121 réponses à ce sujet

[galaxygrunt]

It doesn't bother me, but I am a little concerned for my friend. I just talked him into getting the game, and I'm worried he might get discouraged. I think we forget that bronze was no cakewalk for us when we started (at least, it wasn't for me). I can't even imagine what it must be like for a new player just starting off with the basic weapons at level I, and 2 points assigned to powers and skills.

[GodlessPaladin]

A couple quick points.

1) Overall, Bioware has provided significantly more buffs than nerfs, including a number of elements of straight-up significant power creep. The game hasn't gotten harder.

2) Nerfing can expand the range of competitively viable build/loadout choices in the exact same way as buffing can. The number of competitively viable options depends on how many options occupy a top slot in the metagame. If a few weapons are outclassing many weapons at their respective niches, that reduces the range of competitively viable options. Whether you change it so that the better options get worse or the worse options get better have essentially the same result as far as diversity of competitive build options go.

Therefore, it makes no sense to oppose nerfing if you want to see a greater variety of build options. It would only make sense to oppose nerfs AND buffs that do not actually improve the balance.

So, for example, opposing the Vindicator nerf or the Proximity Mine buff makes sense if you want to see an expansion of viable playstyles, but categorically opposing nerfs or buffs doesn't make a whole lot of sense if that's your goal.

3)  One thing I see a lot on these forums are people simply reacting to whether something was buffed or nerfed, rather than what the power level of the builds that utilize said tools actually are.   This ignores the concept of initial power setting.  For example, you could just set everything to start at 1 DPS, buff the DPS by 1 every week, and it would remain a horrible weapon forever.  Or you could set a weapon to 10,000 DPS with infinite ammo and laser
accuracy, nerf the DPS by 90%, and still have a weapon far greater than the constantly buffed weapon. The real goal isn't whether something should be buffed or nerfed, it's what power level any given weapon should be at.  Reacting to buffs or nerfs instead of what the power level is is simply idiot psychology at work.

I don't think any sane person would ever argue that if a weapon was released that dealt it out like an M-920 Cain with 1000RPM and infinite ammo that the game would be better off for it (and that, by direct implication, that it wouldn't be worse off for the lack of it). I don't think any sane person would ever argue that there should not be some element of challenge to a game with selectable difficulty. I don't think there are a lot of gamers that think that only a couple of weapons should shine far above the rest of the pack, greatly diminishing competitively viable options, replay value, variety of playstyles, and more.

Modifié par GodlessPaladin, 24 juillet 2012 - 10:28 .

[JustinSonic]

I agree. Some of the balance changes have been pretty insane, and that's simply because some players really do exceed in skill.

Either way, it is what it is. :/

[galaxygrunt]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Nice, someone two stars this thread and doesn't even respond. Could at least tell me the error of my thought process.

That IS a bit rude.  I'll click 5 to balance it out!

[Suko Reia]

THE ANSWER...
Play bronze
=)
Good day =)

[Kick In The Door]

This is simply unacceptable.

Do you understand that the game needs to be harder for the rest of us?
We don't care for you things, you're not even people to us!

We want what we want and f*ck everybody else! Nerf EVERTHING RAAAH!!!!! We need to compensate for our boring and lacking lives. We need to compensate for the microscopic size of our phalluses. We need to compensate for our bad jobs and ugly wives who make us sleep on the couch.

We need to compensate to feel better about ourselves.
And thus we impose our will on the rest of the community regardless of what they want.


Until we get laid we will demand moar nerfs!!!!!!!!

[GodlessPaladin]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

GodlessPaladin wrote...

1) Overall, Bioware has provided significantly more buffs than nerfs, including a number of elements of straight-up significant power creep. The game hasn't gotten harder.

2) Nerfing can expand the range of competitively viable build/loadout choices in the exact same way as buffing can. The number of competitively viable options depends on how many options occupy a top slot in the metagame. If a few weapons are outclassing many weapons at their respective niches, that reduces the range of competitively viable options. Whether you change it so that the better options get worse or the worse options get better have essentially the same result as far as diversity of competitive build options go.

