Aller au contenu

Photo

"Looking at Tactical cloak because 30+% of the players use Infiltrator"


223 réponses à ce sujet

#151
someN7orother

someN7orother
  • Members
  • 183 messages

paincanbefun wrote...
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.

Only he wasn't "essentially correct", by any stretch of the imagination. He displayed a glaring inability to grasp an essential game mechanic, and is either exaggerating or flat out wrong in most of his other points. The OP is little more than a rant.

As someone else said before, he has no business talking game balance, nor playing gold outside of FBWG either. Devs don't have to acknowledge or respond to nonsense, but they DO have to enforce their board guidelines.

Check out the "Balance ALL the things!" thread for an example of how to conduct a reasoned, polite and productive discussion on gameplay balance.

Modifié par someN7orother, 22 juin 2012 - 05:42 .


#152
JGDD

JGDD
  • Members
  • 2 106 messages

ParthianShotX wrote...

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.

Image IPB

 
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.  



I'm more confused than amused. They pulled this number flatly stating it's under observation due to the high use. However, it makes me wonder if it's being used more often since it's one of the least glitched classes in the entire game.

Vanguards are off the list and anyone that has played the class in the last three months knows why. Many classes (HS, KV, AJA) suffer from outright broken power evolutions which puts them in the 'do not use' pile for me. So how can Bioware justify their number crunching when it's skewed from the start? Balancing infiltrators, or any class, is going to be nearly impossible when so many things are just not working as intended for a baseline reading. These are larger issues that should have been dealt with long before any notion of weekly balancing even started.

#153
tMc Tallgeese

tMc Tallgeese
  • Members
  • 2 028 messages
The high percentage of infiltrators is due to its versatility. An infiltrator kills, revives, grabs objectives and gives the team a high powered precision strike option. Tactical cloak is an essential tool of the infiltrator's arsenal and despite many player's complaints, it is not overpowered.

Tactical cloak's reputation is biased because of the way that most non-infiltrators view it's buffing to the sniper damage. In the same respect, you could argue that combat drones, Geth turrets, hunter mode, adrenaline rush, grenades, and ballistic blades, biotic charge/nova and stasis are all over-powering in the right hands. I've spent a lot of time in each of the classes and have found that each of them have at least one build that can unleash an unstoppable wave of destruction. Should each of them be "rebalanced" because I can find them to be over-powering?

I realize that many cry out for the infiltrator to be nerfed, but I have a different suggestion, give each class a power buff specific to a weapon class. Instead of only offering a weight reduction, give the classes a boost to weapon damage equal to 15-20%. This gives all classes a power that many find they are lacking and allows the infiltrator community to remain as it is.

Adept - Pistol
Soldier - ALL WEAPONS 
Engineer - Shotgun/SMG
Sentinel - Assault Rifle/Pistol
Vanguard - Shotgun/Pistol

I would like to thank BioWare for considering the community's input.

#154
ArmeniusLOD

ArmeniusLOD
  • Members
  • 529 messages
Unless they do something that completely cripples Tac Cloak, I really don't see the proportion of players using Infiltrators on Gold going down. I really don't see what the problem is with people using Infiltrators more often anyway. If they're really concerned with how people are playing the game, why not do something to the single player to discourage people from playing Soldier all the time like, I don't know, making the default class something other than Soldier or not having a default Shepard at all?

Now I'm not needing a whambulance like some of the people on the forum about this, as I completely agree that something needs to be done to balance the power. But I believe Bioware is going about it for the wrong reasons if what they're most concerned about is how people want to play the game.

Modifié par ArmeniusLOD, 22 juin 2012 - 05:49 .


#155
Brenon Holmes

Brenon Holmes
  • BioWare Employees
  • 483 messages

greghorvath wrote...
 Like in the case of 1.03? :whistle:


Zing... :happy:

It does appear that there were some problematic elements in that patch yes...  But those should be addressed in the next one. It's unfortunate, but that's basically where we're at. 

Modifié par Brenon Holmes, 22 juin 2012 - 05:44 .


#156
GaryMaple

GaryMaple
  • Members
  • 612 messages
They can do what they please with rebalancing Infiltrators... as long as the Geth Infiltrator Scorpion build still remains viable.

