493 réponses à ce sujet

[UKStory135]

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

One thing that is unsung in this game is drawing aggro from the enemies.  I always spec my engineers with full health because I feel that they have the job to draw fire off of others (except for the QME).  If my drone won't draw fire, than I might as well draw it myself while I am debuffing the enemies for my infiltrators and asari commandos.

[Gockey]

MrDaniels1985 wrote...


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.

I can agree with this.  No matter what game people are playing the scoreboard seems to cause a lot more aggravation than anything else.  Even in games where the scoreboard is more complicated (i'm looking at you SWTOR PvP board) and offers more variables, it seems to only provide more to argue about.  

Ah well, most people are competivitve by nature. 

[Homey C-Dawg]

As far as effectiveness, I'm a map revealing tech bursting monster with a MQE. Probably the easiest gold games I've played are with sensor sweep QME. It completely eliminates the enemies ability to surprise me. I also have done exceedingly well with asari vanguard with no stasis (gasp!). Tanker, flanker, medic, destructor. CQC Justicar is another one where I can provide as much utility as damage since I use a hybrid bubble and use it in a hybrid way..

As far as pure fun, I can't hardly beat full melee vorcha. Just too much fun to flank a group and wipe them all out in a fury of flying claws and napalm. Also QE and GE are some of my favorites because I love tossing turrets all over the place.

[Cosmo G. Spacely]

Asari Justicar with the cerebus harrier or Saber or Wraith shotgun.

Wish they would make the Crusader similar to the wraith in weight or given the AJ a 30% weight reduction in shotguns as well..

[tholloway93]

my salarian infiltrator with a widow. secondly my kroguard with my wraith

[CrazyManimalR]

Turian Sentinel with 0/6/6/6/6 and a mattock

[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.

Iron Man as a soldier was dependent on him needing to be slightly larger than the Cap, but Cap also needed a power that acted as a shield hence Shockwave with an Adept.

All of the builds have proven effective when acting alone or in cooperation with others. Efficiency and effectiveness played a role in their builds and weapon choices. It must be noted, however, that regardless of build/weapon effectiveness and efficiency, the true measure of quality in these characters comes with the understanding of what it is meant for and how to do. Player skill is key.

[tetsutsuru]

Gockey wrote...

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.

So, of course, YOU are correct, and the OP "phrased the question incorrectly".

And you come along forcing YOUR interpretation of the word "effectiveness" as simply mostdamage/mostkills/highestscore/either/any/all.

And the other folks who posted, trying to tell you that the question is subjective and that the word "effectiveness" is more flexible than the one aspect you've been lobbying about, are the ones "trolling you"?  Did it ever occur to you that you might be the only one, or among the minority, in this thread that construed "effectiveness" as simply mostdamage/mostkills/highestscore/either/any/all?

Oh, the pride.

Jesus, dude.  You are a sample size of ONE.  Voice your opinion.  But keep in mind that it is YOUR opinion, and merely an opinion, and NOT fact.  And you do not have any right to impose your opinions on others as such.  It does nothing but make you look like a bigger toolbag than you already do.

Modifié par tetsutsuru, 18 juin 2012 - 09:10 .

[Dshinakuma]

What I use to kill things quick:

Geth Infiltrator Spec'd for damage 6/6/6/6/0 (Yeah I know, Glass Cannon!)
Weapon(s) of choice: Claymore, Krysae, Valiant

Why would I want to make things challenging. The enemies are tough as it is, so this is my most dependable build.

[Malditor]

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

I apologize for rising to the bait that was put forth here. I have a hard time when people try to argue that something someone from BW specifically states not being true or doesn't matter.

[LadyAlekto]

If "contribution of succes" matters the most

It would be my Geth Who
GE with revenant x gps x full healing turret and no overload, its the best class i have to support a team independt of what they do, i can hold lines on my own easily, dispatch groups of enemys or hvt's in no time, i am watching everyones back with that class assuring their survival oftentimes at the cost of my own score and life

Sure with my gi i am annihilation herself, with the aj i am the mg/raptor nest of nightmares untold, but only as ge i am the one that is capable of assuring success, always

*edit* i find this build also quite boring, i have nothing besides my own skill that demolishes the enemy, unlike soldier or gi where i have neat frags or the pm

Modifié par ShadedPhoenix, 18 juin 2012 - 09:01 .

[Adhok42]

Derek Hollan wrote...

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.

Cheers

That may have been a heavy support role with little to no fighting but I **** you not, you were like GOD to us pilots because the data you fed us determined if we flew or not.