Therefore, it makes no sense to oppose nerfing if you want to see a greater variety of build options. It would only make sense to oppose nerfs AND buffs that do not actually improve the balance. So, for example, opposing the Vindicator nerf or the Proximity Mine buff.

But isn't that the same thing as making the strong weapons/classes as weak as the weaker weapons/classes, therefore leaving no option for players who may not have the skill or team mates to pull off a successful run on the higher difficulties?

I have a question for you.  What do you believe higher difficulties exist for?

Let's pretend everyone could beat Platinum easily.  In such a case, why even bother to have different difficulty levels?

The conventional answer is that video games often incorporate selectable difficulties in order to provide an engaging experience for distinct demographics of players... namely those with different levels of skill.  Why then do you feel that it is a problem that higher difficulty levels attempt to cater to the needs of more skilled players?

Modifié par GodlessPaladin, 24 juillet 2012 - 10:32 .

[galaxygrunt]

GodlessPaladin wrote...

1) Overall, Bioware has provided significantly more buffs than nerfs, including a number of elements of straight-up significant power creep. The game hasn't gotten harder.

2) Nerfing can expand the range of competitively viable build/loadout choices in the exact same way as buffing can. The number of competitively viable options depends on how many options occupy a top slot in the metagame. If a few weapons are outclassing many weapons at their respective niches, that reduces the range of competitively viable options. Whether you change it so that the better options get worse or the worse options get better have essentially the same result as far as diversity of competitive build options go.

Therefore, it makes no sense to oppose nerfing if you want to see a greater variety of build options. It would only make sense to oppose nerfs AND buffs that do not actually improve the balance. So, for example, opposing the Vindicator nerf or the Proximity Mine buff.

Good points, but I will take minor exception to point #1.  It is harder for new players, who don't have ready access to most of the buffed weapons or the non-basic classes.  They also don't have the experience (with regards to tactics, builds, whatever), and I think the learning curve has increased substantially as well.

[Uberschveinen]

PROTIP: YOU ARE OBJECTIVELY WRONG

This update made the game easier for every player by making the Cobra missile drastically more powerful. You can now fire almost immediately on reviving.

If making the most Child-Friendly rifle in the game a little harder to use made the game unplayable for you, I've bad news for you: the problem isn't the game or Bioware's balance department.

[Liefglinde]

I was pretty indifferent while reading the balance changes. And then I saw the one about stomping. I find stomping to be one of the worst game mechanics I have ever seen, and now it extends to gold and platinum as well. Yay.

Modifié par Liefglinde, 24 juillet 2012 - 10:31 .

[galaxygrunt]

Suko Reia wrote...

THE ANSWER...
Play bronze
=)
Good day =)

As I noted earlier, bronze is not what it once was either--not for brand-new players.

And we DO want to expand our player base and give our beloved game some longevity, don't we?

[Bladedrummer]

They haven't. Platinum has been farmed and soloed from day 1... that's proof enough that the game hasn't been made harder at all.

[Elder_Jefferson]

Suko Reia wrote...

THE ANSWER...
Play bronze
=)
Good day =)

Bronze is the new silver...

[kingvenom41392]

kviksverd wrote...

GodlessPaladin wrote...

1) Overall, Bioware has provided significantly more buffs than nerfs, including a number of elements of straight-up significant power creep. The game hasn't gotten harder.

2) Nerfing can expand the range of competitively viable build/loadout choices in the exact same way as buffing can. The number of competitively viable options depends on how many options occupy a top slot in the metagame. If a few weapons are outclassing many weapons at their respective niches, that reduces the range of competitively viable options. Whether you change it so that the better options get worse or the worse options get better have essentially the same result as far as diversity of competitive build options go.

