only possible scenario where someone could do it right with another class would be a power spam like a AA or a Ex-Cerb Adept etc.  I fully admit the scenario exists that someone could be completely incapable of aiming a gun and that a power doesnt require them to aim.  Except there's this gun called the Krysae.  

But hey, having looked at your post history, your just here to be argumentative anyways.

Malditor wrote...

haha, just totally invalidated that other person's argument that it wasn't a subjective question. Now we can get back to the regularly scheduled program of answering said question.

 

^ As I said, argumentative.  Sorry that I fed the troll.  

Truthfully, you are the troll here, when even the BW person posing the question says it's subjective to the person responding you stubbornly refuse to admit you are wrong.

[Deucetipher]

My most effective class is a build I shamelessly stole from GodlessPaladin. His GI claymore/melee hybrid, to be precise. It can be a lot of fun to run, demanding

The one I enjoy most right now is either MQE techbomber or Drell Adept reavenadier. I like being able to self-combo efficiently, but remain able to carry a bit heavier of a weapon. Drell Adept is my current preferred, mostly because he is so stylin' .

[tMc Tallgeese]

Highest entertainment value?

Iron Man - Human Soldier male
Weapons: Geth Plasma Shotgun w/N7 Hurricane holdout
Specced for Adrenaline Rush (6), Concussion shot (5), Frag (6), Soldier (6), Fitness (3)

Captain America - Human Adept male
Weapons: Talon
Specced for Singularity (6), Shockwave (6), Warp (0), Adept (6), Fitness (6)

Thor - Human Vanguard male
Weapons: Mjolnir (just kidding), Carnifex
Specced for Charge (6), Shockwave (0), Nova (6), Vanguard (6), Fitness (6)

Hulk - Krogan Vanguard
Weapons: Predator
Specced for Charge (6), Barrier (6), Carnage (0), Battlemaster (6), Rage (6)

Each have their respective color schemes (as best as I can manage). Have used them on silver games when I want to have fun.

[Derek Hollan]

I know it's difficult to keep everyone on the same page so, at the risk of confusing the issue, let me try to clarify again.

The term effective can also be subjective here.  If you aren't sure what I am asking then you may be entering your own idea of what that means.

Contribution of success is the key here.  Some classes / builds are designed to be damage dealers moreso than others.  That's a design decision.  Often, these classes / builds will top the scoreboards.

I came from a support role in the military...I provided tactical meteorology for combat units.  That made my role extremely important to them and in turn made me an an effective part of the team.  It wasn't that I wasn't required to fight.  I had to carry a rifle as well.  But again, I stress, I was more effective giving the team the necessary data they needed tactically.

The same goes for how you perceive effectiveness...Did you succeed?  Yes.  Did you contribute in some unsung way that won't be recognized by score or number of kills in the game?  Possibly.

The competitive nature of gamers is such that there is a perception that score or kills makes you more effective when the reality is that effectiveness is how well you fulfill a particular role.

Hopefully that keeps things a bit more civil.

Cheers

Modifié par Derek Hollan, 18 juin 2012 - 08:29 .

[MrDaniels1985]

tMc Tallgeese wrote...

Highest entertainment value?

Iron Man - Human Soldier male
Weapons: Geth Plasma Shotgun w/N7 Hurricane holdout
Specced for Adrenaline Rush (6), Concussion shot (5), Frag (6), Soldier (6), Fitness (3)

Captain America - Human Adept male
Weapons: Talon
Specced for Singularity (6), Shockwave (6), Warp (0), Adept (6), Fitness (6)

Thor - Human Vanguard male
Weapons: Mjolnir (just kidding), Carnifex
Specced for Charge (6), Shockwave (0), Nova (6), Vanguard (6), Fitness (6)

Hulk - Krogan Vanguard
Weapons: Predator
Specced for Charge (6), Barrier (6), Carnage (0), Battlemaster (6), Rage (6)

Each have their respective color schemes (as best as I can manage). Have used them on silver games when I want to have fun.

I'd have figured Cap would be the soldier and Iron Man would be a sentinal. Either way, +1

[UKStory135]

I like my Human Engineer with a 4/6/6/4/6 build using my Talon V with Cryo Ammo, Power Efficiency Module, and the Stronghold Package.

