285 réponses à ce sujet

[SavagelyEpic]

Lord_Sirian wrote...

Ashen Earth wrote...

Jay_Hoxtatron wrote...

Ashen Earth wrote...

sobit wrote...

upinya slayin wrote...

Thats score doesn't add up. should be abut 50k lower total score. espcially since objectives weren't milked (full time bonus on credits) only way the happened is using 5 rockets on wave 11 spawns (you can get about 10k per spawn if you get 2 banshees, 3 brutes,a nd 2 ravagers which is usually a spawn)

gold XP were increased. i just finished a reaper gold PUG with 440k total XP and 81586 credits. i was surprised too, but it seems the increase was that big. no missiles used on extraction btw.

That screenshot is old as hell.

75k credits is what you would get for a 16 minute gold run before the patch, assuming all objectives were completed quickly. (extraction gives bonus credits)

This is from before Retaliation.

Nah it was done yesterday. Sirian died during extraction wave, he got spawn trapped [Banshees/Brutes/Ravagers spawning on him] even though there was 2 free spawn locations. Respawn are sometimes messed up.

Since he died he didn't get the extraction bonus. So 75k credits for him.

lol what a scrub.

 

 I turned to run to the LZ with 30 seconds left. a ton of stuff that my team-mates had just killed near the LZ just respawned on top of my head. Banshee picked me up but I died before the sync kill took effect. Stood up, spammed the rocket button, fired a rocket, but was left with 5 seconds to get to extraction. 

Needless to say, I didn't make it. 

lol what a scrub.

[upinya slayin]

Lord_Sirian wrote...

upinya slayin wrote...

Ashen Earth wrote...

upinya slayin wrote...

our using an example that has no leeway. its a commoon to an UR and one that eveyroene agrees would be way better.

Both weapons fill the niche of a lightweight shotgun. It makes sense to compare them regardless of rarity just like it makes sense to compare the Saber and the Argus. The Talon and the Eviscerator are functionally the same, and appeal to the same classes although one is clearly superior to the other.

upinya slayin wrote...

So if i think the collector SMG is good and I can do good with it, then how can somebody tell me I should think its a bad weapon?

In the end, you're right: It's a matter of opinion. I can't and won't speak for other people, but if I say a weapon is "bad" I support my claim with facts. There is a difference between a person who just says "this weapon is bad and you shouldn't use it because it is bad" and someone who backs up his statements with valid arguments.

you might think a weapon sucks while someone else thinks its good.

 

Herein lies the problem...

It is possible for "someone else" to simply be wrong.

If I say the sky is green, I'm wrong. It's not just that I view it differently, I'm wrong. because the sky is blue, not green.

If someone says the Katana is a great/good weapon, they're just as wrong as if I had said the sky was green.

Your wrong here. you can't compare a scientific fact that can be researched or proved to somehting in a video game that is a matter of opinion.

My point was that its all opinion. If you like a weapon and you can do good with it, who is to tell you that it sucks?

[upinya slayin]

Xaijin wrote...

modok8 wrote...

Xaijin wrote...
It is entirely possible to perform a baseline check of stat effects combined with average best usage of anything. Fighting game developers and analysts have been doing this for twenty years. Performance can and will be reduced to a rather simple algorithm, and yes, this can also cover utility by checking player damage taken or current enemy state at the same time.

These are the kinds of things experienced players and devs alike do, especially ones from a fighting game background who also get in the trenches on a regular basis.

So I'm all for numbers and stats and the like. But aren't they based on certian assumptions.
DPS for example. What does that assume as far as accuracy? 100%? 75%? 50%?
Because I guarantee not every player is landing every shot. A weapon that has its DPS spread out over more shots will punish an inacurate player less than a wepon that has most of its DPS in only a few shots
You say "average best usage"
But what is that?
where do they get that? 
There is a human element that can't be removed, because humans are creating and playing the game.
I'm not a "everything is just opinon" guy or a relativist by any stretch of the imagination
But I also don't think you can boil "best gun" down to numbers and stats
Not that this is what you are saying or belive, just where i'm coming from
Anyway it is interesting how even fairly inconsequential things can raise pretty consequential issues
though I suppose what I find inconsequential may not be so for people in the gaming industry.