Therefore, it makes no sense to oppose nerfing if you want to see a greater variety of build options. It would only make sense to oppose nerfs AND buffs that do not actually improve the balance. So, for example, opposing the Vindicator nerf or the Proximity Mine buff.

Good points, but I will take minor exception to point #1.  It is harder for new players, who don't have ready access to most of the buffed weapons or the non-basic classes.  They also don't have the experience (with regards to tactics, builds, whatever), and I think the learning curve has increased substantially as well.

good spike the learning curve  icant beleive people playing since day one still lay bronze we need more good players on platinum the harder the game is to start the sooner they squash the babies whining entirely like dark souls though that got ruined with an update to gave experience to ghosts and skelotons mroe exp for bosses and ng++ is as hard as it gets the game got to easy and thats supposed to be the hardest game of all or some crap like that keep making this game harder please i need the rush

[GodlessPaladin]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

GodlessPaladin wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...

GodlessPaladin wrote...

1) Overall, Bioware has provided significantly more buffs than nerfs, including a number of elements of straight-up significant power creep. The game hasn't gotten harder.

2) Nerfing can expand the range of competitively viable build/loadout choices in the exact same way as buffing can. The number of competitively viable options depends on how many options occupy a top slot in the metagame. If a few weapons are outclassing many weapons at their respective niches, that reduces the range of competitively viable options. Whether you change it so that the better options get worse or the worse options get better have essentially the same result as far as diversity of competitive build options go.

Therefore, it makes no sense to oppose nerfing if you want to see a greater variety of build options. It would only make sense to oppose nerfs AND buffs that do not actually improve the balance. So, for example, opposing the Vindicator nerf or the Proximity Mine buff.

But isn't that the same thing as making the strong weapons/classes as weak as the weaker weapons/classes, therefore leaving no option for players who may not have the skill or team mates to pull off a successful run on the higher difficulties?

What do you believe higher difficulties exist for?

Let's pretend everyone could beat Platinum easily.  In such a case, why even bother to have different difficulty levels? 

True, but then those people on lower difficulties will never unlock anything competitive, if you take the randomness of the store and the lack of a significant credit flow into account.

I know I'm just whining, it's just frustrating to have stuff that seems to be ineffective.

And I'm just impatient. I know I'll eventually unlock all the stuff I want and be happy buuut I just want that day to come sooner while having fun to boot.

Less PuGs and more friend games seems to be the solution. Or Silver PuGs only.

If you wanted to complain about the unlock system, that's another issue entirely.  It's a preposterous skinner box reward schedule.  Ew.

[InsomniaticMeat]

The fact that Platinum is indeed playable, shows the game is not impossible to play. If anything, perhaps you guys should try to up your game. So what if a phantom uses her shield? She's done that from the beginning. Only difference now is that people can see her use it more obviously - If your grenades don't work on her.. Try staggering her before throwing down your powers.

Instead of nagging about the game getting harder, try to get better and improve your own skills. If it were truly impossible to play this game, no one would be playing it. So if a lot of people fare well in Silver, Gold and even Platinum - Perhaps the problem lies within yourself? (Emphasis on the question mark.)

[nevets79]

Uberschveinen wrote...

PROTIP: YOU ARE OBJECTIVELY WRONG

This update made the game easier for every player by making the Cobra missile drastically more powerful. You can now fire almost immediately on reviving.

If making the most Child-Friendly rifle in the game a little harder to use made the game unplayable for you, I've bad news for you: the problem isn't the game or Bioware's balance department.

i think he was talking about overall. not jsut todays changes.

reading comp ftw!

[IndigoVitare]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

The last 2-3 balance changes have been aimed at making players weaker and enemies stronger. With the exception of buffs to about 3 or 4 weapons.

Bioware are out of control nerfing everything... except for these buffs over here...

IT'S A DISASTER!

[stysiaq]

The only balance change that bothered me was the Atlas cannon buff.

I guess time will heal our hurt butts.