223 réponses à ce sujet

[IndigoVitare]

Ubergrog wrote...

1. Fix the vanguard glitch, you lying jerks.
2. Remove Shield gate. It should never have been added in the first place.
3. Make headshots possible on boss-mobs again (permitting other weapons-heavy classes some value again)
4. Fix all of the glitched tech powers.
5. If you're going to have units with power-negating abilities, make sure the powers negated make sense (seriously, frag grenades?)
6. Fix sync kill units. Way to make them even more of a headache by making them stun-proof.
7. Make known weak powers more effective. Carnage is a great example of a useless power.
8. Stop making classes virtually identical to one another (No one has managed to convince me that the Vorcha Soldier and sentinel are different in any functional way)
9. Increase the effeciveness of other classes instead of making the ONE good class weaker.  
10. Increase grenade spawn rate at ammo crates.

1. People don't play the Vanguard often not so much because of the glitch but because survivability goes way down at Gold difficulty, so this is irrelevent.
2. The Shield Gate mostly effects the Infiltrator. Abilities and melee ignore it, while other weapon classes probably fire fast enough that it's not a problem.
3. Headshots? Infiltrator speciality again.
4. Tech powers? Infiltrator.
5. Ok.
6. Affects all classes so that's irrelevent.
7. Ok, though considering several Infiltrator powers might be considered weak...
8. Ok, but irrelevent.
9. Does it not occur to you that the majority of classes are the ones that are how they're supposed to be, and the one exceptional one is the anomaly that needs fixing?
10. Ok, but irrelevent as not all classes use Grenades.

So you give 10 points as alternatives to nerfing the Infiltrator and 3 of them directly benefit the Infiltrator the most and 4 are completely irrelevent with regards to class balance.

[Vloorshad]

Derek Hollan wrote...

CmnDwnWrkn wrote...

ProjectGemini07 wrote...

ElectroNeonPanda wrote...
Regarding the OP, Infiltrators aren't required for Gold.  They just trivialise it.

Trivialise might be slighting overstating the case.  I've had many a gold game go south on objective rounds because we didn't have an infiltrator.  As such, it seems to be standard operating procedure in a lot of gold lobbies to have at least one infiltrator.

So, I'd kind of regard 25% of gold players being this class as something of a normal baseline.  Having 33.6% of gold players rolling infiltrator doesn't really seem to me to be "overly large".

I guess my question back to the devs would be, what is the desired percentage of players playing infiltrator on gold?  Is it 1/6, reflecting parity among the classes?

The basic structure of the "cap the 4 objectives" rounds dictates infiltrators will always have more value than others.

It IS overly large.  It means that each of the other classes is used, on average, a measly 13.3%.

You have, effectively, hit the nail on the head here.  Eric never takes balance issues lightly.  This sort of disparity tells us a lot.  It is not just that people like infiltrators.  If this were solely the case, then we should see a similar disparity on Silver and Bronze difficulty.  Alas, this is not the case as Eric points out that infiltrators make up 20.43% on Silver and 15.18% on Bronze.

Cheers!

Wouldn't this breakdown imply that it's easier for players to perform all the tasks on the easier difficulties with any class combination? Infiltrator has the unique ability to cloak, despite it's glitched nature as of late.

[Immortal Strife]

I have no problem with TC being nerfed; I do however believe using player use figures to justify a nerf is a rather weak point especially when the vanguard class can't be used by anyone other then the host ( all serious players know this). Fix the vaguard glitch and the statistics will change.

Modifié par Immortal Strife, 22 juin 2012 - 05:12 .

[JerZey CJ]

Derek Hollan wrote...

Ubergrog wrote...


Fix the vanguard glitch, you lying jerks.
 

Definitely the kind of thing that will get a post noticed...for the wrong reason.

Time for a timeout.

Did...did you just suspend a person for calling you a "jerk" and accusing you of lying?

[InfamousResult]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Still, he didn't even aknowledge any of the points in the post. Just "YOU INSULTED US, BYE BYE!!!" There's so much I want to say about this, but I'm not going to risk a ban. I'll just drop it. This was one of the more well thought out balance posts and it gets treated like garbage. Guess that's the way of the forums.

He doesn't have to reply. We know they're reading the forums. That's good enough. It is rare, if ever, that they actually reply to points on any big discussions- no matter what side of the argument people are on. But they take them into consideration.

[landylan]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

InfamousResult wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Wow, I love how the BioWare rep ignored the majority of the post...

And banned the guy.

I would imagine him seeing the insult was a good indicator of them reading the thread. It wasn't at the top- it wasn't at the bottom- it was in the post, along with a lot of abrasive attitude towards the Staff in general. They don't have to say "hey guys here's a stamp that says WE READ YOUR POST".