If we didn't fly because the data you gave us said so, the troops doing actual combat fighting didn't get their close air support. That can put them in quite a bit of a pickle at times. Don't sell yourself short. The role of a support unit CAN change the entire course of a battle. It's not all blood and bullets that get the glory. Support is the only reason combat units can actually fight. No support means no intel, no ammuntion resupply, no fuel, no logistics, no medical attention, no heavy fire, no antipersonel fire, and no targeting. That can quickly make things a nightmare for the guy with the rifle.

Gamers can be a very spoiled bunch, always being the ones to get the glory in the boots of the man with the rifle with no recongnition to the silent supporter in the shadows who's efforts made his fight even remotely possible.

I have no problem playing support to others. I've been support and I've seen the power it wields. You can get the kill if you want and flex your muscles proclaming you are baddest thing since Muhammed Ali but I know who really made it possible for you to even live as long as you did. And you can't see them.

[Gockey]

 

Malditor wrote...

I apologize for instigatingand trolling so obviously. I have a hard time when people refute my opinions with fact.

 

Apology accepted.

tetsutsuru wrote...
So, of course, YOU are correct, and the OP "phrased the question incorrectly".

And you come along forcing YOUR interpretation of the word "effectiveness" as simply mostdamage/mostkills/highestscore/either/any/all.

And the other folks who posted, trying to tell you that the question is subjective and that the word "effectiveness" is more flexible than the one aspect you've been lobbying about, are the ones "trolling you"?

Did it ever occur to you that you might be the only one, or among the minority, in this thread that construed "effectiveness" as simply mostdamage/mostkills/highestscore/either/any/all?

Oh, the pride.

Jesus, dude.  You are a sample size of ONE.  Voice your opinion.  But keep in mind that it is YOUR opinion, and merely an opinion, and NOT fact.  And you do not have any right to impose your opinions on others as such.  It does nothing but make you look like a bigger toolbag than you already do.

*yawn*  Hypocrite much?  You want to come into the thread and exemplify everything you just wanted lob at me?  Pot meet kettle.  

Anyways dude, last I checked we have this thing called language, where certain sounds mean certain things.  Don't like it?  Too bad.  It's not about me being correct or you.  It's about what is right.  If your that stuck on the who I feel bad for you.  

Regardless of your misinformation above words have specific meanings and when ordered together: context.  I'm not looking to voice my opinion.  Just facts.  Now if you want to debate semantics feel free, but that would be your opinion.  So seriously step off that soap box before you embarass yourself any further.

Modifié par Gockey, 18 juin 2012 - 09:11 .

[SanguineRose]

Human soldier. Mattock X and Eviscerator Xboth with damage and piercing mods. Skills AR, frag, fitness, and alliance training. Specced for maximum offensive weapon damage, 4 grenades, can use AR as an impromptu shield recharge as well as to deal massive damage.

I use her as a front-line soldier or a backdoor guard.

Is it entertaining? yes. Is it as entertaining as some of my other builds? no. Sadly.

[tetsutsuru]

Gockey wrote...

tetsutsuru wrote...
So, of course, YOU are correct, and the OP "phrased the question incorrectly".

And you come along forcing YOUR interpretation of the word "effectiveness" as simply mostdamage/mostkills/highestscore/either/any/all.

And the other folks who posted, trying to tell you that the question is subjective and that the word "effectiveness" is more flexible than the one aspect you've been lobbying about, are the ones "trolling you"?

Did it ever occur to you that you might be the only one, or among the minority, in this thread that construed "effectiveness" as simply mostdamage/mostkills/highestscore/either/any/all?

Oh, the pride.

Jesus, dude.  You are a sample size of ONE.  Voice your opinion.  But keep in mind that it is YOUR opinion, and merely an opinion, and NOT fact.  And you do not have any right to impose your opinions on others as such.  It does nothing but make you look like a bigger toolbag than you already do.

*yawn*  Hypocrite much?  You want to come into the thread and exemplify everything you just wanted lob at me?  Pot meet kettle.  

Anyways dude, last I checked we have this thing called language, where certain sounds mean certain things.  Don't like it?  Too bad.  It's not about me being correct or you.  It's about what is right.  If your that stuck on the who I feel bad for you.  

Regardless of your misinformation above words have specific meanings and when ordered together: context.  I'm not looking to voice my opinion.  Just facts.  Now if you want to debate semantics feel free, but that would be your opinion.  So seriously step off that soap box before you embarass yourself any further.

Seriously, man.  Do yourself a favor and just stop.

Actually, that'd also be favor to BSN.

Modifié par tetsutsuru, 18 juin 2012 - 09:12 .

[Derek Hollan]

Adhok42 wrote...

Derek Hollan wrote...

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.

Cheers

That may have been a heavy support role with little to no fighting but I **** you not, you were like GOD to us pilots because the data you fed us determined if we flew or not.