The DPS on BWs spreadsheet is an assumed value based on what the weapon does, how close you get to that number CONSISTENTLY can and will be averaged into a mean number, which is rather likely to be one of the metrics used by BW to balance things. Whether it's fair or not or consistent (in terms of usage versus raw effectiveness by everyone playing the game)  or not is really kinda immaterial. BW has to make a judgement call somewhere on a weapon's effectiveness, and it's rather likely edge cases on both sides of user effectiveness are chunked out the door in most cases, hence average best use. I've never even intimated people can be removed as people's usage is the metric used to quantify how good a weapon is, but I CAN guarantee you it's boiled down to a numeric equivocation.

Period.

Yes the best gun in the game can be boiled down to stats, because stats are what make that gun best. If a gun does 1000 dps and hits targets with 1000 N and it's clip and mag are 1000 rounds, I can guarandamntee you it's the best gun in the game. BW has gone out of their way to provide a huge range of variables to provide variety, but there is a best gun in the game, and it's NOT a matter of opinion. There's a character with the best powers in the game, and the same applies there too. Utility and damage may be separate entities, but they have to come together somewhere because that's literally BW's combat mechanic in Mass Effect, the synergy of utility under the paradigm and play conditions they set, and the efficiency at which enemies are dead without being able to damage you back sufficiently enough to kill you, ie effectiveness. The only way to go outside said model is to so grossly exaggerate a particular stat that it becomes broken or near broken, like a weapon or power that did 1 point of damage but froze any number of enemies for an hour.

Its not all about statas. If someone is uing a turbo a controller a mattock will have a higher DPS then a harrier. Also for example the harrier has the highest DPS in the game. but runs out of ammo fast and has a small clip, where the PPR has to warm up but with its abaility to sustain fire for longer and never lose ammo alot of people would say its better then the harrier.

The stats don't make a gun. for insatnce the talon and paladan are both very similar in stats, both URs, and both heavy pistols. Some may prefer the paladin for range and headshots, some may prefer the talon for being up close. who is to say 1 is wrong based on an arbitary number?

[aimimia]

Sirian save your self the time and trouble. He seems to be arguing kill speed over using a weapon effectively. Jay makes any weapon good though, just some weapons have their limits

[upinya slayin]

Lord_Sirian wrote...

upinya slayin wrote...

Lord_Sirian wrote...

upinya slayin wrote...

Ashen Earth wrote...

upinya slayin wrote...

our using an example that has no leeway. its a commoon to an UR and one that eveyroene agrees would be way better.

Both weapons fill the niche of a lightweight shotgun. It makes sense to compare them regardless of rarity just like it makes sense to compare the Saber and the Argus. The Talon and the Eviscerator are functionally the same, and appeal to the same classes although one is clearly superior to the other.

upinya slayin wrote...

So if i think the collector SMG is good and I can do good with it, then how can somebody tell me I should think its a bad weapon?

In the end, you're right: It's a matter of opinion. I can't and won't speak for other people, but if I say a weapon is "bad" I support my claim with facts. There is a difference between a person who just says "this weapon is bad and you shouldn't use it because it is bad" and someone who backs up his statements with valid arguments.

you might think a weapon sucks while someone else thinks its good.

 

Herein lies the problem...

It is possible for "someone else" to simply be wrong.

If I say the sky is green, I'm wrong. It's not just that I view it differently, I'm wrong. because the sky is blue, not green.

If someone says the Katana is a great/good weapon, they're just as wrong as if I had said the sky was green.

Your wrong here. you can't compare a scientific fact that can be researched or proved to somehting in a video game that is a matter of opinion.

My point was that its all opinion. If you like a weapon and you can do good with it, who is to tell you that it sucks?

 

But it's not a matter of opinion. Not totally.  The Katana is objectively a bad weapon on Gold. Why? Because it's incredibly hard to kill things before they kill you. Its DPS is lacking, it weighs quite a bit even at level X and there are far better weapons to use.  

If you're telling me that the Katana could be called a good weapon if a single person liked the feel and did well with it... I don't really know what to say to you.

again its all relative. the katana is a common. lets say i'm a n00b and i'm playing bronze with my predator and mantis and i'm like man i hate sniping and man the preadtor makes my finger hurt, then i get to wave 6 and get enough for a recruit pack and a katana shows up and i'm like dam this weapon is bad as. and i continue to use it in my bronze games while buying recruit packs to level it up. You think its fair to tell me i'm an idiot becuase I'm thinking it a good gun right now?

I do get your point however that using gold as a baseline that a katana doens't do enough damage. But guns like the CSMG had a high damage output when compared to wieght. for instance a car with 300 HP that weighs 4000lbs won't be as fast as a car with 250HP that weighs 2000 lbs. Its nto about raw HP but about HP/Weight ratio.