Another Build I find effective is A Salarian Engineer Speced full with everything but Incinerate full and using the Falcon, Krysae, or Scorpion with disruptor ammo and energy drain to cause continuous tech bursts.

All of my other builds are pretty standard stuff.

[Gockey]

Malditor wrote...

Truthfully, you are the troll here, when even the BW person posing the question says it's subjective to the person responding you stubbornly refuse to admit you are wrong.

Right.  Because the Bioware poster phrased the question incorrectly and had to elaborate what he intended 11 pages later.  Nice try but your still wrong.  Every one of my posts reinforced the point that we are talking effectiveness. That is the primary piece of information the question was seeking, and the your was attached as a qualifier.  

If he asked what build people had the most fun with then it would be a different matter as fun is subjective.  Effectiveness is a measurable metric in this game.  For you to argue otherwise, says that your being willfully ignorant, and your posts have grown increasingly off-topic and argumentative.  Ergo troll.  

Sorry dude, you tried.  Maybe you learned something anyways. 

Derek Hollan wrote...

I know it's difficult to keep everyone on the same page so, at the risk of confusing the issue, let me try to clarify again.

The term effective can also be subjective here.  If you aren't sure what I am asking then you may be entering your own idea of what that means.

Contribution of success is the key here.  Some classes / builds are designed to be damage dealers moreso than others.  That's a design decision.  Often, these classes / builds will top the scoreboards.

I came from a support role in the military...I provided tactical meteorology for combat units.  That made my role extremely important to them and in turn made me an an effective part of the team.  It wasn't that I wasn't required to fight.  I had to carry a rifle as well.  But again, I stress, I was more effective giving the team the necessary data they needed tactically.

The same goes for how you perceive effectiveness...Did you succeed?  Yes.  Did you contribute in some unsung way that won't be recognized by score or number of kills in the game?  Possibly.

The competitive nature of gamers is such that there is a perception that score or kills makes you more effective when the reality is that effectiveness is how well you fulfill a particular role.

Hopefully that keeps things a bit more civil.

Cheers

 

Ninjaed by OP.  I'm glad your finally clarifying what you intended, instead of what you said.  Effectiveness in this game is an easily measured metric.  And the only thying that really matters is how fast you managed to kill something.

While I would never deign to criticize anyones role in the real world, this is a game.  Your service to your country (thank you for that!) as a comparisson to this game leave a lot to be desired.  One is simple and the other complex, ecompassing many more variables than this game.  

So while I won't continue to post along the lines that I have, I would ask that you edit the title to.  It's still misleading.

Modifié par Gockey, 18 juin 2012 - 08:34 .

[Anubis_TPF]

My favorites in order are:
Asari Adept (original) with a Phalanx and Hurricane
Salarian Infiltrator with a Raptor
Human Engineer with a Mattox
Asari Vanguard with a Carnifex

[MrDaniels1985]

Derek Hollan wrote...

I know it's difficult to keep everyone on the same page so, at the risk of confusing the issue, let me try to clarify again.

The term effective can also be subjective here.  If you aren't sure what I am asking then you may be entering your own idea of what that means.

Contribution of success is the key here.  Some classes / builds are designed to be damage dealers moreso than others.  That's a design decision.  Often, these classes / builds will top the scoreboards.

I came from a support role in the military...I provided tactical meteorology for combat units.  That made my role extremely important to them and in turn made me an an effective part of the team.  It wasn't that I wasn't required to fight.  I had to carry a rifle as well.  But again, I stress, I was more effective giving the team the necessary data they needed tactically.

The same goes for how you perceive effectiveness...Did you succeed?  Yes.  Did you contribute in some unsung way that won't be recognized by score or number of kills in the game?  Possibly.

The competitive nature of gamers is such that there is a perception that score or kills makes you more effective when the reality is that effectiveness is how well you fulfill a particular role.

Hopefully that keeps things a bit more civil.

Cheers

Couldn't agree more. I'm gonna go out on a limb and assume that this why a fair amount of us wish there was no scoreboard.