#157
Optimistman

Optimistman
  • Members
  • 684 messages
I couldn't agree with this post anymore. That is all. Hopefully this change does come.

#158
Optimistman

Optimistman
  • Members
  • 684 messages

someN7orother wrote...

paincanbefun wrote...
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.

Only he wasn't "essentially correct", by any stretch of the imagination. He displayed a glaring inability to grasp an essential game mechanic, and is either exaggerating or flat out wrong in most of his other points. The OP is little more than a rant.

As someone else said before, he has no business talking game balance, nor playing gold outside of FBWG either. Devs don't have to acknowledge or respond to nonsense, but they DO have to enforce their board guidelines.

Check out the "Balance ALL the things!" thread for an example of how to conduct a reasoned, polite and productive discussion on gameplay balance.


Uhh, shut up kid. please.

#159
Killahead

Killahead
  • Members
  • 2 444 messages

Brenon Holmes wrote...

greghorvath wrote...
 Like in the case of 1.03? :whistle:


Zing... :happy:

It does appear that there were some problematic elements in that patch yes...  But those should be addressed in the next one. It's unfortunate, but that's basically where we're at. 



Good to hear it from the horse's mouth. Have full confidence that you guys will sort it out and small "problematic elements" won't stop me from continuing playing the game until you do.

#160
someN7orother

someN7orother
  • Members
  • 183 messages

Optimistman wrote...
Uhh, shut up kid. please.

Make me, big boy. :happy:

#161
richcz3

richcz3
  • Members
  • 170 messages

AlienSpaceBats wrote...
.. what's the point of upgrading the number of grenades to 6 or more if you can never have that number again in a match? Headshot damage really needs to return on the Primes and Atlases, not bothered about Banshees and Brutes.

The newest maps are less a problem with replenishing Grenades, but older maps in comparison are bugged. Running around from ammo box to ammo box hoping for 1 grenade is just crazy in the heat of battle. Worse when you run right into a mob. Yes, you can  get a full replenish using Thermal Clip Capacity but running through your stash early is a recipe for dissaster. 

As for the removal of head shots on Primes and Atlases, I think that was Nerf designed to subdue Infiltrators TC but its effect on other classes is more detrimental. I doubt they are bringing Head shots back anytime soon. 

Modifié par richcz3, 22 juin 2012 - 05:53 .


#162
paincanbefun

paincanbefun
  • Members
  • 1 014 messages

someN7orother wrote...

Only he wasn't "essentially correct", by any stretch of the imagination. He displayed a glaring inability to grasp an essential game mechanic...


the vanguard glitch.  he used the phrase "lying jerks" to refer to the vanguard glitch, the fact that there was a communication about it being fixed and the fact that it is not fixed.  then they banned him for using that phrase.  (yes, it is a long rant and my comment isn't directed at any of the balance concerns he has)

the following blue post probably clarifies the difference between what was said and what would have been a lie.

even an innocent miscommunication however is legitimately frustrating, in my opinion, given the persistence of bugs and the lack of official recognition of the bugs, so even if they weren't technically lying- and he had no excuse to be rude- his criticism of that miscommunication seems accurate to me.

thus, censoring him for saying someting that is true (or even just close to true) because he also said it poorly makes me a little uncomfortable.

#163
Tankcommander

Tankcommander
  • Members
  • 1 268 messages

greghorvath wrote...

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!

Image IPB


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? :blink:
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.


Great post, feel this about sums it up.

#164
xcrunr1647

xcrunr1647
  • Members
  • 2 812 messages
I'm gonna go over the classes I play regularly.

Ubergrog wrote...

Soldiers: Huge targets, questionably useful powers, I suppose the big reason why people don't commonly play this is the lack of "shiny" powers and the feel that this class is mostly a "play if you don't know how to use the more complicated classes".  Some powers are useless (Carnage), some are cool but are put on a platform too slow and clumsy for effective use (ballstic blades), others are OK but since soldiers tend to take heavier weapon loadouts makes them ineffective.  Oh, and super-slow melee attacks look great in a promo video, but are terrible in the actual game. Has anyone explained why a Phantom can ignore a grenade?  Oh, sorry I couldn't help kill the banshee, I was too busy running ALL OVER THE MAP TRYING TO REPLENISH MY GRENADES.