This whole thing began becuase i think the new UR SMG is a good weapon while others don't. And then you use original common weapons as an example of what exactly?

[upinya slayin]

Lord_Sirian wrote...

upinya slayin wrote...

Xaijin wrote...

modok8 wrote...

Xaijin wrote...
It is entirely possible to perform a baseline check of stat effects combined with average best usage of anything. Fighting game developers and analysts have been doing this for twenty years. Performance can and will be reduced to a rather simple algorithm, and yes, this can also cover utility by checking player damage taken or current enemy state at the same time.

These are the kinds of things experienced players and devs alike do, especially ones from a fighting game background who also get in the trenches on a regular basis.

So I'm all for numbers and stats and the like. But aren't they based on certian assumptions.
DPS for example. What does that assume as far as accuracy? 100%? 75%? 50%?
Because I guarantee not every player is landing every shot. A weapon that has its DPS spread out over more shots will punish an inacurate player less than a wepon that has most of its DPS in only a few shots
You say "average best usage"
But what is that?
where do they get that? 
There is a human element that can't be removed, because humans are creating and playing the game.
I'm not a "everything is just opinon" guy or a relativist by any stretch of the imagination
But I also don't think you can boil "best gun" down to numbers and stats
Not that this is what you are saying or belive, just where i'm coming from
Anyway it is interesting how even fairly inconsequential things can raise pretty consequential issues
though I suppose what I find inconsequential may not be so for people in the gaming industry.

The DPS on BWs spreadsheet is an assumed value based on what the weapon does, how close you get to that number CONSISTENTLY can and will be averaged into a mean number, which is rather likely to be one of the metrics used by BW to balance things. Whether it's fair or not or consistent (in terms of usage versus raw effectiveness by everyone playing the game)  or not is really kinda immaterial. BW has to make a judgement call somewhere on a weapon's effectiveness, and it's rather likely edge cases on both sides of user effectiveness are chunked out the door in most cases, hence average best use. I've never even intimated people can be removed as people's usage is the metric used to quantify how good a weapon is, but I CAN guarantee you it's boiled down to a numeric equivocation.

Period.

Yes the best gun in the game can be boiled down to stats, because stats are what make that gun best. If a gun does 1000 dps and hits targets with 1000 N and it's clip and mag are 1000 rounds, I can guarandamntee you it's the best gun in the game. BW has gone out of their way to provide a huge range of variables to provide variety, but there is a best gun in the game, and it's NOT a matter of opinion. There's a character with the best powers in the game, and the same applies there too. Utility and damage may be separate entities, but they have to come together somewhere because that's literally BW's combat mechanic in Mass Effect, the synergy of utility under the paradigm and play conditions they set, and the efficiency at which enemies are dead without being able to damage you back sufficiently enough to kill you, ie effectiveness. The only way to go outside said model is to so grossly exaggerate a particular stat that it becomes broken or near broken, like a weapon or power that did 1 point of damage but froze any number of enemies for an hour.

Its not all about statas. If someone is uing a turbo a controller a mattock will have a higher DPS then a harrier. 

 

No it won't......................

Sorry, it will have the same DPS as a harrier. they both do the samage damage per shot and a turbo controller will allow it to fire as fast as the harrier

[UKStory135]

Lord_Sirian wrote...

Upinya..... I hate to burst your bubble but:

A) Harrier does more damage per shot
Mattock RoF: 450, Harrier RoF: 550
C) Harrier clip size: 20, Mattock clip size: 16

Mattock can't come close to the Harrier for DPS, even with a macro/turbo controller.

Actually, at level X, they both do 130 per shot with no mods. But you are right that the Mattock can't touch the Harrier in DPS.  I think it's either level IV or level V where the Harrier passes the Mattock X in DPS.

[mrcanada]

Lord_Sirian wrote...

TrollBerzerker01 wrote...

While I agree the Disciple is a terrible weapon, I believe it does have a niche on the Krogan Shaman. It's a lightweight shotgun, so you can put a melee damage mod on it and still have a pretty low cooldown for powers, and the weapon itself is decent enough for shooting a few rounds off when it's unsafe to melee enemies like Banshees.

 

The problem is that you could put a Wraith or a Reegar on it instead and still have good cooldowns (200% is NOT mandator for casters), the difference is you would actually kill some things with your gun as well, rather than just having it tickle them.

This. You could take it and it would be passable, but why when there are at least 5 better options that are nearly as light and offer far more stopping power.

[Tybo]

upinya slayin wrote...

