191 réponses à ce sujet

[Valmar]

Why is this even a question? Of course they should. Technically, the Promotional Weapons should be top, but as far as weapons you can unlock through playing the game, UR should be the most elite. Honestly, what is the point of having different tiers of weapons if they're not as good as uncommons?

[baltoid]

Yes. If for no other reason than the fact that they are insanely difficult to level up without actually spending real money or having a steady Gold/Plat farming group.

[Wynne]

Djarknaein wrote...

I think common should be viable on bronze, uncommon silver, rare gold and ultra rare on platinum. As it stands right now many ultra rare are not platinum viable and some rares can't handle gold. For example: Javelin, gpr, gpsmg, Indra to name a few.

I agree with this hierarchy. 

On the one hand, you don't want the game to be too harsh on new players. On the other hand, you do want to make unlocking new packs feel good and keep people interested in playing and unlocking more guns.

Quite simply, if someone looks at that new Argus IX they received and is swearing up and down in dismay that it wasn't something good, then there's a problem. Getting a new assault rifle should make me want to try it out on a character that wouldn't normally use it--it should be good enough to make me seriously consider breaking my favored Adept/Engineer/Vanguard/Infiltrator habits and trying something new. It should get me interested in mastering another aspect of the game.

I would suggest something like the following, very roughly. 

Common
Viability I-X...
Bronze--Good to Very Good
Silver--Weak to Adequate
Gold--Not Viable to Weak, only players with extreme skill could score decently with them.
Platinum--Don't even think about it. 
Argument: These are the basic weapons we all get first. They shouldn't feel like pea-shooters on Bronze, but you should be made to want better guns. If you're not, why would you care about buying new packs? "Just for the novelty" is a pretty weak answer. It's disappointing for most.

Uncommon
Viability I-X...
Bronze--Very Good to Great
Silver--Good to Very Good
Gold--Adequate to Good
Platinum--Weak to Adequate
Argument: After you've played a few matches and bought some packs, you're sure to have unlocked some of these and are probably ready to try Silver. Players with above average skill could still skip upwards in difficulty, but for the average player not yet ready for Gold, the categories are still noticeably kept apart to keep all players crossing their fingers when they open a pack, and saying "Nice," when they get one of these. It's the kind of trusty gun you'd get familiar enough with to possibly even skip the rares out of sheer fondness, or because they're lighter weight than most guns.

Rare
Viability I-X...
Bronze--Great to Awesome
Silver--Very Good to Great
Gold--Good to Very Good
Platinum--Adequate to Good
Argument: These weapons should be golden, just like their color. When you get one of them, you should feel happy to get it and interested in trying it out even if it belongs on a character you're not comfortable with. These should ease the transition to Gold.

Ultra-Rare
Viability I-X...
Bronze--Awesome 
Silver --Great to Awesome
Gold--Very Good to Great
Platinum--Good to Very Good
Argument: If they're classified as N7, they should be elite, plain and simple. These are guns for the best operatives in the galaxy. It fits the lore, it fits their difficulty to obtain. Unlocking one of these should make a player say, "YES!" Their gimmicks may make them a curiosity, but on the right character they should be amazing. 

Promotional
Viability I-X...
Same as Ultra-Rare, but perhaps a little bit better. If someone went out of their way to fulfill a challenge, they ought to feel rewarded. I assume that's why they improved the Hurricane, and I hope the Eagle gets there as well. It would be nice. 

Overall, I just think there should at least be a gap between categories. You should know when to feel excited. The game should not confuse the player by giving them an N7 weapon that isn't as good as a Rare they have. 

[RustySam]

I thought it was a given that rarer weapons should be better. I really can't understand why we should be excited to unlock new peashoo... sorry, ultra rares. Maybe it's the new generation of gamers who don't want to put any effort into their games.

[Sparbiter]

I like this discussion.

