436 réponses à ce sujet

[GodlessPaladin]

EvanKester wrote...
EDIT: please read GodlessPaladin's above post to understand one of the fundamental problems with power creep: The Carnifex never stopped being a good gun. Ever. There was no enemy buff that rendered it weaker than before. But because newer weapons, and some other weapons that were buffed, have risen so much in power relative to it, many people have stopped even checking if the Carnifex is viable, and don't even notice when the Arc Pistol is now as good as the Carnifex.

Even more striking was people overlooking the Acolyte.  I've actually heard people calling the Acolyte (which has what, over 2000 DPS against shields applied in an area with shots that ricochet off walls and provide a special stagger and simply crushes Phantoms while weighing as much as a Predator)  a bad weapon.  

Modifié par GodlessPaladin, 09 août 2012 - 06:58 .

[Mojenator12345]

EvanKester wrote...

-  Why did the GE's hunter mode need to be nerfed?  Did BEs really need to be nerfed?

Hunter mode post-nerf is still one of the best powers in the game. What does that tell you about it pre-nerf? The fact is, the Geth Infiltrator is the most offensively powerful class in the game, and taking a little power from it helps encourage class diversity, which extends the life of the game.

Why are you talking about the GI when I asked about the GE?  The GE was never one of the most offensively powerful classes in the game, and HM is not now and never was one of the strongest powers in the game.  It pushed the GI over the top in combination with the absurd TC bonuses.  The GE did not have TC and was not over the top.  So why did they have to nerf the GE?  The GE was not regarded by anyone as a dominant class or OP.  It was totally arbitrary.

Did BEs really need a nerf? Eh. I dunno. Did they take a hard one?.. not really, they're still really useful, and incredibly powerful, especially against the two most impotant defenses in the game (Barriers and Armor). Prior to the radius reduction, Biotic Explosions using Warp not only had this immense power, they also had a better radius than any other combo. And Warp + Throw is very very easy to set up and set off, especially on the targets it does the best against.

Warp/throw took a massive hit in patch 1.03.  Not documented (and I assume not intended) as a balance change, but the frequency of BEs resulting from the warp/throw combo has decreased dramatically.  There have been many threads documenting this.  Combine that with the actual BE nerf...  The AA is a shadow of her former self.

-  Why was the Hurrican buffed (three times!)?  Why was the Piranha buffed (before it was nerfed)?

I think BW's tendency to under-buff, over-nerf, and generally make inexplicable changes is absolutely relevant to this discussion.  Objectively, I'm pro-balance.  I just don't have faith in BW to move in the direction of balance through all of their constant tinkering.

I love that you put these two comments right next to each other, as the former disproves the latter.

The Hurricane buff (after it was already the highest DPS weapon in the game) and the Pirranha buff/nerf dance fall under the heading inexplicable changes.  As in, seriously, what in the hell are these guys thinking?

[Rokayt]

Mojenator12345 wrote...

EvanKester wrote...

-  Why did the GE's hunter mode need to be nerfed?  Did BEs really need to be nerfed?

Hunter mode post-nerf is still one of the best powers in the game. What does that tell you about it pre-nerf? The fact is, the Geth Infiltrator is the most offensively powerful class in the game, and taking a little power from it helps encourage class diversity, which extends the life of the game.

Why are you talking about the GI when I asked about the GE?  The GE was never one of the most offensively powerful classes in the game, and HM is not now and never was one of the strongest powers in the game.  It pushed the GI over the top in combination with the absurd TC bonuses.  The GE did not have TC and was not over the top.  So why did they have to nerf the GE?  The GE was not regarded by anyone as a dominant class or OP.  It was totally arbitrary.

The GE is the third best gun class IMO.

[whateverman7]

GodlessPaladin wrote...

Even more striking was people overlooking the Acolyte.  I've actually heard people calling the Acolyte (which has what, over 2000 DPS against shields applied in an area with shots that ricochet off walls and provide a special stagger and simply crushes Phantoms while weighing as much as a Predator)  a bad weapon.  

that's because a good portion of the bsn community is sheep/followers...once something gets a rep(good/bad), people on here run with it as gospel without actually playing with whatever it is....

i've also noticed a good portion is more concerned with spreadhseet info, rather then just playing the game

Modifié par whateverman7, 09 août 2012 - 07:04 .

