280 réponses à ce sujet

[hbogyt II]

How about that soldiers get a flat amount of damage boost per shot by default, maybe somewhere around 50?

This will encourage N7 soldiers to carry like real life riflemen slinging an assault rifle.

Other classes do not need asssault rifles to make sense. Infiltrators have sniper rifles. Adepts and engineers have pistols. Vanguards have pistols and shotguns. Sentinels use whatever. These all fit with out preconceived images of those classes, except for assault-rifle-less soldiers of course.

[Bluebeam2012]

Mattock is fine, but I noticed that I run out of ammo very very fast with in when playing Gold.. ><

[Iacov]

Holy-Hamster wrote...

 If you have the harrier already, I'm not sure why this thread exists.....

because I do not want to be forced to use a specific AR - the harrier is awesome, but personally i think the Phaeston looks better...but looks don't matter much if you could also hit a banshee with a toothbrush...

my intention to start this thread was, that it somehow feels awkward to play a soldier and only using rifles that are semi-auto (like the mattock or Saber) or having the Harrier (and Revenant) as the only full-auto alternative

i sometimtes feel like a sniper with the semi-auto gameplay and it would be nice to use some full auto ARs

maybe it's egoistic, but one idea that came to me was, buffing the ARs for soldiers...in case the dev's share my view that the AR should be the "native" weapon of a soldier
in case everyone thinks else...don't mind me... xD

edit:

hbogyt II wrote...

How about that soldiers get a flat amount of damage boost per shot by default, maybe somewhere around 50?

This will encourage N7 soldiers to carry like real life riflemen slinging an assault rifle.

Other
classes do not need asssault rifles to make sense. Infiltrators have
sniper rifles. Adepts and engineers have pistols. Vanguards have pistols
and shotguns. Sentinels use whatever. These all fit with out
preconceived images of those classes, except for assault-rifle-less
soldiers of course.

/signed

Modifié par Iacov, 28 juin 2012 - 05:15 .

[whateverman7]

^ the phaeston works great on gold...it eats through armor and shields.....barriers, not so much, but it's still effective

[Homey C-Dawg]

Lots of incorrect usage of the word "viable" in this thread.

Here's my suggestion for automatic weapons.

ARs (full auto) = +20% dmg vs. shields

SMGs = +40% dmg vs. shields
              -15% dmg vs. health

Modifié par Homey C-Dawg, 28 juin 2012 - 07:06 .

[DVS27t]

xcrunr1647 wrote...

Human Soldier. Harrier. Empty magazine into enemy, pop AR, repeat. Profit.

^^^THIS^^^

[Strict31]

K1LL STREAK wrote...


It would take something like this rather than simple damage buffs to make the game evenly balanced.

Any thoughts?

I also don't think damage buffs or enemy nerfs are necessarily a solution, because it's Gold, after all. And you can't tailor a game change based entirely upon one level of difficulty.

But what I really think the problem is has nothing to do with damage or with enemy toughness. This will take some time to explain, though:

One time a couple months ago, I was playing a Geth Engineer with Hunter mode activated. I watched as a cannibal in the room below me aimed up through the floor at the rest of the players, tracking their movements perfectly, despite the fact a solid ceiling was in his way.

And certainly, people have had the experience of walking around a corner only to be immediately hit by enemy fire. You can even see it when a player tosses down a turret, and it starts firing at enemies obscured by a wall.

The problem here is enemy AI. There is no chance for an enemy to miss. Or if there is a chance, it's so small as to be negligible. As a result, when you pop out of cover, even for a second's worth of sustained-fire from an AR, you're immediately being hit by one or more enemies, who may or may not have a realistic means of hitting you. Even enemies running across the map have damn near 100% accuracy.

It is because of this factor that it becomes imperative for any player to learn how to maximize their damage output in a Gold match. That means doing as much damage in as short an amount of time possible. Which means single-shot weapons and weapons that rely more on burst DPS become the most practical weapon choices.

There are a couple of rifles that fit the bill, and there are a couple of class builds that can maximize damage output. But that's not really the issue.

The issue is the enemy's ability to lock on to you before they can even realistically see you. Since this is amped up on Gold, this is what is causing the problem of decreased utility of sustained-fire weapons.

You don't have to make changes to enemy toughness or add weaker enemies; all you have to do is dial back the enemy's instant, 100% accuracy on Gold difficulty. 

That's not gonna make Gold suddenly a cakewalk, because no enemy needs to be made weaker, and no weapon needs to get a damage buff. And it's not going to imbalance these weapons or enemies on other difficulties either. All it will do is stop punishing the player for taking a sustained-fire weapon into Gold.

[GGW KillerTiger]

In order to make ARs viable on gold they will have to:

Buff the damage of the revenant
Buff the damage of stryker
Buff the damage of falcon
Increase harrier ammo
Buff damage of geth plasma rifle

We all know BioWare prefers to nerf players so this will never happen.

[Rokayt]

Strict31 wrote...

K1LL STREAK wrote...