My opinion:

Game balance is achieved when the common guns are viable, but the Ultra-Rare guns have the highest ceiling for damage output.

Common guns should be user friendly and effective. Ultra Rares should take skill to master, but for those willing to dedicate the time to learn the ultra-rares should dominate, maybe only in a specific niche.

[Chealec]

Checked a few manifests ... seems the people that either think URs aren't very good, or need to be significantly better are the people who don't have them at high levels.

*shrugs*

[Eckswhyzed]

As EvanKester already said, making commons/uncommond better on higher difficulties won't automatically make the URs worse.

[Ronnie Blastoff]

Chealec wrote...

Checked a few manifests ... seems the people that either think URs aren't very good, or need to be significantly better are the people who don't have them at high levels.

*shrugs*

This is usually the case. Honestly I don't think people even realize how "easy" it actually is to level up URs. The difficulty I'm guessing comes from playing easier difficulties, (silver,bronze) I've been mostly on gold+ since the demo, I started this game on gold with a level 1 HS spamming throw and warp. This game isn't hard, biggest problems are the "bugs and BS" the enemies are a simple AI that do the same thing everytime. (When there aren't any bugs and BS of course)

Puting in the work in higher difficulties is what gets you the credits to get what you want, getting ~30K on silver will NEVER max your URs, thats just a given, people want the weapons, they have to get "good" to where gold is easy mode and platinum is normal.

Now i'm not saying everyone go hop into gold, hell no, theres enough newbs getting carried in gold as is. BUT! get your "worthwhile" weapons to good levels then hop into gold and be willing to learn. I'm constantly changing my playstyle everyday to see if there is a better way to adapt to the bs... I mean the AI of this game.

[Jay_Hoxtatron]

Djarknaein wrote...

Jay_Hoxtatron wrote...

Djarknaein wrote...

I think common should be viable on bronze, uncommon silver, rare gold and ultra rare on platinum. As it stands right now many ultra rare are not platinum viable and some rares can't handle gold. For example: Javelin, gpr, gpsmg, Indra to name a few.

You couldn't be more wrong.

Sure I could : The harrier is a bad weapon.

See...

Ultra rares are not viable on Platinum : say what? Even the Avenger is viable on Platinum. Replace your usage of the word VIABLE by OPTIMAL and I'd agree. Anyhow, you're wrong. That is all.

[neteng101]

Eckswhyzed wrote...

As EvanKester already said, making commons/uncommond better on higher difficulties won't automatically make the URs worse.

I have to say I still totally don't get making commons/uncommons better on higher difficulties.  People should have to work up to higher difficulties and better weapons which should be more difficult to obtain.

The game has difficulty tiers, the weapons should correspond accordingly.  URs should be Platinum optimal, Commons should be optimal only for Bronze.  What's so bad about that?

And if you want a challenge, then use a sub-optimal weapon at higher difficulties.  Variety and choice is a good thing.  This notion of balance that everything has to be equally effective is just beyond stupid.

Note - I'm not against the commons/uncommons being buffed, so long as they don't get overbuffed that the lines blur.  But for now, you have Uncommons that outshine Rares like the GPR and Disciple...  they need to focus on the Rares/URs first, and only fix the starter weapons after this is done.

Uncommons have actually gotten rather good buffs even.

[t3hTwinky]

Yes.

They are the hardest guns to get and the biggest rewards for playing the game. Of course they should be the best guns.

[Epique Phael767]

How about we just get the ability to upgrade the more common guns further? Like getting an uncommon to rank XX? I'd love for the vindicator to be viable on platinum, and the main arguement I see is "they're easier to get, so they should be weak." so why not let us get it many more times to make it viable? seems fair to me.

[Kogia]

A lot of you seem to want to have a lot of redundent weapons floating around. I'd rather have more of the weapons useful at all levels, I like variety.