[ryoldschool]

Rokayt wrote...

ryoldschool wrote...

IndigoVitare wrote...

ryoldschool wrote...
In those three I assume you are including the Typhoon, and if not then you need to make that four.  I do not believe that those 150% factors vs armor/shields/barriers works ( perhaps it did pre-nerf ) and after the nerf is really is not worth taking anymore.   This is a big letdown since its an ultra-rare and it was very good, now just wasted upgrades.  Had the gun just been a rare it would not hurt nearly as much.   We even had a thirty page thread about it, started by bioware, but they have done nothing other that say after the nerf it is still "very powerful".

The best full auto, high capacity weapon in the game?

Even at I it still takes out an Atlas like it's made of paper. And no, I wasn't using the Destroyer, HS or an Infiltrator to do that.

Honestly, anyone who thinks the Typhoon is rubbish now must be insane. It's no longer the kill-everything weapon it once was, but then that was what was wrong with it in the first place. You've got a huge amount of sustained dps fire, which is exactly what it should be, bonuses against all defence types and innate piercing. If it's unpopular compared with, say, the Harrier, then there are several obvious reasons why:

1. It's not been out for as long, so there are fewer players able to use it.
2. It suffers from the same problem as the Revenent, Phaeston etc. Namely the high damage nature of the game putting users at risk when they have to spent a lot of time out of cover. HOWEVER, all those weapons are perfectly viable on certain classes. SO IS THE TYPHOON. There is NOTHING wrong with a weapon that only reaches maximum effectiveness on certain classes; that's how most of them work.

I am not sure what level you are playing on.  In specter's video comparing pre and post nerf ( platinum ) even with tricked out consumables it took over a full clip of the Typhoon on the destroyer to take out an Atlas, easily the best target for the typhoon ( big, hard to miss, moves slow - not like a banshee, or phantom ).

As for using it on any class that requires a cooldown, like Human Soldier's Arush

Arush Cooldown with only one weapon equiped
----------------------------------------------------------------
Harrier 7 = 2.46 seconds
Revenant X = 2.35 seconds
Typhoon 6   = 3.80 seconds

Edit: Claymore X = 3.33 seconds, just to compare.

I have to say, that video is one of the least alarming videos I have ever seen.

That shows an exact 25% nerf to the Typhoon.

Sure, you had to reload... But having guns that must reload on an atlas is kinda expected.

Calling it a 50% nerf ot the Typhoon is silly, because atlas are not the only things you can expect to be shooting with your Typhoon.

I know I'm not going to convince you, but how you get 25 percent from that video? - its not silly, its game performance so you can't just take out the reload.   And as was mentioned the Atlas is the easiest target.   Try shooting at a phantom with it compared to either a harrier or revenant.

[Javo2357]

GodlessPaladin wrote...

Even more striking was people overlooking the Acolyte.  I've actually heard people calling the Acolyte (which has what, over 2000 DPS against shields applied in an area with shots that ricochet off walls and provide a special stagger and simply crushes Phantoms while weighing as much as a Predator)  a bad weapon.  

This^^^^^^
The Acolyte is EXTREMELY underrated imo judging from what I've seen on the forums. Virtually weightless and destroys shields like nothing else..

[tetsutsuru]

Javo2357 wrote...

GodlessPaladin wrote...

Even more striking was people overlooking the Acolyte.  I've actually heard people calling the Acolyte (which has what, over 2000 DPS against shields applied in an area with shots that ricochet off walls and provide a special stagger and simply crushes Phantoms while weighing as much as a Predator)  a bad weapon.  

This^^^^^^
The Acolyte is EXTREMELY underrated imo judging from what I've seen on the forums. Virtually weightless and destroys shields like nothing else..

And Barriers too.

[Grunt_Platform]

Mojenator12345 wrote...
Why are you talking about the GI when I asked about the GE?  The GE was never one of the most offensively powerful classes in the game, and HM is not now and never was one of the strongest powers in the game.  It pushed the GI over the top in combination with the absurd TC bonuses.  The GE did not have TC and was not over the top.  So why did they have to nerf the GE?  The GE was not regarded by anyone as a dominant class or OP.  It was totally arbitrary.

