Aller au contenu

Photo

I don't understand this class system at all anymore


  • Ce sujet est fermé Ce sujet est fermé
125 réponses à ce sujet

#26
Kenadian

Kenadian
  • Members
  • 5 031 messages

CmnDwnWrkn wrote...

Kenadian wrote...

Huntress has TC, a combat power. Just saying. Even nitpicking aside, big ****ing whoop? The absolute last thing I care about from ME1 (other than its utter **** inventory system) is its poor gameplay. Strict class specifications from 5/6 years ago are irrelevant.


TC is Tech.  And where are you getting 5 or 6 years ago?  These class distinctions existed in ME3 SP and in the original pre-DLC multiplayer.


They originated with ME1, hence 5/6 years ago. And the classes changed long before ME3 MP DLC. Vanguards, Sentinels and Infiltrators all got their "signature" powers back in ME2. And how is TC a tech power?

#27
Cyonan

Cyonan
  • Members
  • 19 360 messages

Frozen Mind wrote...

class system is very easy in ME3:
Adept = 2 biotic powers or more
Soldier = combat powers, no biotic powers
Engineer = tech powers, no biotic powers
Sentinel = Tech Armor
Infiltrator = Tactical Cloak
Vanguard = Biotic Charge


I think the Batarian, Vorcha, and Volus Sentinels and the N7 Paladin would all like a word with you =P

#28
LoonySpectre

LoonySpectre
  • Members
  • 1 545 messages
Vorcha Sentinel has no Tech Armor.

#29
KingGuy420

KingGuy420
  • Members
  • 247 messages
I'm not going to get to deep into what I think about this but I will comment on these 2 statements...

Krogan Soldier with Fortification...... Grunt....

Asari Huntress with Biotics...... Every Asari since the beginning of Mass Effect has had biotics, even Asari Soldiers.

Race destinction plays just a big a role as class distinction.

Modifié par KingGuy420, 14 décembre 2012 - 08:56 .


#30
CmnDwnWrkn

CmnDwnWrkn
  • Members
  • 4 336 messages

Cyonan wrote...

CmnDwnWrkn wrote...

Kenadian wrote...

Huntress has TC, a combat power. Just saying. Even nitpicking aside, big ****ing whoop? The absolute last thing I care about from ME1 (other than its utter **** inventory system) is its poor gameplay. Strict class specifications from 5/6 years ago are irrelevant.


TC is Tech.  And where are you getting 5 or 6 years ago?  These class distinctions existed in ME3 SP and in the original pre-DLC multiplayer.


Not really.

Original Vanguards don't have combat powers.


Okay, you're right.  They screwed up the class distinctions in multiplayer from the beginning.

#31
unclemonster

unclemonster
  • Members
  • 852 messages
give us more characters!!!!
I could care less about "sticking to class distinctions"

#32
AkuIaTubShark

AkuIaTubShark
  • Members
  • 883 messages

Cyonan wrote...

Frozen Mind wrote...

class system is very easy in ME3:
Adept = 2 biotic powers or more
Soldier = combat powers, no biotic powers
Engineer = tech powers, no biotic powers
Sentinel = Tech Armor
Infiltrator = Tactical Cloak
Vanguard = Biotic Charge


I think the Batarian, Vorcha, and Volus Sentinels and the N7 Paladin would all like a word with you =P


Couldn't you, hypothecially, count his shield as some sort of indirect tech armor? :huh:
Although if so, it seems as though it's an attempt to make a ME3 verison of ME2's Tech Armor, since it can only take X amount of damage before going poof. 
My two cents though. :wizard:
Besides, we all know teh Paladin is an Engineer and not a Sentinel. :lol:

#33
Descy_

Descy_
  • Members
  • 7 325 messages

unclemonster wrote...


I could care less about "sticking to class distinctions"


I bet you also want Protheans in MP, don't ya?

#34
Kalas Magnus

Kalas Magnus
  • Members
  • 10 343 messages

Descy_ wrote...

unclemonster wrote...


I could care less about "sticking to class distinctions"


I bet you also want Protheans in MP, don't ya?

female protheans, yes.:devil:

#35
chefcook90

chefcook90
  • Members
  • 1 003 messages

AkuIaTubShark wrote...