Just simply having UR & rares as better versions of common and uncommons means what's the point of having I through to X upgrading? If by the time you get your Phalanx to VI you've already got a Talon at III that's better, you then carry on getting your now entirely worthless Phalanx to X and never look at it again. The Talon should provide something better, in the right hands, but the Phalanx should still have a place with certain builds or situations.

Its more complex to have each weapon maintain a use and ultimately the rares & urs should be better, but they shouldn't be better in every way for every situation.

[Djarknaein]

Jay_Hoxtatron wrote...

Djarknaein wrote...

Jay_Hoxtatron wrote...

Djarknaein wrote...

I think common should be viable on bronze, uncommon silver, rare gold and ultra rare on platinum. As it stands right now many ultra rare are not platinum viable and some rares can't handle gold. For example: Javelin, gpr, gpsmg, Indra to name a few.

You couldn't be more wrong.

Sure I could : The harrier is a bad weapon.

See...

Ultra rares are not viable on Platinum : say what? Even the Avenger is viable on Platinum. Replace your usage of the word VIABLE by OPTIMAL and I'd agree. Anyhow, you're wrong. That is all.

Call it what you want viable, optimal, acceptable. You show up in a pug lobby I'm in with the avenger or afore mention weapons equipt and no other better weapons and I vote to kick, that's all im saying. A SI can easily use the javelin only on gold, on platinum not so much.

[Wynne]

Chealec wrote...

Checked a few manifests ... seems the people that either think URs aren't very good, or need to be significantly better are the people who don't have them at high levels.

*shrugs*

I have all of them at X except for 3 of the newest and I think many of them are not as good as they should be. The Graal, the GPS, the Widow, the Carnifex, the Reegar Carbine, etc. are absolutely good enough or more than good enough, but the Disciple, the GPSMG, the Argus... they are outclassed, certainly not on the level of the others. Not to mention the Uber-Rare Eagle.

The GPR and the Revenant and the Hurricane have received buffs--others still deserve it. 

[Grunt_Platform]

neteng101 wrote...

Eckswhyzed wrote...

As EvanKester already said, making commons/uncommond better on higher difficulties won't automatically make the URs worse.

I have to say I still totally don't get making commons/uncommons better on higher difficulties.  People should have to work up to higher difficulties and better weapons which should be more difficult to obtain.

The game has difficulty tiers, the weapons should correspond accordingly.  URs should be Platinum optimal, Commons should be optimal only for Bronze.  What's so bad about that?

And if you want a challenge, then use a sub-optimal weapon at higher difficulties.  Variety and choice is a good thing.  This notion of balance that everything has to be equally effective is just beyond stupid.

Note - I'm not against the commons/uncommons being buffed, so long as they don't get overbuffed that the lines blur.  But for now, you have Uncommons that outshine Rares like the GPR and Disciple...  they need to focus on the Rares/URs first, and only fix the starter weapons after this is done.

Uncommons have actually gotten rather good buffs even.

The problem there is more that the GPR, Disciple and Argus are just in desperate need of a buff. The absolute best Uncommons (Viper, Mattock.. I guess the Tempest and Phalanx too?), are good, but they're not in direct competition with any rares. The most similar URs are generally better, but by being more specialized (Harrier trades the Mattock's light weight and ammo reserves for CRAZY DPS. Black Widow trades the Viper's light weight and ammo for damage and penetration.. and BW probably needs a buff)

It wouldn't be hard to balance the guns as they are currently designed so that Rares and Ultra Rares are better for meta-game reasons, but the Uncommons are still perfectly viable. Trading ease of use for higher damage spikes will always be slightly "better" in this game. Most of the really good Rares are the high damage in exchange for being heavy.

And any Ultra-Rares that aren't already good at Rank I might need their Rank I stats buffed, but most of them are already great at Rank V and above. EDIT: Heck, the worst case I can think of for an Ultra Rare is the Wraith, as it is solidly outclassed by the Talon (better damage,clip size, mod options and weight all in one...oi). But I can't think of a single uncommon or rare that's actually better than the Wraith at al the things it's meant to do.