Excuse me? Questionably useful powers? Heavier weapons make them ineffective? Have you tried the Turian Soldier's heavy melee? It's damn fast. If you're running all over the map trying to replenish your grenades, you're using them too much. Learn to aim properly and use your weapon more. 

I don't use the Krysae anymore because my aim deteriorates to **** whenever I use it. I used to be able to put every one of my Valiant rounds into an enemy's head. Then I started using the Krysae, aiming for the middle of groups and going for splash damage, and I stopped getting headshots, even when I tried. I've stopped playing infiltrators altogether, because the Krysae isn't that fun for me, but every other infiltrator uses it...so me playing one is pretty much worthless. My aim is finally improving. And the rate at which I mow down enemies with the Human and Turian Soldiers proves it. Marksman (usually with the Phaeston) and Adrenaline Rush (always with the Harrier) are great powers. 

Sentinels: Too many powers, too few points.  Some should not even be there (like the vorcha), all of the issues of Adepts and Engineers combined into a single package. The Krogan is tough as a hand full of rusty nails though.

The Turian Sentinel is the true jack of all trades. Synergizes with biotic and tech power users, and the racial bonuses to weapon stability and accuracy make it a solid assault rifle user, as well. I can do well with just my Phaeston, without even using powers. 

Vanguards: I am calling you out here, Bioware.  You lied to us on your 1.03 bugfix list.  The vanguard bug is still there, and that's why people don't play them. 

Novaguards, mostly. I've never bugged out on my Kroguard. Best tank in the game. 

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. Vanguards do still glitch, I'll give you that.
2. It keeps you alive. Don't ask them to remove things you don't fully understand. 
3. No complaints here. 
4. Same as above. 
5. Huh?
6. Meh. 
7. Weak? Yes. Useless? I don't think so. 
8. People ask for more races...they get them. Then they complain that they're not different enough. Jesus. 
9. The one good class? Seriously? Elitism at its best. 
10. Sure, but you know they'll buff all the enemies if they do, right?

:whistle:

#165
Guest_The Mad Hanar_*

Guest_The Mad Hanar_*
  • Guests
It all comes down to the fact that people have to force their way of playing on others. They can't stand the fact that other people like to play as Infiltrators. It eats away at them.

#166
GroverA125

GroverA125
  • Members
  • 1 539 messages

Derek Hollan wrote...

justgimmedudedammit wrote...

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!

Image IPB


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.

Image IPB


While I am heavily against the infiltrator being a god and support a debuff towards them (or a buff to other classes, to give us the whole escalation concept), I'd strongly advise making the changes light. Don't throw a nerf bomb on it, just take a little more time, spend maybe three weeks consecutively giving it less and less effect. That way, you have a far more accurate backup plan if you overshoot it or undershoot it.

We want them debuffed, not useless. I personally am looking for a flat playing field, so that everyone can play with whatever style they like on the hardest difficulty (provided they have an average skill level). Please make sure Fangan (or anyone else who is involved) is not too overzealous with the nerf, as this will cause more problems than it will fix (infiltrators are heavily relied upon by teammates, a severe debuff will cause problems for other classes who won't be able to fill the gaps that cloak fills, especially objectives)

#167
xcrunr1647

xcrunr1647
  • Members
  • 2 812 messages

GroverA125 wrote...

We want them debuffed, not useless. I personally am looking for a flat playing field, so that everyone can play with whatever style they like on the hardest difficulty (provided they have an average skill level).


If you are only of "average skill level" you shouldn't be able to finish Gold, unless you're being carried. That's what Silver is for. You should need to be good to survive and successfully complete Gold. Four quality players should have to put some serious effort in to complete a Gold run. 

#168
paincanbefun

paincanbefun
  • Members
  • 1 014 messages

xcrunr1647 wrote...

GroverA125 wrote...

We want them debuffed, not useless. I personally am looking for a flat playing field, so that everyone can play with whatever style they like on the hardest difficulty (provided they have an average skill level).