 Vorcha's arn't tanky? :huh:
And, personally, I think the GI/Destroyer are still the best "weapon based classes" in the game, TGI was a joke character and nothing more before the nerf. Haven't played him since, however.


Vorcha are only tanky on Bronze and Silver. Their horrible base shields mean they don't benefit from Cyclonic Modulators, and thusly tend to die on Gold and Platinum.

#36
Kirrahe Airlines CEO

Kirrahe Airlines CEO
  • Members
  • 4 739 messages
The only vanguard that fits the classic description is the Kroguard.

#37
CmnDwnWrkn

CmnDwnWrkn
  • Members
  • 4 336 messages

Kenadian wrote...

CmnDwnWrkn wrote...

Kenadian wrote...

Huntress has TC, a combat power. Just saying. Even nitpicking aside, big ****ing whoop? The absolute last thing I care about from ME1 (other than its utter **** inventory system) is its poor gameplay. Strict class specifications from 5/6 years ago are irrelevant.


TC is Tech.  And where are you getting 5 or 6 years ago?  These class distinctions existed in ME3 SP and in the original pre-DLC multiplayer.


They originated with ME1, hence 5/6 years ago. And the classes changed long before ME3 MP DLC. Vanguards, Sentinels and Infiltrators all got their "signature" powers back in ME2. And how is TC a tech power?


I'm not sure how this is relevant to the discussion.  We're not talking about how classes changed over time, we're talking about characters in multiplayer violating the class distinctions.

I'm not sure how to answer your question about TC.  How is any tech power a tech power?

#38
The Wayward Vagabond

The Wayward Vagabond
  • Members
  • 617 messages

chefcook90 wrote...

AkuIaTubShark wrote...

 Vorcha's arn't tanky? :huh:
And, personally, I think the GI/Destroyer are still the best "weapon based classes" in the game, TGI was a joke character and nothing more before the nerf. Haven't played him since, however.


Vorcha are only tanky on Bronze and Silver. Their horrible base shields mean they don't benefit from Cyclonic Modulators, and thusly tend to die on Gold and Platinum.

I think the term "tanky" doesn't fit Vorcha, but "survivalist" sure does.

#39
Cyonan

Cyonan
  • Members
  • 19 360 messages

AkuIaTubShark wrote...

Cyonan wrote...

Frozen Mind wrote...

class system is very easy in ME3:
Adept = 2 biotic powers or more
Soldier = combat powers, no biotic powers
Engineer = tech powers, no biotic powers
Sentinel = Tech Armor
Infiltrator = Tactical Cloak
Vanguard = Biotic Charge


I think the Batarian, Vorcha, and Volus Sentinels and the N7 Paladin would all like a word with you =P


Couldn't you, hypothecially, count his shield as some sort of indirect tech armor? :huh:
Although if so, it seems as though it's an attempt to make a ME3 verison of ME2's Tech Armor, since it can only take X amount of damage before going poof. 
My two cents though. :wizard:
Besides, we all know teh Paladin is an Engineer and not a Sentinel. :lol:


I think at this point it's more just that Sentinel = has a defensive ability more than anything =P

#40
Thuellai

Thuellai
  • Members
  • 35 messages

CmnDwnWrkn wrote...

Kenadian wrote...

CmnDwnWrkn wrote...

Kenadian wrote...

Huntress has TC, a combat power. Just saying. Even nitpicking aside, big ****ing whoop? The absolute last thing I care about from ME1 (other than its utter **** inventory system) is its poor gameplay. Strict class specifications from 5/6 years ago are irrelevant.


TC is Tech.  And where are you getting 5 or 6 years ago?  These class distinctions existed in ME3 SP and in the original pre-DLC multiplayer.


They originated with ME1, hence 5/6 years ago. And the classes changed long before ME3 MP DLC. Vanguards, Sentinels and Infiltrators all got their "signature" powers back in ME2. And how is TC a tech power?


I'm not sure how this is relevant to the discussion.  We're not talking about how classes changed over time, we're talking about characters in multiplayer violating the class distinctions.

I'm not sure how to answer your question about TC.  How is any tech power a tech power?