And people who break rules get banned.

Still, he didn't even aknowledge any of the points in the post. Just "YOU INSULTED US, BYE BYE!!!" There's so much I want to say about this, but I'm not going to risk a ban. I'll just drop it. This was one of the more well thought out balance posts and it gets treated like garbage. Guess that's the way of the forums.

the original post had no valid points and was overly exaggerated. all he basically said was,"gold is too hard without an infiltrator and every class suffers from major bugs except the infiltrator." the only big bug is the vanguard bug. bioware did not need to reply to a senseless rant from a person who thinks theyre lazy while they are trying to fix bug changes.

[D.Shepard]

Derek Hollan wrote...

CmnDwnWrkn wrote...

ProjectGemini07 wrote...

ElectroNeonPanda wrote...
Regarding the OP, Infiltrators aren't required for Gold.  They just trivialise it.

Trivialise might be slighting overstating the case.  I've had many a gold game go south on objective rounds because we didn't have an infiltrator.  As such, it seems to be standard operating procedure in a lot of gold lobbies to have at least one infiltrator.

So, I'd kind of regard 25% of gold players being this class as something of a normal baseline.  Having 33.6% of gold players rolling infiltrator doesn't really seem to me to be "overly large".

I guess my question back to the devs would be, what is the desired percentage of players playing infiltrator on gold?  Is it 1/6, reflecting parity among the classes?

The basic structure of the "cap the 4 objectives" rounds dictates infiltrators will always have more value than others.

It IS overly large.  It means that each of the other classes is used, on average, a measly 13.3%.

You have, effectively, hit the nail on the head here.  Eric never takes balance issues lightly.  This sort of disparity tells us a lot.  It is not just that people like infiltrators.  If this were solely the case, then we should see a similar disparity on Silver and Bronze difficulty.  Alas, this is not the case as Eric points out that infiltrators make up 20.43% on Silver and 15.18% on Bronze.

Cheers!

Could the disparity be simply the consequence of how confident players are with the class?
I mean on Silver and Bronze I barely care about the weapons. I try all of them and I never use equipement (a part from consumables like missiles etc, if need be) but on Gold I use a more tactical approach.

I play mostly on public teams where sadly there are a lot of not very skilled players. I have noticed the simply presence of an Infiltrator who can revive team mates using cloak is priceless, especially when the three other players are not very good.
Could it be the reason of the disparity?

This is for example the reason I play Infiltrator on Gold.(well I played other classes two, this week is for example my Engineers week ).
On Silver I don't care about this tactical approach too much and I play whatever class I feel the desire to use.

Just my two cents, but I hope my post will useful to your "investigation on Infiltrators"

[ParthianShotX]

Derek Hollan wrote...

justgimmedudedammit wrote...

I'd like to see the numbers after any changes and if they still hold steady. You guys have a plan for that if it manifests itself?

There is no doubt we will be monitoring it afterwards.  Such is the nature of balancing.  It will be at Eric's discretion if he posts any figures though.

 
I'm amused a little by this because of the calls on thiis forum for an INF to support the team as a medic or objective capper.  As a consequence, when I log on to play with my favorite QFE and see a team that could possibly benefit from INF support, I switch.  So . . . I guess my point is that some instances of the choice for INF may lie in factors that have nothing to do with possibly being OP.  

Modifié par ParthianShotX, 22 juin 2012 - 05:14 .

[Traim Eisenblut]

It`s a perfectly valid reason. If 30%+ of the player-base are having fun with a class, it must be nerfed to oblivion so these 30%+ don't have fun no more! Fun is for sissys! This is about equality. Female Quarian Engineers have feelings too! And they have the god damn right to be used in the game as often as every other class! Don't you dare pick Salarian Engineer! Think about how many others use them first. Pick Human Adept. Or Batarian Sentinal. So every class is represented equally through all matches on all platforms. This must be the first goal for Bioware! Everything else would be bad game-design!

[Fisterbear]

Derek Hollan wrote...

Ubergrog wrote...


Fix the vanguard glitch, you lying jerks.
 

Definitely the kind of thing that will get a post noticed...for the wrong reason.

Time for a timeout.

I'm not going to condone what he said or how he said it, but there are bugs that were claimed to have been fixed that were not fixed.

That can only mean one of two things, and I won't state either or I'll be on time out as well.

[Feauce]

Fisterbear wrote...

The numbers aren't that big on bronze and silver. If they were, it would be chalked up to class preference.

No, this is a specific spike for a particular difficulty, indicating that the other classes are not as viable and balance needs to be achieved.