It really wasn't. I apologize, I was focused more on the geth buffs issue. Anyway, it's still completely unclear if Bioware actually can nerf a power for one class separately from another, unless the classes were designed with separate versions of the power. And my point still stands: A Geth Engineer with Hunter Mode is one of the best gun users in the game.

It didn't need a nerf, but the nerf didn't hit it that hard either. Especially not if you're speccing it for power damage.

And YES Hunter Mode is one of the best powers in the game, I don't know how that's even up for debate. With one power you can buff your damage, movement speed, accuracy and get the ability to see through walls, smoke and detect cloaked enemies. And that's not even touching on its evolutions. And this is all for the low, easy-to-compensate cost of losing 375 off your max shields (Like many things in the game, the shield penalty is additive, and only works off your base, not your actual total shields).

Warp/throw took a massive hit in patch 1.03.  Not documented (and I assume not intended) as a balance change, but the frequency of BEs resulting from the warp/throw combo has decreased dramatically.  There have been many threads documenting this.  Combine that with the actual BE nerf...  The AA is a shadow of her former self.

This is a lag problem, and it got better with some of the undocumented changes in the Earth DLC. If you're playing with low ping, BEs are still reliable. Asari Adept is still good, but the game is moving at a faster pace now, and other classes benefitted more from the new gear and consumables. For example, the Drell Adept has kept pace since high movement speed and one of the better grenades in the game is more useful than Stasis and the Warp+Throw combo. This is a metagame shift due to power creep, and people learning how the game works better. Also, as the number of anti-phantom weapons increases, the value of Stasis decreases.

Mind, I'd like to see the lag problems go away as much as the next person, but I just don't see them as a prime concern for balance. It's more of a bug-fix issue.

The Hurricane buff (after it was already the highest DPS weapon in the game) and the Pirranha buff/nerf dance fall under the heading inexplicable changes.  As in, seriously, what in the hell are these guys thinking?

It's easily explicable: Both are low accuracy guns, and the Hurricane in particular is promotional, so they wanted it to be good at rank I. No doubt something similar was going on with the Piranha. I think it's silly, and ridiculous, and yeah, evidence that there might be something wrong with the balance procedures... but overall, it doesn't change that the general trend of weapons and classes getting stronger.

Modifié par EvanKester, 09 août 2012 - 07:31 .

[Tchu Tchu Tchu Paaaa]

@GodlessPaladin

I always had the curious to know about the Buff VS Nerf things. Must have been hard to get all this data.

What I have to say is congratulate you on this research. Well done N7.

I promess that I will stop being so pain in the *** from now on.

[IndigoVitare]

ryoldschool wrote...

IndigoVitare wrote...

ryoldschool wrote...
In those three I assume you are including the Typhoon, and if not then you need to make that four.  I do not believe that those 150% factors vs armor/shields/barriers works ( perhaps it did pre-nerf ) and after the nerf is really is not worth taking anymore.   This is a big letdown since its an ultra-rare and it was very good, now just wasted upgrades.  Had the gun just been a rare it would not hurt nearly as much.   We even had a thirty page thread about it, started by bioware, but they have done nothing other that say after the nerf it is still "very powerful".

The best full auto, high capacity weapon in the game?

Even at I it still takes out an Atlas like it's made of paper. And no, I wasn't using the Destroyer, HS or an Infiltrator to do that.

Honestly, anyone who thinks the Typhoon is rubbish now must be insane. It's no longer the kill-everything weapon it once was, but then that was what was wrong with it in the first place. You've got a huge amount of sustained dps fire, which is exactly what it should be, bonuses against all defence types and innate piercing. If it's unpopular compared with, say, the Harrier, then there are several obvious reasons why:

1. It's not been out for as long, so there are fewer players able to use it.
2. It suffers from the same problem as the Revenent, Phaeston etc. Namely the high damage nature of the game putting users at risk when they have to spent a lot of time out of cover. HOWEVER, all those weapons are perfectly viable on certain classes. SO IS THE TYPHOON. There is NOTHING wrong with a weapon that only reaches maximum effectiveness on certain classes; that's how most of them work.

I am not sure what level you are playing on.  In specter's video comparing pre and post nerf ( platinum ) even with tricked out consumables it took over a full clip of the Typhoon on the destroyer to take out an Atlas, easily the best target for the typhoon ( big, hard to miss, moves slow - not like a banshee, or phantom ).