But the defining elements of each class have already changed before [when some classes got new signature powers in ME2] so it's not as if class distinctions are perfectly rigid.  And barring the Paladin, most of the class breaks can be explained by racial preference - of course the Asari Infiltrator is partly biotic, all asari are biotic, it's in the codex.  Of course the Ghost is a weapons specialist - Infiltrators are all about high damage from a cloak and the turians know high damage comes from correctly applied firepower.

Racial distinctions account for most of the deviations from class distinctions.

#41
ClockworkSpectre

ClockworkSpectre
  • Members
  • 1 089 messages

CmnDwnWrkn wrote...

ClockworkSpectre wrote...

Think of it this way. The established classes before ME3 MP where for Shepard only, they were the Earth Alliance definition of class types. Most the the newer classes that stray from the established definitions are aliens, they are not from the Alliance. They are N7 in name only, other than the human characters there is no implied connection to the Earths military other than they are working with them now. So breaking the existing definitions is not problem, in fact in some ways it makes sense to do so. Each alien race would have their own definitions as to how a class would be built.

The Asari infiltrator, for example, makes perfect sense considering how the Asari military operates.  They prefer infiltration, spying, and sabotage rather than straight up firefights, leaving those up to the turians.  Which makes the turian ghost make sense because the turians have a pretty narrow view of how to fight.


Yet we have a Turian Saboteur now, which completely goes against the lore argument you just made.

Look, the concept of character classes is a well-established aspect of RPGs.  Once you start ignoring class distinctions, then there is no reason to have them in the first place.

 

Plenty of of modern RPGs have thrown out the idea of established classes, both Western RPGs and JRPGs.  Just look at games like Skyrim or the last few offline Final Fantasy games as examples.

Also, how does the turian sabateur break the arguement I was trying to make, all conventional armies have engineers that support the usual soldiers.  Besides I was saying that in the context of the races/cultures the characters come from the kits they have make sense and that the old definitions for classes from me1 and 2 don't need to aply here.

#42
Islandrockzor

Islandrockzor
  • Members
  • 309 messages

CmnDwnWrkn wrote...

ClockworkSpectre wrote...

Think of it this way. The established classes before ME3 MP where for Shepard only, they were the Earth Alliance definition of class types. Most the the newer classes that stray from the established definitions are aliens, they are not from the Alliance. They are N7 in name only, other than the human characters there is no implied connection to the Earths military other than they are working with them now. So breaking the existing definitions is not problem, in fact in some ways it makes sense to do so. Each alien race would have their own definitions as to how a class would be built.

The Asari infiltrator, for example, makes perfect sense considering how the Asari military operates.  They prefer infiltration, spying, and sabotage rather than straight up firefights, leaving those up to the turians.  Which makes the turian ghost make sense because the turians have a pretty narrow view of how to fight.


Yet we have a Turian Saboteur now, which completely goes against the lore argument you just made.

Look, the concept of character classes is a well-established aspect of RPGs.  Once you start ignoring class distinctions, then there is no reason to have them in the first place.

I think the multiplayer in some ways serve as a sort of beta-testing for ME4, more or less. Cause let's face it, the multiplayer isn't entirely lore-abiding at all times, and probably not entirely "canon". Doing the experimenting with classes now, in ME3s horde mode instead of in the main game, with all the feedback people post here, could help make the next Mass Effect installment have a much closer to perfect class system.

#43
Kalas Magnus

Kalas Magnus
  • Members
  • 10 343 messages

The Krauser wrote...

The only vanguard that fits the classic description is the Kroguard.

Slayer says hi.=]

#44
Julian Skies

Julian Skies
  • Members
  • 374 messages

Draining Dragon wrote...

So now, classes are now more defined by role.

Soldier is the weapon specialist, which is why we have classes like the Human Soldier with Adrenaline Rush, Turian Soldier with Marksman, and Krogan Soldier with... wait, what? Fortification? 

Okay.... I guess that might be okay....

Sentinels are tanks, as shown by classes like.... the Vorcha Sentinel?

Wait, doesn't the Soldier have the same "tanking" power as the Sentinel?

And I don't even the Engineers and Adepts. What is the difference between an Adept and an Engineer at this point? Tech vs Biotics? I thought we threw that out the window....