And it can't be because, for those players, Infiltrator is their most effective class. As difficulty goes up, the opportunity for "screwing around" goes down. There's less Biotic Charging into masses of enemies, krogans using their heavy melee to launch things into orbit, etc. It's easy to play that way on Bronze, but Gold is an entirely different animal. It stands to reason that on the higher difficulties, more people will use their most effective characters, and the ones they're the most comfortable with.

The flipside of this is that on Bronze, people are better able to experiment with different builds/weapons, and it's where most new players start out. Before someone gets into a particular playstyle, they'd likely try out different classes, especially as they start unlocking new characters.

Fisterbear wrote...

If the other classes were buffed, the "gold is too easy" posts would inscrease exponentially, and they'd be justified.

Filter out from those "Gold is too easy" threads the following...

(1) Elitists that won't be happy until they get Platinum, where you get nothing if you don't extract, and you have to kill a Reaper/Thresher Maw in Wave 11.
(2) People that play nothing but Firebase White/Geth on Gold, and base their entire opinion upon that.
(3) The ones talking about Gold, trying to sound like they know what they're talking about, when the highest they've actually played is Silver.
(4) The few people who can solo Gold matches. Being exceptional players (assuming the solo run is legitimate), they are outside of consideration for what constitutes "easy" for the majority of people.

If you were to do that, I'd wager that you would find very few threads remaining.

[Saaz5555]

66,4% people think that Infiltrators are op, 33,6% people play Infiltrators.

[mpompeo27]

I find too many factual inaccuracies and subjective rather than objective reasoning in the OP to consider the argument valid.

I think infiltrators are fine btw. No nerf needed. I most play Engineers and Soldiers, and I like having Infiltrators on my team. No they don't carry me, very often the opposite. I find them to be useful but not OP.

[GGW KillerTiger]

Derek Hollan wrote...

CmnDwnWrkn wrote...

ProjectGemini07 wrote...

ElectroNeonPanda wrote...
Regarding the OP, Infiltrators aren't required for Gold.  They just trivialise it.

Trivialise might be slighting overstating the case.  I've had many a gold game go south on objective rounds because we didn't have an infiltrator.  As such, it seems to be standard operating procedure in a lot of gold lobbies to have at least one infiltrator.

So, I'd kind of regard 25% of gold players being this class as something of a normal baseline.  Having 33.6% of gold players rolling infiltrator doesn't really seem to me to be "overly large".

I guess my question back to the devs would be, what is the desired percentage of players playing infiltrator on gold?  Is it 1/6, reflecting parity among the classes?

The basic structure of the "cap the 4 objectives" rounds dictates infiltrators will always have more value than others.

It IS overly large.  It means that each of the other classes is used, on average, a measly 13.3%.

You have, effectively, hit the nail on the head here.  Eric never takes balance issues lightly.  This sort of disparity tells us a lot.  It is not just that people like infiltrators.  If this were solely the case, then we should see a similar disparity on Silver and Bronze difficulty.  Alas, this is not the case as Eric points out that infiltrators make up 20.43% on Silver and 15.18% on Bronze.

Cheers!

That's because bronze and silver are easy and nobody even tries on them anymore. So that in itself is a failaicy for why to not touch the over powered class ....

Also with all the crummy balance changs done so far it seems like he does take them lightly and goes, "Enie meanie minie moe!," to select the ones being talked about then just does random numbers to random parts of the "balanced" subject.

Modifié par GGW KillerTiger, 22 juin 2012 - 05:23 .

[Tankcommander]

Hook-n-Swoop wrote...

Probably the most annoying aspect with playing with infiltrators is the accompanyig aggro dump of TC.

I've played lots of games with infiltrators while I'm a PA, and I've only noticed the aggro dump with it was three infiltrators and I was the odd one out. Otherwise it is not very noticeable and if you are halfway decent you will be fine.

[greghorvath]

Derek Hollan wrote...

You have, effectively, hit the nail on the head here.  Eric never takes balance issues lightly.  This sort of disparity tells us a lot.  It is not just that people like infiltrators.  If this were solely the case, then we should see a similar disparity on Silver and Bronze difficulty.  Alas, this is not the case as Eric points out that infiltrators make up 20.43% on Silver and 15.18% on Bronze.

Cheers!