If we didn't fly because the data you gave us said so, the troops doing actual combat fighting didn't get their close air support. That can put them in quite a bit of a pickle at times. Don't sell yourself short. The role of a support unit CAN change the entire course of a battle. It's not all blood and bullets that get the glory. Support is the only reason combat units can actually fight. No support means no intel, no ammuntion resupply, no fuel, no logistics, no medical attention, no heavy fire, no antipersonel fire, and no targeting. That can quickly make things a nightmare for the guy with the rifle.

Gamers can be a very spoiled bunch, always being the ones to get the glory in the boots of the man with the rifle with no recongnition to the silent supporter in the shadows who's efforts made his fight even remotely possible.

I have no problem playing support to others. I've been support and I've seen the power it wields. You can get the kill if you want and flex your muscles proclaming you are baddest thing since Muhammed Ali but I know who really made it possible for you to even live as long as you did. And you can't see them.

Haha, thanks for the encouragement.

Cheers

[Gockey]

tetsutsuru wrote...

Gockey wrote...

tetsutsuru wrote...
So, of course, YOU are correct, and the OP "phrased the question incorrectly".

And you come along forcing YOUR interpretation of the word "effectiveness" as simply mostdamage/mostkills/highestscore/either/any/all.

And the other folks who posted, trying to tell you that the question is subjective and that the word "effectiveness" is more flexible than the one aspect you've been lobbying about, are the ones "trolling you"?

Did it ever occur to you that you might be the only one, or among the minority, in this thread that construed "effectiveness" as simply mostdamage/mostkills/highestscore/either/any/all?

Oh, the pride.

Jesus, dude.  You are a sample size of ONE.  Voice your opinion.  But keep in mind that it is YOUR opinion, and merely an opinion, and NOT fact.  And you do not have any right to impose your opinions on others as such.  It does nothing but make you look like a bigger toolbag than you already do.

*yawn*  Hypocrite much?  You want to come into the thread and exemplify everything you just wanted lob at me?  Pot meet kettle.  

Anyways dude, last I checked we have this thing called language, where certain sounds mean certain things.  Don't like it?  Too bad.  It's not about me being correct or you.  It's about what is right.  If your that stuck on the who I feel bad for you.  

Regardless of your misinformation above words have specific meanings and when ordered together: context.  I'm not looking to voice my opinion.  Just facts.  Now if you want to debate semantics feel free, but that would be your opinion.  So seriously step off that soap box before you embarass yourself any further.

Seriously, man.  Do yourself a favor and just stop.

Stop what?  I'm just replying to you and illuminating things for everyone to see that you clearly degned to overlook.   Feel free to make a constructive post on topic or not directed at me and I won't give it a glance.  

Try to spread misinformation or act like a hypocrite and expect to be called on it.

edit* I especially like your new miss cleo hat.  lol @ you telling me not to speak for others when you post that.

Modifié par Gockey, 18 juin 2012 - 09:15 .

[T1l]

Derek Hollan wrote...

Although you consider it your most effective build / weapon combination, is it also the one you are most entertained with?

Geth Engineer is what I enjoy playing the most. I really like the defensive abilities of the turret as well as crowd control with Overload. I use a Geth Pulse Assault Rifle because it fits, and if I'm debuffing with an ammo power the high rate of fire seems to work well.

I'm probably more effective as a Turian Soldier or a Salarian Infiltrator, though. Turian Soldier with a revenant and I tend to do very well (even on Gold) and the SI with a Black Widow is an absolute devestator for obvious reasons.

Still love my Geth. Wouldn't play anything else.

[tetsutsuru]

Gockey wrote...

tetsutsuru wrote...

Gockey wrote...

tetsutsuru wrote...
So, of course, YOU are correct, and the OP "phrased the question incorrectly".

And you come along forcing YOUR interpretation of the word "effectiveness" as simply mostdamage/mostkills/highestscore/either/any/all.

And the other folks who posted, trying to tell you that the question is subjective and that the word "effectiveness" is more flexible than the one aspect you've been lobbying about, are the ones "trolling you"?

Did it ever occur to you that you might be the only one, or among the minority, in this thread that construed "effectiveness" as simply mostdamage/mostkills/highestscore/either/any/all?

Oh, the pride.

Jesus, dude.  You are a sample size of ONE.  Voice your opinion.  But keep in mind that it is YOUR opinion, and merely an opinion, and NOT fact.  And you do not have any right to impose your opinions on others as such.  It does nothing but make you look like a bigger toolbag than you already do.

*yawn*  Hypocrite much?  You want to come into the thread and exemplify everything you just wanted lob at me?  Pot meet kettle.  

Anyways dude, last I checked we have this thing called language, where certain sounds mean certain things.  Don't like it?  Too bad.  It's not about me being correct or you.  It's about what is right.  If your that stuck on the who I feel bad for you.  