And why is the best weapons class in the game the Turian Ghost Infiltrator? I thought SOLDIERS were the weapon specialists!


Still makes perfect sense, but some people have difficulty in seeing this. There is actually a combination of factors at play here, there is not just the class role, but also you will notice that each species has their own role too. So the two of them are combined.

First off, Soldiers are weapon specialists, you are correct, and the thing about the Krogan Soldier is that it does not gives two touchdowns about power cooldowns, it can equip the heaviest (thus strongest) weapons. They are also durable, able to dish and take damage, they are not designed to tank, but they also do not go down quickly, they're frontliners.
Combine that with the fact that Krogans are tanky and have some form of DR, universally, and you get a soldier with Fortification, grenades and a single active power.

Then you look at the Infiltrators, you fail not realize what their niche is: They're the assassin class, stealth movement and gigantic burst damage, by nature their burst damage might seem like they compete with soldier as 'best weapon class' but the Infiltrators are by nature a lot more fragile, their damage burst is on a cooldown, too that is easily screwed up with if you carry the best weapons. What the Turian Ghost can do is deal a spike of very high damage every 3 seconds while doing what he can to drop aggro and withstand damage, what a Soldier would do is just sit there, firing that weapon for goddamn ever at a higher damage output, but not an irregular spike. (Quarian Marksman is frail, why? Quarians are frail. That said, he is more frail than planned on accident).

Now you look at Sentinels. In they are the 'red caster' class, they have access to all types of powers and their main job is take enemy fire without going down, they all possess damage reduction, aggro redirection and similar things. You might say 'But Paladin' and i'm going to ****slap you with my shield, that thing can eat more damage than a Krogan, people are just too dumb to proper use it.

So the roles are factually defined, some are similar but still different (Infiltrator with irregular damage spikes and Soldier with regular high damage). There is just a tendency for people to not want to understand that.

#45
unclemonster

unclemonster
  • Members
  • 852 messages

Descy_ wrote...

unclemonster wrote...


I could care less about "sticking to class distinctions"


I bet you also want Protheans in MP, don't ya?


I don't necessarily "want" them, BUT...
Sure I'll take them, Why not?

more characters=more fun
IMO:   more>lore

people are taking this WAY to seriously

Modifié par unclemonster, 14 décembre 2012 - 09:11 .


#46
AkuIaTubShark

AkuIaTubShark
  • Members
  • 883 messages

chefcook90 wrote...

AkuIaTubShark wrote...

 Vorcha's arn't tanky? :huh:
And, personally, I think the GI/Destroyer are still the best "weapon based classes" in the game, TGI was a joke character and nothing more before the nerf. Haven't played him since, however.


Vorcha are only tanky on Bronze and Silver. Their horrible base shields mean they don't benefit from Cyclonic Modulators, and thusly tend to die on Gold and Platinum.


Me and a few friends must be something wrong then, because we've gone entire Gold games going down once or twice a game at most. If you keep BL up and put on Shield Recharge items on a Vorcha, he can tank, not an amazing tank, but a minor one. 

#47
Striker93175

Striker93175
  • Members
  • 2 096 messages

Draining Dragon wrote...

Seriously. It makes no sense. None.

In ME1 and ME2, the classes used powers in three categories: Tech, Biotics, and Combat.

Soldier was pure combat.
Engineer was pure tech.
Adept was pure biotic.
Infiltrator was a combat/tech hybrid.
Vanguard was a combat/biotic hybrid.
Sentinel was a tech/biotic hybrid.

But those have been thrown out the window, by such classes as the...

N7 Paladin: A sentinel without biotics.
Batarian Sentinel: A sentinel with a combat power.
Asari Huntress: An infiltrator with biotics and no combat powers.

So now, classes are now more defined by role.

Soldier is the weapon specialist, which is why we have classes like the Human Soldier with Adrenaline Rush, Turian Soldier with Marksman, and Krogan Soldier with... wait, what? Fortification? 

Okay.... I guess that might be okay....

Sentinels are tanks, as shown by classes like.... the Vorcha Sentinel?

Wait, doesn't the Soldier have the same "tanking" power as the Sentinel?

And I don't even the Engineers and Adepts. What is the difference between an Adept and an Engineer at this point? Tech vs Biotics? I thought we threw that out the window....