1. Do you monitor what classes the same person plays, and what their personal difficulty choices are? I play most games I play on gold and often I choose the class that best complements the rest of the team. My number one class is sniper infiltrator (I play sniper in every shooter I play). In public games, where teamwork is not guaranteed, I naturally choose the class I perform best with and that that I think is most helpful to the team. Why would I not choose infiltrator?
2. About the 33%:
People who play gold with randoms often do stick to infiltrator, because of e.g. the following reasons:
- Vanguards are out because of the glitch BioWare is too incompetent to fix. The class is also teamwork dependant, which is scarce when playing with randoms. One class out.
- Sentinels are mostly out because they are sloths. Too much encumbrance and too little damage to compensate for it. Sentinels are specialist that are useful in specific situations. Not a very good class for random/random/random/gold
- Soldiers. Very few people I know can handle a soldier in gold. The HS after the buff is okay, the Batarian is still good in spite of BW screwing up close range stuff, but the others you seldom meet, even when playing with friends.

That leaves us 3 classes:
- Engineers are squishy on gold, but they are worth keeping alive because of the defensive qualities.
- Adepts: very good for gold because of the AoE attacks. One adept in a team is good, 2 is a wrecking crew, even with minimal cooperation.
- Infiltrator

Only 3 classes that are really viable for gold... That 33% doesnt seem so much, does it?

3. Does anyone actually realize how STUPID it is to say that a class needs to be "balanced" because many people are using and enjoying it?
4. 15.18% on bronze. I suppose you have considered the fact that vanguards (who stick to lower difficulties because of the infamous glitch), adepts, sentinels and soldiers clear maps in a matter of seconds. Infiltrator sucks on bronze, because by the time they take aim, AoE powers took care of the wave. Thats why people don't play it there.

BioWare is focusing in the wrong direction and the fan base is just lapping up the garbage. Congratz.

Modifié par greghorvath, 22 juin 2012 - 05:28 .

[paincanbefun]

@OP
.............

dude, you're right about the bugs (i disagree about "too hard"), but you're such a jerk about it...

that almost makes you not right anymore.

Modifié par paincanbefun, 22 juin 2012 - 05:34 .

[Schneemann]

Derek Hollan wrote...

You have, effectively, hit the nail on the head here.  Eric never takes balance issues lightly.  This sort of disparity tells us a lot.  It is not just that people like infiltrators.  If this were solely the case, then we should see a similar disparity on Silver and Bronze difficulty.  Alas, this is not the case as Eric points out that infiltrators make up 20.43% on Silver and 15.18% on Bronze.

Cheers!

But that there is only a disparity on Gold doesn't show that Infiltrators are OP either. If Infiltrators were genuine overpowered, they would be used on every difficulty most. So if anything their increased number in Gold suggests some major flaws in the way higher difficulties are designed, rather than class imbalance.

[greghorvath]

paincanbefun wrote...

.............

dude, you're right about the bugs (i disagree about "too hard"), but you're such a jerk about it...

that almost makes you not right anymore.

Was that addressed at me?

[paincanbefun]

Derek Hollan wrote...

Ubergrog wrote...


Fix the vanguard glitch, you lying jerks.
 

Definitely the kind of thing that will get a post noticed...for the wrong reason.

Time for a timeout.

hm.. i'm  actually not sure if i think this was cool either.

OP was being a jerk himself...but he was also essentially correct, just rude.

i realize that it's against the forum rules, but censoring accurate criticism makes me uncomfortable, even if it is expressed rudely.

[paincanbefun]

greghorvath wrote...

paincanbefun wrote...

.............

dude, you're right about the bugs (i disagree about "too hard"), but you're such a jerk about it...

that almost makes you not right anymore.

Was that addressed at me?

no, sorry, that's to the OP.  didn't read the thread.  i'll go back and edit my post

[Brenon Holmes]

Just as an FYI, since I'm not sure that it's clear... there is a difference between a hotfix and a patch.

Hotfixes can be deployed live and fairly easily (like a lot of the balance tweaks). Patches take a relatively long time to put together and test (especially when you take into account certification).

A lot of things can only be fixed with patches, balance issues are primarily being addressed with hotfixes (because they can be). Hopefully this clarifies things a bit. :happy:

Modifié par Brenon Holmes, 22 juin 2012 - 05:36 .

[greghorvath]

Brenon Holmes wrote...
Patches take a relatively long time to put together and test (especially when you take into account certification).

Like in the case of 1.03?

[paincanbefun]

@ bioware: thank you.

receiving official comments about bugs makes it much easier to accept them and makes me feel more respected as a player of the game.

Modifié par paincanbefun, 22 juin 2012 - 05:38 .

[Linither]

I just thought of another reason that the bronze and silver rates are so low, I bet a lot of new players think TC only affects the first shot out of cloak, I know i made that mistake for a long while, it wasn't until i read otherwise on this forum that i started playing my infil.

Come to think of it, the forums made me a much better player, and I'm sure the same can be said about you guys
NERF THE FORUMZ!! NERF DA FORUMZ!! NERF THE FORUMZ!! NERF DA FORUMZ!!

lol