As for using it on any class that requires a cooldown, like Human Soldier's Arush

Arush Cooldown with only one weapon equiped
----------------------------------------------------------------
Harrier 7 = 2.46 seconds
Revenant X = 2.35 seconds
Typhoon 6   = 3.80 seconds

Edit: Claymore X = 3.33 seconds, just to compare.

Oh that's so unfair! You take twice as long to kill an Atlas now?

You have to use another clip? Such a shame, every other weapon can do it with one.

Yeah, it's worse than it was before. But then, before it was stupidly overpowered. So of course it's obviously worse.

But does that mean it's bad? Does that mean the nerf was unjustified? NO! That's the point! Rather than comparing pre- and post- buff, can we maybe see how it compares, on the same class, with the Claymore? Or, better yet, the weapon people like to compare it to: the Revenent?

[Necrotron]

GodlessPaladin wrote...

Even more striking was people overlooking the Acolyte.  I've actually heard people calling the Acolyte (which has what, over 2000 DPS against shields applied in an area with shots that ricochet off walls and provide a special stagger and simply crushes Phantoms while weighing as much as a Predator)  a bad weapon.  

I've been making sure to make ample demonstration of the gun in every gold match I host.  Watch my Drell Vanguard pew-Pull-Kaboom everything with 75% bonus biotic explosions!

People just are ignorant of the gun's value.  Most seem to just get turned off by the charge time and ignore it entirely.  Best part about the gun is it fits as a second gun to carry with just about any loadout as it's ultra light.

[Revanchist01]

[quote]Star fury wrote...

[quote]Revanchist01 wrote...

[/quote]

Problem with reading comprehension? List of "awesome guns that were nerfed into trash". It's your words, not mine.

[/quote]

Maybe the English Language is to OP for you to comprehend and must be nerf....? Go ahead and bold anywhere in the original post where he used the words "awesome guns that were nerfed into trash." + 10 internets for you if you find it.
[/quote]

Are you dumb? What do you want from me?

[/quote]

LOL, you just keep digging yourself into a deeper and deeper doo doo hole aren't ya? I've read the OP and can't find those combinations of words at all...

[/quote]

Where did I quote OP, dummie? Your buddy and you are so thick it's not even funny.

[/quote]

Can you seriously shut up? Can you? You clearly said "Awesome guns nerfed to trash". The Op said nothing about "awesome huns nerfed to trash" He said awesome guns nerfed to OK. DO you see something flawed here? Do you. BTW learn to spell "DUMMY" before you call someone else that word. You are a complete and utter moron who should just doesn't know when to shut it. As I said keep digging yourself into a deeper and deeper s#!t hole!

[GodlessPaladin]

Revanchist01 wrote...The Op said nothing about "awesome guns nerfed to trash" He said awesome guns nerfed to OK.

To be fair, I don't think I actually said either of those things.  I just posted a consolidated list of what the changes were, I didn't evaluate whether those particular guns (Falcon, Krysae, Typhoon) were now trash, okay, or whatever (at least not in this thread).

Modifié par GodlessPaladin, 09 août 2012 - 08:53 .

[Tankcommander]

TheKillerAngel wrote...

Some of the buffs have been significant, but many of them are just "token buffs" that haven't meaningfully affected players.

Whereas the 'minor' nerfs/fixes have really hurt some guns. The Kishock went from being awesome to good on host and crap everywhere else. Typhoon is prettty junky now, and so I've dropped it.

The numbers are great and all, but don't mean a whole lot when comparing guns. None of the buffs I've seen has convinced me to start using a buffed weapon I wasn't already using, whereas the nerfs have made me drop weapons in favor of better alternatives.

Also, a lot of the buffs were actually a class buff (ARs), so it is almost unfair to count them all, since the entire category needed (and still needs) work.

Modifié par Tankcommander, 09 août 2012 - 09:05 .

[GodlessPaladin]

Tankcommander wrote...
The numbers are great and all, but don't mean a whole lot when comparing guns.

Seeing as the guns are quite literally nothing but a collection of numbers, I have to wonder what you do think matters when comparing guns.

Modifié par GodlessPaladin, 09 août 2012 - 09:10 .

