191 réponses à ce sujet

[Grunt_Platform]

This is one of the most hotly debated arguments in balance threads. How much better should an ultra rare be than a rare? Should URs completely eclipse Rares, meaning that Rares are left obsolete once you finish ranking up your URs? Or should they be roughly on par?

Well, let's get the easily agreed upon parts out of the way first:

Premise 1: Rare weapons should be good
Ultra Rares, and Rares should be good. Find me a person who disagrees. If it's going to take so long to unlock that Harrier I, it better be worth it.

Premise 2: Every gun should be worth using when unlocked
[EDIT: modified for clarity]
Given the unlock system, and the tedium of unlocking rarer weapons, every gun should have at least something to recommend it as soon as it is unlocked. For Ultra Rares, due to the severe tedium of even getting them to rank V, this standard is higher than for any other weapon, but the principle applies.

There are two ways to accomplish this:
- The cool way: Give each gun unique handling and mechanics that makes them fun and effective to use even at low levels.
- The dull but effective way: Tweak the gap between rank I and rank X stats so that the gun's natural advantages still matter at Rank I, but that it doesn't completely outclass everything at Rank X.
- The bad way: Crank up the rank I stats of the gun so much that it's just as good as everything else, but completely outclasses everything else at rank X.

Basically: If you are starting from an empty manifest, no unlock along the way should be dull and forgettable.

Premise 3: Rarer weapons should not be a requirement to play the game.
Basically, you shouldn't need a Typhoon X in order to be useful on Platinum. Nor should you need any rare cards to play on Gold, or uncommons to play on Silver. In fact, I would say that common weapons should be perfectly servicable on Gold and Platinum.

So... I suppose we can debate those, but except maybe for number 3 there, I think they're all fairly safe assumptions.

My conclusion
So the question is: Should an Ultra Rare be better than a Rare gun? Short answer: No. Longer answer: Yes, but only in their niche.

My read on the way the balance changes are going, and the way that just feels right to me is that once you have a maxed out manifest, every weapon you have is worth using. Sure, for a truly specialized build, a few of the Rares and Ultra Rares should be the best weapons to use, but they should always have some drawback that makes it worth using another gun instead. Maybe the Ultra-Rare is very specialized (like the Scorpion), or maybe it's really heavy (like the Typhoon). Point is, the Ultra-Rare is a gun that requires you to be commited to using it. It's more powerful overall, but less forgiving.

I also think that every Common gun should be more like the Mantis. They should be the baseline guns for the class, with no particular strengths or weaknesses except those that typify the weapon class. And they should be relevant at all levels of play. They'll never -really- compete with the top-tier guns, but they should still be worth using, either for their light weight, or the lack of the drawbacks the stronger guns have. The Mantis, for example, has the high precision and power of a Sniper Rifle, but it's not so heavy a caster can't use it. The Mantis is not as good as the Widow or the Kishock, but it'll do as a substitute if you don't want the extra weight, or weird projectile mechanics.



..so. Discuss?

EDIT: Clarified my position.

Modifié par EvanKester, 28 septembre 2012 - 11:02 .

[cuzIMgood]

 No.

[Rifneno]

Definitely. This is where we get the RPG and shooter genres against each other. As an RPGer, I can't even rightly fathom how you would justify a weapon that takes 25 times longer to get not being any better. What the hell was it so hard to get for if it's not better?!

[TMB903]

Yes

[Constant Motion]

I agree with your expanded answer, but not your short answer, weirdly.

EvanKester wrote...

My conclusion
So the question is: Should an Ultra Rare be better than a Rare gun? Short answer: Yes. Longer answer: Yes, but not completely.

My read on the way the balance changes are going, and the way that just feels right to me is that, once you have a maxed out manifest, every weapon you have is worth using. sure, for a truly specialized build, a few of the Rares and Ultra Rares should be the best weapons to use, but they should always have some drawback that makes it worth using another gun instead. Maybe the Ultra-Rare is very specialized (like the Scorpion), or maybe it's really heavy (like the Typhoon). Point is, the Ultra-Rare is a gun that requires you to be commited to using it. It's more powerful overall, but less forgiving.

I think the gold guns should, once unlocked and reasonably well upgraded, become a player's proper, full-blooded arsenal, and the black guns should be niche. Specialist equipment, opening up different strategies and new ways to play that won't work for everyone by any stretch of the imagination, but will be the absolute best at the thing they do. The Scorpion is a spot-on example of this kind of thing. A weapon like the Crusader, too.