EDIT: In the case where two guns really are so similar that it's difficult to keep them functionally distinct then.. yes, I do think the rarer weapon should be the stronger of the two, but by a small margin. This is especially relevant in the case of the Avenger and the GPR.

Modifié par EvanKester, 30 septembre 2012 - 09:24 .

[Grunt_Platform]

Wynne wrote...
I agree with this hierarchy. 

On the one hand, you don't want the game to be too harsh on new players. On the other hand, you do want to make unlocking new packs feel good and keep people interested in playing and unlocking more guns.

Quite simply, if someone looks at that new Argus IX they received and is swearing up and down in dismay that it wasn't something good, then there's a problem. Getting a new assault rifle should make me want to try it out on a character that wouldn't normally use it--it should be good enough to make me seriously consider breaking my favored Adept/Engineer/Vanguard/Infiltrator habits and trying something new. It should get me interested in mastering another aspect of the game.

I would suggest something like the following, very roughly. 
[cut for spae]

I disagree with this hierarchy for a few simple reasons but it's certainly not a bad idea. The only issue is: Where is the Rare equivalent to the Avenger? If you learn to use the Avenger on Bronze, why isn't there a straight line of succession? Every upgrade to the Avenger trades away one of the Avenger's advantages to be better in some other way. Considering this, why does the Avenger's damage need to be so bad it's barely viable on Silver? Also note that you start unlocking rare weapons while playing on Silver, meaning that making Rare weapons solidly better than Uncommons will see most players hardly even using uncommons, unless they dwell on Silver an unusually long time. 

I prefer the way sniper rifles are currently balanced:
Mantis - Solid, easy to use and light enough for most classes. Viable through Gold. Directly outclassed only by heavier weapons.
Viper - Solid, light weight and very easy to use. A change of pace from its Common cousin, but not a direct improvement. Viable on almost all difficulties, though weapon-focused classes will prefer something heavier for Platinum.
Widow* - Excellent single shot damage, but too heavy to use on a caster. It's definitely exclusive to the rights of Soldiers and Infiltrators.
Javelin* - Best single-bullet damage in the game. An excellent weapon for snipers, but its immense weight and tricky handling make it fairly exclusive

*: Right now the Widow probably needs a buff, which would require a buff to the Javelin as well. But it's a small thing.

The more common guns can work alright on any class, but their better rare alternatives trade some of that ease of use and low weight for raw power. Right now, no gun in the game is strictly better than another, except in cases where one gun is seriously weak. (Note: "Strictly Better" means the weapons are entirely or functionally identical except where the better one is stronger. A single shot sniper with the same damage as the Mantis, but lower weight, for example, would be strictly better. Similarly, a gun with the same weight and damage, but multiple shots per clip.)

Bad or under powered rares do seriously need a buff though, and that issue is not dependant on the status of uncommons. The GPR, GPSMG, Argus and the like shouldn't require direct comparison to any commons or uncommons, sincetheir handling is rather unique, but the guns are underpowered and fail to do well even if you ignore their closest equivalents. And if a Rare or Ultra Rare gun is fine at rank V and up, but bad at Rank I, then some of its Rank I stats should probably become its Rank V stats.

I'd actually say that the Avenger's suckiness is infectious. Since every other assault rifle was balanced with the Avenger as the base weapon, it means they're starting with poor damage and quirky handling as a default. As for the progression of players from lower to higher difficulties, I would rather skill be the primary factor, rather than gear. It can take forever to get the items that make Gold relatively easy, especially if you're playing on Silver. The fact that a player can't take a level 20 character, and a maxed common onto Gold and contribute, unless they're Speed-Runner/Soloer level awesome just seems wrong (Especially since the Mantis, unlike other commons, is perfectly fine on Gold). 

Modifié par EvanKester, 30 septembre 2012 - 07:48 .