It would take something like this rather than simple damage buffs to make the game evenly balanced.

Any thoughts?

I also don't think damage buffs or enemy nerfs are necessarily a solution, because it's Gold, after all. And you can't tailor a game change based entirely upon one level of difficulty.

Ultimately, Gold is the least casual difficulty mode. People who play gold generally have higher expectations in terms of game balance. Warning flags should fly up when a gun is practically unusable in gold mode for various reasons.

The Locust, Vindicator, and Avenger all need love for gold.

[MrFuddyDuddy]

Mass Effect lore will tell us that rapid fire weapons by default deal X amount of exra damage to shields while dealing X amount of reduced damage to armor while heavier slower firing weapons had an opposite effect. Not sure its implimented in 3 but it should be.

[Rokayt]

GGW KillerTiger wrote...
We all know BioWare prefers to nerf players so this will never happen.

THAT IS A LIE.

How many buffs have been released? 40+?

How many nerfs have been released? Less then 10.

[Hackulator]

People are sleeping on the Striker.

[Rokayt]

Hackulator wrote...

People are sleeping on the Striker.

I have witnessed stabilized, capacity boosted, cryo strikers.

Let me say, the effects are hillarious.

That is all.

[GGW KillerTiger]

Rokayt wrote...

GGW KillerTiger wrote...
We all know BioWare prefers to nerf players so this will never happen.

THAT IS A LIE.

How many buffs have been released? 40+?

How many nerfs have been released? Less then 10.

Not by my count XD Especially when some of the nerfs are over nerfing something they "buffed". Also so far the buffsa have done nothing to help at all and the nerfs are like nucular warheads hitting the nerf targets .....

[GGW KillerTiger]

MrFuddyDuddy wrote...

Mass Effect lore will tell us that rapid fire weapons by default deal X amount of exra damage to shields while dealing X amount of reduced damage to armor while heavier slower firing weapons had an opposite effect. Not sure its implimented in 3 but it should be.

Kind of why lore in ME3 is broken form the rest of ME universe .... ME3 gets it own set of lore if people haven't noticed .....

[Strict31]

Rokayt wrote...

Strict31 wrote...

K1LL STREAK wrote...


It would take something like this rather than simple damage buffs to make the game evenly balanced.

Any thoughts?

I also don't think damage buffs or enemy nerfs are necessarily a solution, because it's Gold, after all. And you can't tailor a game change based entirely upon one level of difficulty.

Ultimately, Gold is the least casual difficulty mode. People who play gold generally have higher expectations in terms of game balance. Warning flags should fly up when a gun is practically unusable in gold mode for various reasons.

The Locust, Vindicator, and Avenger all need love for gold.

I think we should be looking to the cause.

It already takes longer to kill a trash mob with an Avenger on Gold than it does on Silver. That's because that trash mob has more Health on Gold. It's a tougher difficulty, so that is to be expected. But the Avenger will still kill that Trash mob.

The difference is the amount of time the player can devote to firing without being killed in the face. And on Gold, the reason for this is increased hit probability against the squad.

The way I figure it, you have Avengers doing more damage, and that upsets their balance on lower difficulties. Lowering enemy Health/Shields/Barrier on Gold would only have an incremental impact because the enemy does not care about suffering damage in the process of accurately hitting you from across the map.

It's the enemy accuracy that makes sustained-fire weapons problematic to employ on Gold.

In my opinion, of course.

[Rokayt]

GGW KillerTiger wrote...

Rokayt wrote...

GGW KillerTiger wrote...
We all know BioWare prefers to nerf players so this will never happen.

THAT IS A LIE.

How many buffs have been released? 40+?

How many nerfs have been released? Less then 10.

Not by my count XD Especially when some of the nerfs are over nerfing something they "buffed". Also so far the buffsa have done nothing to help at all and the nerfs are like nucular warheads hitting the nerf targets .....

I am seeing the Eagle getting used EVERY OTHER ROUND now, to awesome effect!

The Hurricane is a god killing machine now that it is more stable.

The Saber is now a valid scopeless replacement for a sniper rifle.

The Mattock is a valid replacement for a Raptor, vice versa.

Sabotouge is a nice power now.

Tech armor is an excellent power.

Guns have been buffed in general to the main community (LVL 4 ammos.)

The Palidin is a reasonable replacement for the Carnifex.

The Wraith is an excellent low weight shotgun.

Most assault rifles are significantly stronger/lighter then before. They need plenty of work, but the sun is rising.

Lets look at the nerfs:

The Kyrase no longer outshines the black widow ENTIRELY.

The Falcon no longer breaks the game (AND DOES DECENT DAMAGE NOW. ITs honestly my third favorite gun as is.)

Tactical cloak is now Tactical.

[Rokayt]

Strict31 wrote...

Rokayt wrote...

Strict31 wrote...

K1LL STREAK wrote...


It would take something like this rather than simple damage buffs to make the game evenly balanced.

Any thoughts?