If you are only of "average skill level" you shouldn't be able to finish Gold, unless you're being carried. That's what Silver is for. You should need to be good to survive and successfully complete Gold. Four quality players should have to put some serious effort in to complete a Gold run. 


the crazy thing is that many silver caliber players want the silver match experience to be called "gold" and to pay gold ammounts of credits.

i play silver mostly.  i'm happy i have bronze to experiement in, silver to play in generally, and gold to play once in a while when i feel up for it.

the people that want gold to be silver though...what do they envision themselves doing when they become gold caliber players?

Modifié par paincanbefun, 22 juin 2012 - 06:17 .


#169
Dharvy

Dharvy
  • Members
  • 741 messages

Brenon Holmes wrote...

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:

Maybe put this in a sticky or somehow let it be known that BW knows about the bugs and the general weekly balances fixes are not patches that will deal with the bugs. Or maybe every time the post that announces balance changes can somehow let it be known that these are hotfixes and not a patch and some issues are patch required to be able to fix. I personally already understood this but it may help with a lot of the crying about bugs fixed instead of balances you seem to get with every unfavorable balance. So hopefully when someone read the balance they can know there's a difference. Just a suggestion. May help, may not but it'll at least be easier to quote or point out to people who seems to think there's no real difference.

#170
DylanBar

DylanBar
  • Members
  • 79 messages
I'm curious how much of that 33.6% is exclusive to fbwgg. Farmers are always going to farm, barring some radical change to the store which is unlikely and I am not advocating. They will spam lobbies with whichever map/class/loadout is thought to earn credits efficiently, quickly, with minimal effort, etc. An idea with this in mind is to make all public games r/r/selectable difficulty. Farmers looking to replay one map repeatedly would do so privately, freeing public lobbies from an overused map/enemy/class combo. Not ideal, i know, but as worthy of consideration as many other ideas as the goal is promoting fun and player diversity. Thanks to any that read this.

#171
Kalas Magnus

Kalas Magnus
  • Members
  • 10 371 messages

Linither wrote...

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

Yep the forum taught me about 85 percent of the things are bugged. 

#172
Dharvy

Dharvy
  • Members
  • 741 messages

Tankcommander wrote...

greghorvath wrote...

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!

Image IPB


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? :blink:
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.


Great post, feel this about sums it up.

And I agree, I have more fun with my other classes than my infiltrator on bronze and silver. And silver or fbwgg is my testing ground if I bring out a new build or I read about a build and I want to test its damage/versatility out. And most other classes need some sort of synergy with another class to be quite effective. I believe the sole reason that infiltrators are played moreso on Gold is because they can turn invisible which is one of the most beneficial skill on gold, add to that they can do critical damage, which is typically about twice the damage of regular attacks and is also typical of almost any and every rogue/assassin character in almost any game.

Gold is not that forgiving for silver/bronze playstyles unless you have perfect team synergy. You're a melee character? You can dominate silver and bronze, but on Gold you need to tone it down or have a team at your back giving you adequate support. You want to run and gun? Also you can dominate silver and bronze, Gold not so much, still need a team synergy at you back to make it effective. But on the other hand, an infiltrators playstyle, cloaking and lining up shots, flanking is viable in silver and transitions into gold thus making an easier transition. The same go for adepts and engineers, there playstyles easily flow into a more cautious self aware gold match.

But as long as Infiltrators have invisibility they'll always be more gold viable than others and you'll see them more in Gold matches. Nerfing the damage a little probably won't do much because the utility of invisibility is still more useful on gold than other abilities. But, I understand the idea of choosing between being a stealthy cloaking rogue and a damage dealing critical hitting assassin.

#173
jerrinehart

jerrinehart
  • Members
  • 485 messages

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!

Image IPB


Incase this wasn't obvious, I'll point it out. The reason for this is not because Infiltrators are incredibly OP, but because MOST of the other options are utter GARBAGE on Gold. Anyone who tries to dispute this is full of it.

I am not arguing if Infiltrators need adjusted, what I am saying is a lot of the other classes are NOT Gold viable, you guys are looking at the issue all wrong and I refuse to believe you guys don't see that...

Modifié par jerrinehart, 22 juin 2012 - 07:35 .