Which is exactly what you expressed, but to the question "Should an Ultra Rare be better than a Rare gun?" my short answer would be "No." They should be less versatile and hence much less broadly useful, but unbeatable within their niche.

I agree with your assessment of the blue weapons, too. Mantis is a great example. And silver cards should be an extension of the blue arsenal - so a gun like the Viper should be right up there with the Mantis.

[NuclearTech76]

Mostly yes but especially when the weapon says in it's description that it is a better version of its rare counterpart.

[DecCylonus]

Premise 2: I think this is implemented, but not to the degree you suggest. The rarer guns are viable at rank 1 on Bronze. Common or uncommon guns at rank 10 are better though. If rare guns at rank 1 were better than common or uncommon guns at rank 10, it would game breaking for several reasons. First, because there would be no reason to use the weaker guns. Second, because all we would need to do is save credits for the Spectre packs and we would be gauranteed to have awesome weapons. Third because of the way the guns scale up with ranks, we would be shooting down Banshees on Gold with one clip from our trusty rank 10 Carnifex.

Premise 3: I think this is actually the strongest premise. Not everyone has the time or patience to unlock all the rare and ultra rare guns. Others have bad luck and get tons of rare character cards and consumables instead of guns. In short, the game needs to be accessible to people who put a reasonable amount of time into it, not just to the "elites" who can play 12 hours per day and unlock everything.

I mostly agree with your conclusion. You seem to be saying that the common guns need to be nerfed to be "more like the Mantis," and I disagree with that. I think all of the common guns do the job of their type adequately, not exceptionally, and have a few minor drawbacks. All are light enough to be used by any character, which is as it should be. I think all are fine as they are.

Overall I think Bioware has achieved the right balance between the weapon classes (common vs. uncommon vs. rare vs. ultra rare). Individual weapons need some balancing, but there is no class that outshines the others so badly that everyone uses them once they have them.

[Grunt_Platform]

Rifneno wrote...

Definitely. This is where we get the RPG and shooter genres against each other. As an RPGer, I can't even rightly fathom how you would justify a weapon that takes 25 times longer to get not being any better. What the hell was it so hard to get for if it's not better?!

See, this is the thing for me. Mass Effect is as much Action game as RPG. Most of the real role-playing stuff is in the single player story and well. Let's just leave that there.

I think the Mantis -> Widow -> Javelin progression is the best example in the game. The Javelin can do things the Widow can't, but it's also quirkier, and much heavier. In the hands of a truly skilled player, is it better than the Widow? Yes, hands down. Is it strictly better than the Widow? No! It has some serious drawbacks compared to the Widow, and it has a higher skill floor to boot. It's special. The Paladin has a similar relationship to the Carnifex. It's "better" in perfect conditions, but its small clip size is enough of a drawback to make the Carnifex worth choosing over it.

Or take the Scorpion, or the Talon. They're weird guns. The Talon is one of those "obvious choice" guns for almost any short range caster, but it still isn't a direct comparison to shotguns or any other pistols. Scorpion just.. what can you compare it to? The Falcon and the Acolyte? What it does is special, and cool.

I don't like how extremely rare the Ultra-Rares are, but I do like that most of them are, these days, worth using at any rank, but don't completely obsolete the other more common weapons.

[Eckswhyzed]

URs shouldn't be the best in the sense that it's not worth using any of the non-UR guns after you have acquired an ultra rare.

They can still be very powerful though. I like your idea that if you have a complete manifest, you should still have a reason to use every gun.

[Reizo Ryuu]

Constant Motion wrote...

I agree with your expanded answer, but not your short answer, weirdly.

EvanKester wrote...

My conclusion
So the question is: Should an Ultra Rare be better than a Rare gun? Short answer: Yes. Longer answer: Yes, but not completely.

My read on the way the balance changes are going, and the way that just feels right to me is that, once you have a maxed out manifest, every weapon you have is worth using. sure, for a truly specialized build, a few of the Rares and Ultra Rares should be the best weapons to use, but they should always have some drawback that makes it worth using another gun instead. Maybe the Ultra-Rare is very specialized (like the Scorpion), or maybe it's really heavy (like the Typhoon). Point is, the Ultra-Rare is a gun that requires you to be commited to using it. It's more powerful overall, but less forgiving.

I think the gold guns should, once unlocked and reasonably well upgraded, become a player's proper, full-blooded arsenal, and the black guns should be niche. Specialist equipment, opening up different strategies and new ways to play that won't work for everyone by any stretch of the imagination, but will be the absolute best at the thing they do. The Scorpion is a spot-on example of this kind of thing. A weapon like the Crusader, too.

