61 réponses à ce sujet

[mybudgee]

Fake

[Black Phantom]

capn233 wrote...

Ashen Earth wrote...
A "power-based" class can deal pretty ridiculous weapon damage without sacrificing it's ability to use it's powers very frequently, which makes it hard for an intelligent player to draw the line between a "weapon-based" or "power-based" class: The intelligent player uses both because there is no penalty for doing so.

People are using a "middle earth" rpg mentality with a difference between magic and weapon classes, that has never existed in Mass Effect.  All classes have always had weapons and powers.

That's part of what makes this forum so amusing. Being a TPS/RPG hybrid, you get the stereotypical viewpoints of people who are mainly familiar with shooters, (the people who will use the heaviest weapons on every class, and know nothing about the weight system and powers) the RPG crowd (the people who are terrible at the TPS aspect of the game, and can't accept that Mass Effect is not a pure PRG and is in fact a third person shooter) and the people who have played both RPGs and shooters, and understand both aspects of the game well.

[Shampoohorn]

capn233 wrote...

Ashen Earth wrote...
A "power-based" class can deal pretty ridiculous weapon damage without sacrificing it's ability to use it's powers very frequently, which makes it hard for an intelligent player to draw the line between a "weapon-based" or "power-based" class: The intelligent player uses both because there is no penalty for doing so.

People are using a "middle earth" rpg mentality with a difference between magic and weapon classes, that has never existed in Mass Effect.  All classes have always had weapons and powers.

ME2, pretty clearly limited weapon usage for 'casters' vs shooters.

ME3 was when they designed the encumbrance system to add more nuance to the concept: allowing casters to use any gun -- but at a cost.  Implementation is surprisingly flat though.  Heavy weapons are not that big a deal on casters and frequently weapon weight has no correlation to the strength of a gun.

Modifié par Shampoohorn, 14 novembre 2012 - 11:19 .

[TeamLexana]

Yes, yes, you CAN use casters against collecters BUT is it FUN? NOPE! Not for me at least and since it's my opinion on what I find to be entertaining, it can't really be argued against, lol.

[Geek]

You'd be surprised how easy it is to steamroll the collectors with a team of each of the Asari.

[Black Phantom]

Shampoohorn wrote...

capn233 wrote...

Ashen Earth wrote...
A "power-based" class can deal pretty ridiculous weapon damage without sacrificing it's ability to use it's powers very frequently, which makes it hard for an intelligent player to draw the line between a "weapon-based" or "power-based" class: The intelligent player uses both because there is no penalty for doing so.

People are using a "middle earth" rpg mentality with a difference between magic and weapon classes, that has never existed in Mass Effect.  All classes have always had weapons and powers.

ME2, pretty clearly limited weapon usage for 'casters' vs shooters.

ME3 was when they implemented the encumbrance system to add more nuance to the concept.  Implementation is surprisingly flat though.  Heavy weapons are not that big a deal on casters and frequently weapon weight has no correlation to the strength of a gun.

Regardless of the class specific weapon restrictions that were in ME1 and ME2, this has never been a game where you could get by on using powers exclusively, within practicality. Refusing to use your weapon for whatever reason has never been to a player's advantage.

Even in the first Mass Effect game, an Adept could walk into a room and use Singularity, but would still end up shooting enemies with his/her pistol during the 30 second cooldown. Sure, you could use all of your powers, then wait for the absurdly long cooldowns to reset if you had an aversion to weapons, but it was impractical because using both would end firefights faster. If anything, ME3 is the closest the series has ever gotten to allowing a player to get by on only power use. (it's especially true in the single player)

Modifié par Ashen Earth, 14 novembre 2012 - 11:38 .

[Shampoohorn]

@Ashen:
Agreed. They've always intended Mass Effect to be a hybrid, and you don't need good THAC0 to shoot well. And I'm perfectly satisfied with what they've given us.

Aside from this entertaining opportunity to think back to my DnD days, this really isn't a very interesting thread. I'll be going, now.

Modifié par Shampoohorn, 14 novembre 2012 - 11:41 .

[HolyAvenger]

Ashen Earth wrote...

 If anything, ME3 is the closest the series has ever gotten to allowing a player to get by on only power use. (it's especially true in the single player) 

Yes. Doing my renegadeShep adept insanity playthrough now, and I almost forget I have a gun sometimes. Biotic explosions rule the roost.

[capn233]

Shampoohorn wrote...

ME2, pretty clearly limited weapon usage for 'casters' vs shooters.

ME3 was when they designed the encumbrance system to add more nuance to the concept: allowing casters to use any gun -- but at a cost.  Implementation is surprisingly flat though.  Heavy weapons are not that big a deal on casters and frequently weapon weight has no correlation to the strength of a gun.

I suppose.

In ME1 the pure tech and biotics, as well as that hybrid all had the Pistol in a vanilla game... the class with the highest DPS in the game under its power (Marksman).

ME2 you were restricted to pistols and SMGs... but you were still much better off shooting things with the Predator and Shuriken then without using them.  And you do get an extra gun for the last 40% of the game.

ME3 I mainly agree, weapon "usefulness" does not scale very well with the weight, which should be an absolute design requirement across the board if they were going to make the weapon weight affect power cooldown.

edit: Ashen is also right that ME3 is the closest to allowing you to get by on powers only.  This is a direct result of the power combo system, which does relatively better damage at higher difficulties because it is the only damage dealer that scales up with enemy health.  Powers are remarkably powerful, even in comparison to ME1 where people acted like they were game breaking.  In reality, in ME1 most served as more CC than damage... sure you could lift a Colossus, but you didn't blow it up by casting a couple simple power combos.

Modifié par capn233, 15 novembre 2012 - 12:03 .

[Blissey1]

Miniditka77 wrote...

Ashen Earth wrote...

Beerfish wrote...

Any faction can be killed by any class solo on any level (probably with any weapon) with a player that is skilled enough and takes the time to do so.

Therefore the players that can't should be blaming their own lack of skill instead of blaming everything else.

Acknowledging that something is more difficult is not the same as complaining or blame shifting.  Collectors are more difficult for power-based classes.  The OP is actually proof of that, rather than contradicting it.  A good player with a weapons-based class would have probably done the same thing in half the time.

this is really all I'm able to take away form this.

[Xaijin]

TeamLexana wrote...

Yes, yes, you CAN use casters against collecters BUT is it FUN? NOPE! Not for me at least and since it's my opinion on what I find to be entertaining, it can't really be argued against, lol.

If it wasn't fun I wuldn't have bothered to do it. And I'm sure at some point I'll bring a piranha or something actually suited to bosses and use amps, and I'm pretty sure not only will it still be fun, it'll take at most half the time, and very likely probably less.

in comparison to ME1 where people acted like they were game breaking.

Liara with maxed singularity is all I have to say about that.

THAC0 to shoot well

ME4 still needs a psionic monk class.

Modifié par Xaijin, 15 novembre 2012 - 12:42 .

[Clips7]

Dayum....over an hour to clear that....must've been brutal....