#174
DragoGoldenwing

DragoGoldenwing
  • Members
  • 439 messages
I think the best point raised so far is that 33% of people play Infiltrator on Gold because so many other classes are just too buggy to risk bringing into a high-difficulty match. People are saying 'I use so and so all the time, there are no classes too risky for Gold,' but these people are talking about playing with friends who have established teamwork.
Random lobbies do not typically bring teamwork to the table. It brings to the table four players so convinced of everyone else's uselessness that they treat the other players like revivable Decoys while they try to solo the waves. Which means you need classes strong at solo play. Adepts, Infiltrators, some Engineers. Of those, most people are more comfortable with Infiltrator because TC gives a potential complete aggro dump onto the other three Decoys who are obviously not going to be doing their jobs because this is random lobby play and you're the only one who ever does things right.
That's the mentality you end up with on random lobby play. It's prevalent in any shooter with random lobbies. TF2, ME3, MW.

Infiltrator being the most widely used class by a huge margin isn't indicative of a problem with balance of Infiltrator, it's indicative of a problem with balance of the rest of the classes - but mostly it is indicative of a problem with the playerbase.
Several things have been done lately to try to indirectly nerf the Infiltrator class. Headshot bonuses on boss mobs, nerfing Hunter Mode. But in both cases, these changes were far more punishing to the rest of the classes.
Heavy weapons classes already suffered from having so many of them 'meant for' using full-auto or burst-fire weapons in a game where such weapons are already considered underperformers because of their weakness against armor and because sustained DPS on Gold is rather difficult when a burst-fire enemy can drop your shields and health within a second (Looking at you Marauders,) long before you can return the favor.
Removing headshot bonuses versus bosses punished these classes far more than it did Infiltrators because they suddenly have no way for their weapons to deal aggravated damage, which turns fighting two or three Primes at once into a situation where you feel like you're trying to stop an avalanche with water hoses - it's theoretically possible but only if you have several water hoses and more water pressure than the average person can provide.
And it's already well-known that the Hunter Mode nerf did far more for further weakening of GEs than it did to the GIs, who just took the nerf in stride and continued to Cloak cycle things to death.
Caster classes of both tech and biotic varieties are suffering from a dearth of bugs and glitches that make many of them perceived under-performers. The exceptions - like Asari Adepts - are considered golden children on Gold because Gold punishes you so heavily for sticking your head out that it indirectly rewards burst-damage characters like (Functioning) casters and Infiltrators who can do inside a one-second cast animation or a single relatively secure Cloak cycle what it can take a heavy weapons class several seconds of sustained fire to accomplish. Several seconds of sustained fire that will leave them near death from return fire, if not dead already. And if there's armor involved, both types of 'heavy weapon' - ARs and Shotguns - are so heavily penalized for damage against it that most heavy weapons classes are relegated to trash mob cleanup because that shield-stripped Banshee can soak up Revenant/Claymore fire all day without TC damage boosts.
And when the above is brought up, the answer is usually 'Use consumables.' And I'm sorry but I should not have to use AP Ammo III/AR-Shotgun Rail III and Gear in every match I play to be able to start to defend myself on a class that is all about using big heavy guns to put some hurt on things.
Which is why Infiltrators are so common. They can do with Tactical Cloak and a high-damage rifle or Shotgun what every other weapons-based class needs expensive consumables and teamwork to do. And this is not a statement meant to infer Infiltrators are imba. It's a statement meant to infer that other weapon classes are severely hampered by current game mechanics and AI on Gold, to the point that it has caused a massive disparity in usage statistics.
And thinking that disparity is a sign of an imbalance on the part of Infiltrators is paying enviable, praise-worthy attention to the minutiae, while completely missing the role of the minutiae in the bigger picture.

Modifié par DragoGoldenwing, 22 juin 2012 - 07:49 .


#175
Derek Hollan

Derek Hollan
  • BioWare Employees
  • 1 099 messages
Please don't read anything further into what is being said.  The single stat Eric brought to our attention only warranted the "why" question.  This only leads to investigation (all parties innocent until proven otherwise, as it were).

This by no stretch of the imagination means we automatically assume the worse and begin brandishing the nerf bats.  The points raised are certainly good points and a great deal of factors are reviewed before any decision is made one way or the other.

A good example would be this thread  that was raised on one single aspect of TC.

Cheers

Image IPB