Which is exactly what you expressed, but to the question "Should an Ultra Rare be better than a Rare gun?" my short answer would be "No." They should be less versatile and hence much less broadly useful, but unbeatable within their niche.

I agree with your assessment of the blue weapons, too. Mantis is a great example. And silver cards should be an extension of the blue arsenal - so a gun like the Viper should be right up there with the Mantis.

this

[Grunt_Platform]

DecCylonus wrote...

Premise 2: I think this is implemented, but not to the degree you suggest. The rarer guns are viable at rank 1 on Bronze. Common or uncommon guns at rank 10 are better though. If rare guns at rank 1 were better than common or uncommon guns at rank 10, it would game breaking for several reasons. First, because there would be no reason to use the weaker guns. Second, because all we would need to do is save credits for the Spectre packs and we would be gauranteed to have awesome weapons. Third because of the way the guns scale up with ranks, we would be shooting down Banshees on Gold with one clip from our trusty rank 10 Carnifex.

Premise 3: I think this is actually the strongest premise. Not everyone has the time or patience to unlock all the rare and ultra rare guns. Others have bad luck and get tons of rare character cards and consumables instead of guns. In short, the game needs to be accessible to people who put a reasonable amount of time into it, not just to the "elites" who can play 12 hours per day and unlock everything.

I mostly agree with your conclusion. You seem to be saying that the common guns need to be nerfed to be "more like the Mantis," and I disagree with that. I think all of the common guns do the job of their type adequately, not exceptionally, and have a few minor drawbacks. All are light enough to be used by any character, which is as it should be. I think all are fine as they are.

Overall I think Bioware has achieved the right balance between the weapon classes (common vs. uncommon vs. rare vs. ultra rare). Individual weapons need some balancing, but there is no class that outshines the others so badly that everyone uses them once they have them.

Buffed, dear sir! Buffed! The Avenger, at least, is a huge joke. If the Shuriken and Katana are better than the Mantis, relative to their respective weapon classes, it's news to me. The Mantis is relevant at all levels of play, I feel the same should be true of the others.

Premise 2 I see more as a design goal that I think everyone can agree on. It's not there yet but it's a goal. And yeah, there is the risk of making the gold guns too awesome at Rank I, but it IS possible to improve Rank I stats without touching Rank X. I'd also say the more "special" of the Rares are already there. A Claymore I may not be as awesome as a Claymore X, but it is definitely worth using as soon as you unlock it.

But yeah.. I might be a bit wrong about the strength of my premises. I mostly weighed them on how much I already knew people would argue with any of them.

Modifié par EvanKester, 28 septembre 2012 - 01:57 .

[Das Rouse]

I agree that URs should be the best, I almost exclusively use URs anyway. The Talon is the best pistol hands down in the game, however, if I am on Giant or Hydra, I would take the Paladin because the range of the Paladin is way better that the Talon due to it's "shotgun spread". I prefer the Wraith over the Claymore because 1) it is lighter so the classes I use can get that low CD time like the BatSol's BBs or ED with the Salarians or N7 Paladin. 2) I like the range of the Wraith, smart choke is awesome for above mentioned maps. The Indra is my fav sniper because of low weight and plenty of ammo so my QFI can use sabotage constantly. Maybe once my Valiant is at X, I might change my mind. Who doesn't like the Harrier? Yes ammo is low but I think that keeps it from being nerfed. The only drawback to the PPR is that it leaves you exposed to long to use the whole clip. Those drawbacks I can deal with.

[snarf001]

Considering that ultra rares are all N7 weapons and N7 soliders are elite, they have access to the best weapons possible that fits into their specific training but not necessarily best for common soldiers without the training. In gameplay, maybe Ultra Rares should be reamined with the headtitle N7's instead so the boundery between UR and R would not be challenged at large.

[baralaiex]

UR's are the best guns in the game at level X. The only category they fall short in are shotguns, but that's only because you have a single average gun (Wraith) competing against beasts like Reegar, Piranha, Claymore, and maybe GPS.

[SimulatedSnowman]

I agree with your conclusion OP. However, I don't think that is what BW wants, especially given the last nerfs to the Piranha and Carnifex, with the explanation being to "bring them in line" with the other guns. This suggests that they do not want weapons that outshine other weapons from level 1, but rather most weapons should be similar enough in characteristics that it could pretty much be a toss up between them. It's upsetting.

[Constant Motion]

Rifneno wrote...