Its not all about statas. If someone is uing a turbo a controller a mattock will have a higher DPS then a harrier. Also for example the harrier has the highest DPS in the game. but runs out of ammo fast and has a small clip, where the PPR has to warm up but with its abaility to sustain fire for longer and never lose ammo alot of people would say its better then the harrier.

The stats don't make a gun. for insatnce the talon and paladan are both very similar in stats, both URs, and both heavy pistols. Some may prefer the paladin for range and headshots, some may prefer the talon for being up close. who is to say 1 is wrong based on an arbitary number?

But...many of these things are stats.  You can say that the PPR is better because its clip size.  Or that the paladin is better for its range.  (Though I'd disagree on both, they are legitimate claims).

Your problem is making the false argument that stats=DPS.  DPS is just one of many important stats.

Modifié par tyhw, 16 novembre 2012 - 05:29 .

[ASmoothCriminalx]

Fine, fine. We won't call weapons awesome just because we can score well with them and consider those weapons viable. But! You can't call a weapon sh**ty just because X weapon is better than it.

All that matters to me is viability. I saw the most ridiculous thread where someone wanted to buff nearly all of the UR weapons because there were rare weapons (mostly DLC) that were "better". He was only considering the weapons relative to each other and not at all concerned with how easily the weapons will get you through a gold game.

Sure, the differences in weapon effectiveness come into play if there is enough of a difference between said weapon and comparable weapons. I just don't see it when looking at the weapon that caused this thread.

[CmnDwnWrkn]

Lord_Sirian wrote...

CmnDwnWrkn wrote...

If you think the Hornet qualifies as a bad weapon to the degree that you list it alongside the Disciple, I would say you either haven't used it enough and are speaking from ignorance, or you need to L2P.

I do agree that "I scored X points with weapon Y; therefore Y is a great weapon" is a silly argument.

Lord_Sirian wrote...

stysiaq wrote...

Please, do so. I score pretty high with Hornet on any class I use it with.

All it takes is using the stability consumable.

 

Fine.. I didn't want to do this, but:



For
those who are unaware, Jay is a MUCH better player than I am. For me to
outscore him, he needs to be using a horrible weapon. For me to
outscore him by 85k, the weapon has to be absolutely and totally awful.

Guess which weapon he was using this game? [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/whistling.png[/smilie]

This argument for the Hornet being bad is ironically more ridiculous than the type of argument this thread is making fun of.

 

Spoken like someone who has never played with Jay.

The Hornet sucks, sorry bro.

Hopefully this is a joke and you're mocking the people who make "Weapon X is bad because I outscored such and such with it" arguments.

[upinya slayin]

Lord_Sirian wrote...

UKStory135 wrote...

Lord_Sirian wrote...

Upinya..... I hate to burst your bubble but:

A) Harrier does more damage per shot
Mattock RoF: 450, Harrier RoF: 550
C) Harrier clip size: 20, Mattock clip size: 16

Mattock can't come close to the Harrier for DPS, even with a macro/turbo controller.

Actually, at level X, they both do 130 per shot with no mods. But you are right that the Mattock can't touch the Harrier in DPS.  I think it's either level IV or level V where the Harrier passes the Mattock X in DPS.

 

Yeah I just remembered they recently buffed the Mattock up to the same damage per shot as the Harrier.

Mattock's RoF is 100 lower though.

not eevyrone has a harrier X too dont' forget. a casual player with a harrier 2-4 and a mattock 10 with a turbo controller owuld put out more damage with a mattock then a harrier. around 5 is wher eit passes it. still with both at X the mattock is still pretty close to the harriers output and has more spare ammo

[upinya slayin]

tyhw wrote...

upinya slayin wrote...

Its not all about statas. If someone is uing a turbo a controller a mattock will have a higher DPS then a harrier. Also for example the harrier has the highest DPS in the game. but runs out of ammo fast and has a small clip, where the PPR has to warm up but with its abaility to sustain fire for longer and never lose ammo alot of people would say its better then the harrier.

The stats don't make a gun. for insatnce the talon and paladan are both very similar in stats, both URs, and both heavy pistols. Some may prefer the paladin for range and headshots, some may prefer the talon for being up close. who is to say 1 is wrong based on an arbitary number?

But...many of these things are stats.  You can say that the PPR is better because its clip size.  Or that the paladin is better for its range.  (Though I'd disagree on both, they are legitimate claims).

Your problem is making the false argument that stats=DPS.  DPS is just one of many important stats.