[Revanchist01]

GodlessPaladin wrote...

Revanchist01 wrote...The Op said nothing about "awesome guns nerfed to trash" He said awesome guns nerfed to OK.

To be fair, I don't think I actually said either of those things.  I just posted a consolidated list of what the changes were, I didn't evaluate whether those particular guns (Falcon, Krysae, Typhoon) were now trash, okay, or whatever (at least not in this thread).

This "beef"  does not concern what your post, I am sorry if it came off that way, it concerns another post made by someone who never said any of the things that this person (not naming names) is implying. When this person was called out on it he/she goes on a vile name calling rage at anyone who accused him/her. Despite 3 other members trying to point out the flaw in what he/she said, he/she devolves to the level of calling us all "dummie" and "thick headed" instead of admitting the error and moving on. I don't take kindly to things like that.


Once again sorry for ruining your thread with pointless bickering but someone needed to let this person know whats really good.

[Tankcommander]

GodlessPaladin wrote...

Tankcommander wrote...
The numbers are great and all, but don't mean a whole lot when comparing guns.

Seeing as the guns are quite literally nothing but a collection of numbers, I have to wonder what you do think matters when comparing guns.

I am meaning you have to look at the collection of factors that make a gun up. If you'd like to say the entire collection of numbers that correspond to Gun1, that's fine. The point is even a small change in 1 number factor for a particular gun may have a major effect, whereas a small change on another  might have no affect at all.

So to strictly compare numbers and say that the buffs outweight the nerfs may be true, and I'm not arguing with you there or discounting your findings. However, I still don't know anyone that takes the Eagle seriously, even after its apparently massive buff. I know a lot of people who have dropped the Typhoon and Kishock however.

[Star fury]

Edit: Post removed. Poster banned for insulting others.

Modifié par Chris Priestly, 10 août 2012 - 03:44 .

[Star fury]

GodlessPaladin wrote...
To be fair, I don't think I actually said either of those things.  I just posted a consolidated list of what the changes were, I didn't evaluate whether those particular guns (Falcon, Krysae, Typhoon) were now trash, okay, or whatever (at least not in this thread).

I asked list of "awesome guns nerfed into trash" from other person(one from "anti-nerf" crowd), not from you. But three idiots can't understand that. It's bsn after all.

[GodlessPaladin]

Tankcommander wrote...

GodlessPaladin wrote...
Seeing as the guns are quite literally nothing but a collection of numbers, I have to wonder what you do think matters when comparing guns.

I am meaning you have to look at the collection of factors that make a gun up.  If you'd like to say the entire collection of numbers that correspond to Gun1, that's fine. The point is even a small change in 1 number factor for a particular gun may have a major effect, whereas a small change on another  might have no affect at all.

So to strictly compare numbers and say that the buffs outweight the nerfs may be true, and I'm not arguing with you there or discounting your findings. However, I still don't know anyone that takes the Eagle seriously, even after its apparently massive buff. I know a lot of people who have dropped the Typhoon and Kishock however.

I never claimed that the current Eagle was good though.  In fact I said the exact opposite.  I even made a thread about how bad it is... here:  http://social.biowar.../index/13552527

Modifié par GodlessPaladin, 09 août 2012 - 09:34 .

[GodlessPaladin]

@Star fury and Revanchrist01

Ah.  I thought "the OP" was referring to me.   Guess not. 

Modifié par GodlessPaladin, 09 août 2012 - 09:28 .

[Revanchist01]

[quote]Star fury wrote...

[quote]Revanchist01 wrote...

[quote]Star fury wrote...

[quote]Revanchist01 wrote...

[/quote]

Problem with reading comprehension? List of "awesome guns that were nerfed into trash". It's your words, not mine.

[/quote]

Maybe the English Language is to OP for you to comprehend and must be nerf....? Go ahead and bold anywhere in the original post where he used the words "awesome guns that were nerfed into trash." + 10 internets for you if you find it.
[/quote]

Are you dumb? What do you want from me?

[/quote]

LOL, you just keep digging yourself into a deeper and deeper doo doo hole aren't ya? I've read the OP and can't find those combinations of words at all...

[/quote]

Where did I quote OP, dummie? Your buddy and you are so thick it's not even funny.