And why is the best weapons class in the game the Turian Ghost Infiltrator? I thought SOLDIERS were the weapon specialists!

Help? Someone? Anyone? 

It doesn't make any sense :(



http://t1.gstatic.co...myFn19b7Mg8sRgw

#48
UKStory135

UKStory135
  • Members
  • 3 954 messages
Other than the Volus Mercenary, I think that all of the kits are appropriately placed, even the Paladin. That is mostly because I think that playstyle is more important than biotic vs. tech as far as designations go.

Soldiers all have high damage and/or defensive powers
Adepts are all great at setting up and detonating biotic combos
Sentinels all have a defensive power and a debuffer, except for the Vorcha who is more of the Tech/Biotic combo type
Engineers can all prime and detonate their own tech combos and all have some sort of support or crowd control power.
Infiltrators all have TC, a high damage power, and a debuffer, except for the Ghost who has no debuffing powers.
Vanguards all have Biotic Charge and some way to get high CQC damage.

#49
CmnDwnWrkn

CmnDwnWrkn
  • Members
  • 4 336 messages

ClockworkSpectre wrote...

CmnDwnWrkn wrote...

ClockworkSpectre wrote...

Think of it this way. The established classes before ME3 MP where for Shepard only, they were the Earth Alliance definition of class types. Most the the newer classes that stray from the established definitions are aliens, they are not from the Alliance. They are N7 in name only, other than the human characters there is no implied connection to the Earths military other than they are working with them now. So breaking the existing definitions is not problem, in fact in some ways it makes sense to do so. Each alien race would have their own definitions as to how a class would be built.

The Asari infiltrator, for example, makes perfect sense considering how the Asari military operates.  They prefer infiltration, spying, and sabotage rather than straight up firefights, leaving those up to the turians.  Which makes the turian ghost make sense because the turians have a pretty narrow view of how to fight.


Yet we have a Turian Saboteur now, which completely goes against the lore argument you just made.

Look, the concept of character classes is a well-established aspect of RPGs.  Once you start ignoring class distinctions, then there is no reason to have them in the first place.

 

Plenty of of modern RPGs have thrown out the idea of established classes, both Western RPGs and JRPGs.  Just look at games like Skyrim or the last few offline Final Fantasy games as examples.

Also, how does the turian sabateur break the arguement I was trying to make, all conventional armies have engineers that support the usual soldiers.  Besides I was saying that in the context of the races/cultures the characters come from the kits they have make sense and that the old definitions for classes from me1 and 2 don't need to aply here.


But ME3 didn't throw out the idea of established classes like those other games.  classes exist in the game.  They're there.  They haven't been removed.  I'm not arguing against what you're saying.  My point is - why have these classes in the first place if the distinctions between them are meaningless?

I'm also saying, I don't think they have been meaningless up until now.  There was a certain balance that came from having different classes, and the strengths and weaknesses each brought to the table.  I think BioWare was careless in abandoning this, and because they did so, this is starting to create an unbalanced game.

#50
BlackbirdSR-71C

BlackbirdSR-71C
  • Members
  • 1 516 messages

AkuIaTubShark wrote...

chefcook90 wrote...

AkuIaTubShark wrote...

 Vorcha's arn't tanky? :huh:
And, personally, I think the GI/Destroyer are still the best "weapon based classes" in the game, TGI was a joke character and nothing more before the nerf. Haven't played him since, however.


Vorcha are only tanky on Bronze and Silver. Their horrible base shields mean they don't benefit from Cyclonic Modulators, and thusly tend to die on Gold and Platinum.


Me and a few friends must be something wrong then, because we've gone entire Gold games going down once or twice a game at most. If you keep BL up and put on Shield Recharge items on a Vorcha, he can tank, not an amazing tank, but a minor one. 


It's not that the Vorcha can't tank, in fact, he's good at it. It's more that both the Soldier and the Sentinel have bloodlust.

The Soldier, in my opinion should have a more damage focused ability. Heck, even if they made it so that:

- Vorcha Sentinel: Base health regen ammount 10-20% higher
- Vorcha Soldier: Evo 5 Power/Weapon Damage is 10% per stack instead of 5%

would already help.