I also don't think damage buffs or enemy nerfs are necessarily a solution, because it's Gold, after all. And you can't tailor a game change based entirely upon one level of difficulty.

Ultimately, Gold is the least casual difficulty mode. People who play gold generally have higher expectations in terms of game balance. Warning flags should fly up when a gun is practically unusable in gold mode for various reasons.

The Locust, Vindicator, and Avenger all need love for gold.

I think we should be looking to the cause.

It already takes longer to kill a trash mob with an Avenger on Gold than it does on Silver. That's because that trash mob has more Health on Gold. It's a tougher difficulty, so that is to be expected. But the Avenger will still kill that Trash mob.

The difference is the amount of time the player can devote to firing without being killed in the face. And on Gold, the reason for this is increased hit probability against the squad.

The way I figure it, you have Avengers doing more damage, and that upsets their balance on lower difficulties. Lowering enemy Health/Shields/Barrier on Gold would only have an incremental impact because the enemy does not care about suffering damage in the process of accurately hitting you from across the map.

It's the enemy accuracy that makes sustained-fire weapons problematic to employ on Gold.

In my opinion, of course.

Sustained fire weapons also do not necessaraly give better DPS over guns of the same weight as well, due to the one shot weapons having reload canceling.

Also, sustained fire weapons on average hit for 1/5th of their normal damage when firing on a target that isn't killed by 1 shot from the single shot/slow shooting guns. Making them tactically insignificant, as their designated targets still die instantly from single shot weapons, and they are worthless against the single shot weapons intended targets.

[cuzIMgood]

The assault rifles are much better now than when the game was first released. A few of them could still use a small buff though.

[Strict31]

Rokayt wrote...

Strict31 wrote...

Rokayt wrote...

Strict31 wrote...

K1LL STREAK wrote...


It would take something like this rather than simple damage buffs to make the game evenly balanced.

Any thoughts?

I also don't think damage buffs or enemy nerfs are necessarily a solution, because it's Gold, after all. And you can't tailor a game change based entirely upon one level of difficulty.

Ultimately, Gold is the least casual difficulty mode. People who play gold generally have higher expectations in terms of game balance. Warning flags should fly up when a gun is practically unusable in gold mode for various reasons.

The Locust, Vindicator, and Avenger all need love for gold.

I think we should be looking to the cause.

It already takes longer to kill a trash mob with an Avenger on Gold than it does on Silver. That's because that trash mob has more Health on Gold. It's a tougher difficulty, so that is to be expected. But the Avenger will still kill that Trash mob.

The difference is the amount of time the player can devote to firing without being killed in the face. And on Gold, the reason for this is increased hit probability against the squad.

The way I figure it, you have Avengers doing more damage, and that upsets their balance on lower difficulties. Lowering enemy Health/Shields/Barrier on Gold would only have an incremental impact because the enemy does not care about suffering damage in the process of accurately hitting you from across the map.

It's the enemy accuracy that makes sustained-fire weapons problematic to employ on Gold.

In my opinion, of course.

Sustained fire weapons also do not necessaraly give better DPS over guns of the same weight as well, due to the one shot weapons having reload canceling.

Also, sustained fire weapons on average hit for 1/5th of their normal damage when firing on a target that isn't killed by 1 shot from the single shot/slow shooting guns. Making them tactically insignificant, as their designated targets still die instantly from single shot weapons, and they are worthless against the single shot weapons intended targets.

Again, if you increase the damage to a given AR just to make it useful on Gold, it will imbalance that weapon on lower difficulties.

Sure, I'd like for the Phaeston to do more damage per shot on Bronze or Silver. But I don't need it to do so. I'm not getting punished on Bronze for hanging out of cover, hosing an enemy down with bullet sauce until they fall over.

But this does happen on Gold, because enemy accuracy is dialed up to 11. As I have said before, it is this specific factor which necessitates the ability to do as much damage as fast as possible on Gold. It creates a world of difference in the leap from Silver to Gold.

It is a change in the parameters of the match. My suggestion is to dial back that parameter change; not to change weapon damage, because that seems like the less invasive alteration.

[Holy-Hamster]

Some of the ARs could use some buffs, but it's never going to be balanced to everyone's tastes.

ARs almost require amps. You can get away without them on the harrier but it really makes a difference on the ARs.

Still you have a few decent choices, which seems to be the case for the other categories except for SMG imo which is limited to the hurricane. I think the others are terrible, but that's just my own personal opinion.

Same thing with AR, I love the harrier but hate all the others. But just because I hate them doesn't mean they're not effective. I've seen people use other ARs very effectively.

[Holy-Hamster]

Two people with falcon against cerberus can be pretty hilarious. Also saw a drell adapt using the falcon once who beat me in score on my infiltrator. Doesn't happen too often.

[Heldarion]

I found Striker Assault Rifle to be pretty solid. Anyone else?

[aerowars617]

Revenant + Turian Marksman = Rain of Bullets
Its effective on Gold, throw in an ammo power & you're laughing