Definitely. This is where we get the RPG and shooter genres against each other. As an RPGer, I can't even rightly fathom how you would justify a weapon that takes 25 times longer to get not being any better. What the hell was it so hard to get for if it's not better?!

The counter-point, here, is that a player shouldn't be waiting for months upon months to be able to unleash maximum hell. A weapon that you can play a game for seven months without unlocking shouldn't be the most damaging weapon in the game, for the precise reason that they're not going to be accessible to the vast majority of players. You shouldn't be elbowed out of the metagame by random chance.

The black weapons are the bonus weapons. You're not meant to farm them. Competitive with the gold weapons, often a better choice than them, but if so it's because they work in a different way. They should be good, but not so good that your capacity to slaughter Reapers would be seriously inhibited without them.

[neteng101]

You should take a poll if you wanted the views of the community as a whole. Because discussions go around in circles on BSN with a few people dominating the discussion.

Yes URs should be the best in the game, but Rares should be Gold/Platinum viable too. The first two tiers I don't really see any fuss about... I don't quite understand the calls for buffing the Raptor and Locust, because these weapons served their purpose as a starting point into Bronze/Silver/MP gaming.

The biggest problem I see is the Rares in the game that simply doesn't work... eg. Disciple, GPR. Just because there's a few duds doesn't mean we should go around nerfing all the other Rare/URs. And the Falcon/Krysae are over-nerfed if you ask me, they need to both be rebuffed. The Paladin nees a 4-clip, and the BW/Saber needs to be buffed most among the URs. Saw a BF3 soldier with AR just shoot and shoot and shoot and shoot so many times with a Saber X to down a single Banshee on Gold.

I think the benchmark for URs is set by the Harrier, PPR, Indra, Scorpion, Talon. Javelin/Wraith aren't too bad either. The Typhoon got over-nerfed but Bioware doesn't seem to want to give it more DPS, and having finally unlocked it, its usable, but doesn't feel special. The top tier URs have their niches.

Modifié par neteng101, 28 septembre 2012 - 02:13 .

[Eckswhyzed]

@Simulated_Snowman

I didn't agree with the Carnifex nerf.....but the Piranha's ability to easily obtain sky high DPS against bosses for such a low weight was completely overshadowing many other weapons.

Anyway, that's not too important. Back on topic:

Commons - easy to use (e.g. Avenger's low weight and recoil) vs. UR - hard to master e.g. PPR's ramp-up time, Scorpion's odd mechanics, Saber's recoil and reticule bloom, and so on.

[Grunt_Platform]

Neofelis Nebulosa wrote...

That is a bit ambivalent.

Personally, I think as an ultra-rare, those weapons should at the very least have surpreme stats compared to their equivalents, basically being the on-crack versions of them instead of being weapons for other purposes entirely.

But from a balance point of view, I see how it would invalidate the less rare version of said weapon, which is in itself a bit poor design if you can simply trounce it because something you have unlocked is simply superiour in more or less every aspect.

I like to think that all weapons should serve a distinctive niche for where they are the most effective. And in there, every weapon, no matter what rarity they are should be equally effective, with the rarer ones being a bit more better at things that don't fall exactly into the niche they are filling, so that whilst uncommon or common weapons would still be perfectly servicable in their niche throughout all difficulties, more rare weapons could simply cover a wider spectrum of actions without having a severe dropoff in effectivity as compared to the more specialized lower-rare weapons.
[...]

That's an interesting take on it, but I kinda see the existing balance trending in the opposite direction: The more common weapons are more generalized, but the rarer ones are more specialized. Ergo, the Katana should do pretty well at any job you could want a shotgun for, but can't quite compete in the specialties of rarer weapons. Just like how the Mantis strikes a balance between the heavy duty sniper rifles, and the lighter, more caster and side-arm friendly sniper rifles.

I think we're pretty much in agreement overall though: The "best" weapons should be the niche guns that are difficult to master, and have a fairly narrow specialty, but they rock at it. That's where I think URs belong.

SimulatedSnowman wrote...

I agree with your conclusion OP. However, I don't think that is what BW wants, especially given the last nerfs to the Piranha and Carnifex, with the explanation being to "bring them in line" with the other guns. This suggests that they do not want weapons that outshine other weapons from level 1, but rather most weapons should be similar enough in characteristics that it could pretty much be a toss up between them. It's upsetting.

Hrm, I disagree.