[/quote]

Can you seriously shut up? Can you? You clearly said "Awesome guns nerfed to trash". The Op said nothing about "awesome huns nerfed to trash" He said awesome guns nerfed to OK. DO you see something flawed here? Do you. BTW learn to spell "DUMMY" before you call someone else that word. You are a complete and utter moron who should just doesn't know when to shut it. As I said keep digging yourself into a deeper and deeper s#!t hole!

[/quote]

You clearly make into  top 3 of dumbest members of bsn. Congratulations.

[/quote]

LOL, you learned to spell dumb. We can keep this up all day. You just keep replying with you sill one liners, I will be waiting. Keep on trolling....

[Tankcommander]

GodlessPaladin wrote...

Tankcommander wrote...

GodlessPaladin wrote...
Seeing as the guns are quite literally nothing but a collection of numbers, I have to wonder what you do think matters when comparing guns.

I am meaning you have to look at the collection of factors that make a gun up.  If you'd like to say the entire collection of numbers that correspond to Gun1, that's fine. The point is even a small change in 1 number factor for a particular gun may have a major effect, whereas a small change on another  might have no affect at all.

So to strictly compare numbers and say that the buffs outweight the nerfs may be true, and I'm not arguing with you there or discounting your findings. However, I still don't know anyone that takes the Eagle seriously, even after its apparently massive buff. I know a lot of people who have dropped the Typhoon and Kishock however.

I never claimed that the current Eagle was good though.  In fact I said the exact opposite.  I even made a thread about how bad it is. 

Exactly! I am just saying you've got to be careful what you claim. The numbers state that the buffs outweigh the nerfs. We all agree with you on that. However, all the buffs to the Eagle hasn't helped it, whereas the nerfs to the Typhoon have made a lot of players drop it. So, to say that the buffs outweigh the nerfs based on numbers alone doesn't quite cut it, since we know that the Eagle still sucks and now the Typhoon is a poor alternative in most situations.

[Revanchist01]

GodlessPaladin wrote...

@Star fury and Revanchrist01

Ah.  I thought "the OP" was referring to me.   Guess not. 

Since you seem to be pretty well respected around here I whumbly ask for you to go to pg. 14 or so and read the OP. Then you can come to a decision about this "Star" fellow. Just look at the replies and insistance on call others "dumb", "morons" and other names. You get the pic.

Once again sorry for mudding your thread with this.

[GodlessPaladin]

Tankcommander wrote...

GodlessPaladin wrote...

Tankcommander wrote...

GodlessPaladin wrote...
Seeing as the guns are quite literally nothing but a collection of numbers, I have to wonder what you do think matters when comparing guns.

I am meaning you have to look at the collection of factors that make a gun up.  If you'd like to say the entire collection of numbers that correspond to Gun1, that's fine. The point is even a small change in 1 number factor for a particular gun may have a major effect, whereas a small change on another  might have no affect at all.

So to strictly compare numbers and say that the buffs outweight the nerfs may be true, and I'm not arguing with you there or discounting your findings. However, I still don't know anyone that takes the Eagle seriously, even after its apparently massive buff. I know a lot of people who have dropped the Typhoon and Kishock however.

I never claimed that the current Eagle was good though.  In fact I said the exact opposite.  I even made a thread about how bad it is. 

Exactly! I am just saying you've got to be careful what you claim. The numbers state that the buffs outweigh the nerfs. We all agree with you on that. However, all the buffs to the Eagle hasn't helped it, whereas the nerfs to the Typhoon have made a lot of players drop it. So, to say that the buffs outweigh the nerfs based on numbers alone doesn't quite cut it, since we know that the Eagle still sucks and now the Typhoon is a poor alternative in most situations.

*Nod* I know this. 

That's why I said that the OP doesn't say anything about the actual power of the guns.  It just refutes the hysterical claims that nerfs are constant and proportionally larger than buffs and turning "all" or "most" of the guns into trash (when really only 3/50 guns have been affected by significant nerfs, and every gun has benefitted from external changes like the gear slot and thermal clip pack adrenaline rush, and many of the best guns in the game got to where they are now via buffs.  The Eagle isn't one of those weapons, obviously )

I have other threads for the purpose of analyzing the relative power of choices available to players.

Modifié par GodlessPaladin, 09 août 2012 - 09:43 .