Actually my argument is stats don't matter. Seeing as statstically a mattock X is better then a harrier 1-2 but in reality and actual usage the harrier is a much better gun even at leevl 1 then a mattock X

[Ashen One]

upinya slayin wrote...

not eevyrone has a harrier X too dont' forget. a casual player with a harrier 2-4 and a mattock 10 with a turbo controller owuld put out more damage with a mattock then a harrier. around 5 is wher eit passes it. still with both at X the mattock is still pretty close to the harriers output and has more spare ammo

Sorry, but I lol'd at this.

[Moby]

upinya slayin wrote...

a mattock 10 with a turbo controller

I cap that thing no problem without one... 

[FlowCytometry]

I like to think that starter weapons like the Katana being weak is kinda a good thing- if we start raining good guns on new player's they'll get the idea they should try a difficulty higher than they are prob ready for and too early.

Some guns gonna have to be weaker, and that's alright on a 'tiered' (though quite random) release system. The question isn't if they should be weaker, but to what extent.

Modifié par FlowCytometry, 16 novembre 2012 - 08:10 .

[VaultingFrog]

Lord_Sirian wrote...

upinya slayin wrote...

Lord_Sirian wrote...

upinya slayin wrote...

Ashen Earth wrote...

upinya slayin wrote...

our using an example that has no leeway. its a commoon to an UR and one that eveyroene agrees would be way better.

Both weapons fill the niche of a lightweight shotgun. It makes sense to compare them regardless of rarity just like it makes sense to compare the Saber and the Argus. The Talon and the Eviscerator are functionally the same, and appeal to the same classes although one is clearly superior to the other.

upinya slayin wrote...

So if i think the collector SMG is good and I can do good with it, then how can somebody tell me I should think its a bad weapon?

In the end, you're right: It's a matter of opinion. I can't and won't speak for other people, but if I say a weapon is "bad" I support my claim with facts. There is a difference between a person who just says "this weapon is bad and you shouldn't use it because it is bad" and someone who backs up his statements with valid arguments.

you might think a weapon sucks while someone else thinks its good.

 

Herein lies the problem...

It is possible for "someone else" to simply be wrong.

If I say the sky is green, I'm wrong. It's not just that I view it differently, I'm wrong. because the sky is blue, not green.

If someone says the Katana is a great/good weapon, they're just as wrong as if I had said the sky was green.

Your wrong here. you can't compare a scientific fact that can be researched or proved to somehting in a video game that is a matter of opinion.

My point was that its all opinion. If you like a weapon and you can do good with it, who is to tell you that it sucks?

 

But it's not a matter of opinion. Not totally.  The Katana is objectively a bad weapon on Gold. Why? Because it's incredibly hard to kill things before they kill you. Its DPS is lacking, it weighs quite a bit even at level X and there are far better weapons to use.  

If you're telling me that the Katana could be called a good weapon if a single person liked the feel and did well with it... I don't really know what to say to you.

It has been and always will be a complete and total matter of opinion. I dont care what kind of stats you put out. The use of a particular weapon is a personal choice, not a statistical one.

Sure "weapon X" has a higher DPS than "weapon Y". I just dont care. If I am comfortable with a weapon I use it. Thats that. If you prefer a certain DPS over another then that too is a personal choice. Either way it comes down to an individuals personal opinions or conceptions about the weapons and or powers within the game.

I tend to give shotguns the cold shoulder because I hate using them in ME. Never liked them from any of the games. Does that make them bad weapons? Nope, its just a personal opinion of them that I have. And that is what all of this boils down to.

Sorry but you are seeming to be pushing your personal opinion as fact on this matter when clearly it is not. That is my personal observation of this thread. You tried to make a parody of other threads and I can deal with that but the constant insistance that a "weapon" is bad is pure insanity (which the thread turned into even during  your initial post).

[MrGoldarm]

darkpassenger2342 wrote...

I have eagle VI. Somehow i doubt that.

Its pretty amazing on a headshot specced TS, small things go poof.

[upinya slayin]

Ashen Earth wrote...

upinya slayin wrote...

not eevyrone has a harrier X too dont' forget. a casual player with a harrier 2-4 and a mattock 10 with a turbo controller owuld put out more damage with a mattock then a harrier. around 5 is wher eit passes it. still with both at X the mattock is still pretty close to the harriers output and has more spare ammo

Sorry, but I lol'd at this.

I've seen someone play with a modded controller using a GI and a mattock. And he tried arguing with me that the GI isn't the most powerfull class as far as boosting weapon damage and his biggest argument was taht it has no shields which made even less sense. but hey if you need a modded controller to do good, what can you expect lol