See, the problem with the Carnifex is it was overshadowing many other rares and uncommons (heck, early on it was invalidating every multi-shot sniper rifle!), even those that had been buffed to be roughly its equal. Heck, it was even overshadowing its Ultra-Rare cousin the Paladin! Most dedicated players picked up on the Paladin's usefulness, but... you can still find people saying the Carnifex is the better weapon. Not sure the nerf hit the mark exactly though.

And the Piranha was having its stint as the single most popular weapon in the game, and with good reason. For those weeks before its damage buff was undone it was beyond a doubt the most power for weight in the game, and even now it still has the second best theoretical damage per second (Reegar beats it.. but the Reegar's weird).

In both cases, BioWare showed much more restraint than when they nerfed the Krysae and Falcon. They dialed the guns back a bit, but they're both still among the best in the game. This actually falls roughly inline with my theory—No gun should be completely overshadowing another (overshadowing a common may be exempt, but... see below)

Eckswhyzed wrote...
Commons - easy to use (e.g. Avenger's low weight and recoil) vs. UR - hard to master e.g. PPR's ramp-up time, Scorpion's odd mechanics, Saber's recoil and reticule bloom, and so on.

THIS. So very this.

Modifié par EvanKester, 28 septembre 2012 - 02:20 .

[AustereLemur799]

Given all the trouble we go to to get the elusive buggers, yes.

[neteng101]

EvanKester wrote...

Heck, it was even overshadowing its Ultra-Rare cousin the Paladin! Most dedicated players picked up on the Paladin's usefulness, but... you can still find people saying the Carnifex is the better weapon.

Its because Bioware nerfed the Paladin's clip many moons ago, and their continued refusal to increase the clip size back to 4.  Anyone that has been around would have seen many different people ask for the 4-clip back.  The weight has never been the issue with the Paladin for me, its the stupid clip size.

[Constant Motion]

neteng101 wrote...

EvanKester wrote...

Heck, it was even overshadowing its Ultra-Rare cousin the Paladin! Most dedicated players picked up on the Paladin's usefulness, but... you can still find people saying the Carnifex is the better weapon.

Its because Bioware nerfed the Paladin's clip many moons ago, and their continued refusal to increase the clip size back to 4.  Anyone that has been around would have seen many different people ask for the 4-clip back.  The weight has never been the issue with the Paladin for me, its the stupid clip size.

And yet other players are perfectly happy with a 3-clip Paladin and will gladly pay that price for increased power-per-shot.

Sounds pretty well-balanced from where I'm standing!

[Grunt_Platform]

neteng101 wrote...

You should take a poll if you wanted the views of the community as a whole. Because discussions go around in circles on BSN with a few people dominating the discussion.

I'd make a poll if I had a simple yes/no question to ask.  But it's the discussion I really want. I might make a poll if some clear positions come up in the discussion. I also have to admit that I've never seen the BioWare staff acknowledging or openly reacting to any polls related to balance changes, which makes me hesitant to bother. And every poll I've ever voted on didn't really have the answer I wanted to give.

[EDIT, actually, here's a thought. How do these poll options sound?
How should weapon rarity affect balance?
* All weapons should be gold-viable.
* All weapons should be gold-viable, but rarer weapons should be more specialized. (High skill requirements for high power rewards) 
* Rarer weapons should be stronger than more common weapons [Black > Gold > SIlver > Blue]
* Commons and Uncommons are just stepping stones, but Rares and Ultra Rares should be balanced.] 

neteng101 wrote...
Its because Bioware nerfed the Paladin's clip many moons ago, and their continued refusal to increase the clip size back to 4.  Anyone that has been around would have seen many different people ask for the 4-clip back.  The weight has never been the issue with the Paladin for me, its the stupid clip size.

Agree to disagree time here, I think. I like the reduced clip size since, frankly, it makes the Paladin more distinct from the Carnifex. Yes they nerfed its clip size, but at the same time they upped its damage. With the 4-shot magazine, the Paladin starts looking a lot like a straight upgrade to the Carnifex, instead of its more aim-dependant big brother. Gives them a nice balance—The Carnifex is the more forgiving gun, and it's better for using with Marksman or Geth, but the Paladin's a better marksman's weapon.

Modifié par EvanKester, 28 septembre 2012 - 02:43 .

[neteng101]

Constant Motion wrote...

And yet other players are perfectly happy with a 3-clip Paladin and will gladly pay that price for increased power-per-shot.

Sounds pretty well-balanced from where I'm standing!

All opinions unless you can back that up with numbers.  But the numbers suggests the Carnifex (not Paladin) has been too dominant, per Bioware.  If they want more Paladin usage, then the 4-clip has been enough times by different people on BSN to merit consideration.