Regardless of your misinformation above words have specific meanings and when ordered together: context.  I'm not looking to voice my opinion.  Just facts.  Now if you want to debate semantics feel free, but that would be your opinion.  So seriously step off that soap box before you embarass yourself any further.

Seriously, man.  Do yourself a favor and just stop.

Stop what?  I'm just replying to you and illuminating things for everyone to see that you clearly degned to overlook.   Feel free to make a constructive post on topic or not directed at me and I won't give it a glance.  

Try to spread misinformation or act like a hypocrite and expect to be called on it.

Do you seriously need me to clarify that I mean for you to stop posting?

Ok, now I think you have more pressing issues other than your beef with the Infiltrator class.

[AldarionnEB]

The class I am the deadliest with is the Geth Engineer. That class has a significant box of tricks even after the Hunter mode nerf, and I have gotten very good at working around the limitations of having low health and shields using my Turret and cover. I generally use a Talon or a Geth Plasma Shotgun for the build. Fortunately this class is also pretty high on the list of my more entertaining classes.

classes I find more entertaining than the Geth Engineer are the Drell Adept (Grenades! Grenades everywhere!), the Phoenix Vanguard (Whiplash mother****er!) and the Geth Infiltrator Melee build (Oh I'm sorry, you wanted to maintain your molecular cohesion? My bad.) I'm not more effective with any of those than I am with the Geth Engineer, but they sure are a riot to play!

[david_demos484]

My most effective: male quarian infiltrator with a reager X and arc grenades for dmg and armor. I had my highest scoring game with him on firbase glacier against cerberus.. ~166,000 and that is without the bonus from random random gold.

My most fun to play: asari justicar with the offensive bubble and talon; especially if I run around with a buddy who is spamming somekind of area biotic detonator..like smash.

I have read a lot on this topic about people enjoying the drell adept. I don't really play him as I used him a lot when I first started out, but didn't like how squishy he was on gold. I am going to have to try him again though. What type of build/weapon choice would you guys suggest for him?

[Gockey]

tetsutsuru wrote...

Gockey wrote...

tetsutsuru wrote...

Gockey wrote...

tetsutsuru wrote...
So, of course, YOU are correct, and the OP "phrased the question incorrectly".

And you come along forcing YOUR interpretation of the word "effectiveness" as simply mostdamage/mostkills/highestscore/either/any/all.

And the other folks who posted, trying to tell you that the question is subjective and that the word "effectiveness" is more flexible than the one aspect you've been lobbying about, are the ones "trolling you"?

Did it ever occur to you that you might be the only one, or among the minority, in this thread that construed "effectiveness" as simply mostdamage/mostkills/highestscore/either/any/all?

Oh, the pride.

Jesus, dude.  You are a sample size of ONE.  Voice your opinion.  But keep in mind that it is YOUR opinion, and merely an opinion, and NOT fact.  And you do not have any right to impose your opinions on others as such.  It does nothing but make you look like a bigger toolbag than you already do.

*yawn*  Hypocrite much?  You want to come into the thread and exemplify everything you just wanted lob at me?  Pot meet kettle.  

Anyways dude, last I checked we have this thing called language, where certain sounds mean certain things.  Don't like it?  Too bad.  It's not about me being correct or you.  It's about what is right.  If your that stuck on the who I feel bad for you.  

Regardless of your misinformation above words have specific meanings and when ordered together: context.  I'm not looking to voice my opinion.  Just facts.  Now if you want to debate semantics feel free, but that would be your opinion.  So seriously step off that soap box before you embarass yourself any further.

Seriously, man.  Do yourself a favor and just stop.

Stop what?  I'm just replying to you and illuminating things for everyone to see that you clearly degned to overlook.   Feel free to make a constructive post on topic or not directed at me and I won't give it a glance.  

Try to spread misinformation or act like a hypocrite and expect to be called on it.

Do you seriously need me to clarify that I mean for you to stop posting?

Ok, now I think you have more pressing issues other than your beef with the Infiltrator class.

Do you seriously need reading comprehension lessons?  I clearly addressed your post and then dismissed it for the drivel that it was.  

I know you clearly have nothing more important to do then attack others.  Please your embarrasing yourself.

[T1l]

What's with the ****posting, guys?

[Kloreep]

Yay for supporting Gethgineers. One of the funnest parts of playing them is seeing the crazy bleep other players will do once they are confident the turret will be there for them, like Vanguards who obviously haven't specced half blast nevertheless doing two Novas in a row.

[SanguineRose]

Gockey, Tetsutsuru, take it somewhere else. Seriously.

Probably the most entertaining build for me is my Drell Vanguard ever since I got the Talon. Biotic charge, blam blam blam, charge, blam.