189 réponses à ce sujet

[DeadeyeCYclops]

Some people don't use it, i actually prefer powers over weapons for most of my characters, and the weight of it makes it a no use weapon for me. So, yeah u could nerf it, buff it, or remove it from the game, and it would not make any difference to me

Modifié par DeadeyeCYclops78, 18 décembre 2012 - 04:30 .

[UnknownMercenary]

Poison_Berrie wrote...

Jay_Hoxtatron wrote...

Switch out in cover/out of cover recoil. 

They should do this before any other changes. Seriously they can't tell me this isn't a bug/mess up, yet they've never deemed to fix it and it's in part what makes the gun so easy to use overal.

It's pretty funny to see ransoms using the stability mod or consumable on it right now. It's not necessary at all unless you decide to run a fire rate specced Turian soldier and don't feel like compensating.

Modifié par UnknownMercenary, 18 décembre 2012 - 04:33 .

[Ziegrif]

UnknownMercenary wrote...

Poison_Berrie wrote...

Jay_Hoxtatron wrote...

Switch out in cover/out of cover recoil. 

They should do this before any other changes. Seriously they can't tell me this isn't a bug/mess up, yet they've never deemed to fix it and it's in part what makes the gun so easy to use overal.

It's pretty funny to see ransoms using the stability mod or consumable on it right now. It's not necessary at all unless you decide to run a fire rate specced Turian soldier and don't feel like compensating.

I dunno if I used some for lulz.
I'm trying to save my cylonics and recharge and speed amps and usually the only thing left are the stability ones. So I shove those into games because I wanna use something and am not using a power class.

But The Harrier is accurate enough to just hipfire the thing and hit enough to kill all in your way anyway. The recoil really isn't that hard to handle.

[OuterRim]

The only time I use it is if I'm playing a grenade character since I then have to go to ammo boxes often anyway. Otherwise, nay. There are better choices.

[UnknownMercenary]

Stupid iPad autocorrect changes randoms to ransoms.

[GeneralMoskvin_2.0]

Lord_Sirian wrote...

GeneralMoskvin_2.0 wrote...

What really bugs me on the harrier is not its full auto capability or high damage, it is just that every monkey could use it. The avenger (bad example, but meh) has bad bullet spread, the vindicator too much recoil to make its precision count, the phaeston still has some more spread etc......

The only gun that is as easy to use than the harrier is the GPR. And no one uses it because it is a super soaker - I open fire on an atlas, five hours later.....it is down. Well. No one would use that thing except for when needing a lightweight AR (though there are much better alternatives), using a geth class or just grinding a challenge.

Harrier's everywhere. Always. A destroy with a harrier is pretty much the most boring way to play ME3. Weapons should actually reward practice and skill when playing with them. Not just point, shoot, dead, like the harrier, the black widow, the hurricane......

You get it now. I see.

 

lol.

So every weapon in this game needs to be some hipster BS weapon that is complicated to use/master.

I have a news flash for you: The Harrier DOES reward practice and skill when playing with it. It's called AIMING.

I did not say every weapon needs to be a weapon difficult to fire. I just not want the weapons that the greatest ****** in history could fire make the greatest damage - this makes ME3 extremely boring and frustrating. 

You see what happened after the acolyte change: Now it will take dust in the arsenal of people who are unable to use soft cover properly. 

Hell, people call the particle rifle a "WTF gun". It is Mass Effect. The frickin' future. The laws of todays weaponry should not apply here.

[billy the squid]

GeneralMoskvin_2.0 wrote...

Lord_Sirian wrote...

GeneralMoskvin_2.0 wrote...

What really bugs me on the harrier is not its full auto capability or high damage, it is just that every monkey could use it. The avenger (bad example, but meh) has bad bullet spread, the vindicator too much recoil to make its precision count, the phaeston still has some more spread etc......

The only gun that is as easy to use than the harrier is the GPR. And no one uses it because it is a super soaker - I open fire on an atlas, five hours later.....it is down. Well. No one would use that thing except for when needing a lightweight AR (though there are much better alternatives), using a geth class or just grinding a challenge.

Harrier's everywhere. Always. A destroy with a harrier is pretty much the most boring way to play ME3. Weapons should actually reward practice and skill when playing with them. Not just point, shoot, dead, like the harrier, the black widow, the hurricane......

You get it now. I see.

 

lol.

So every weapon in this game needs to be some hipster BS weapon that is complicated to use/master.

I have a news flash for you: The Harrier DOES reward practice and skill when playing with it. It's called AIMING.

I did not say every weapon needs to be a weapon difficult to fire. I just not want the weapons that the greatest ****** in history could fire make the greatest damage - this makes ME3 extremely boring and frustrating. 

You see what happened after the acolyte change: Now it will take dust in the arsenal of people who are unable to use soft cover properly. 

Hell, people call the particle rifle a "WTF gun". It is Mass Effect. The frickin' future. The laws of todays weaponry should not apply here.

Then don't use them

The Acolyte change was dumb, it was done to stop missile glitching and failed.

Partcle rifle is fine, it has a steeper learning curve than the Harrier, but is better once you practice due to the Harrier's crappy amo capacity. 

The Harrier is bemoaned as the noob and the scrub weapon by some, well frankly most of the other ARs are complete rubbish, so why would I ever bother with them? Exceptions being The Sabre, Typhoon and PPR. Possibly the Revenant, but I wouldn't recommend it outside a Turian Sol. or Sent.

Edit: Oh yes and the Mattock, stand out award should go to that AR, better than the Rare AR's, although you'll break your trigger finger after a few Gold matches.

Modifié par billy the squid, 19 décembre 2012 - 04:52 .

[GeneralMoskvin_2.0]

billy the squid wrote...

GeneralMoskvin_2.0 wrote...

Lord_Sirian wrote...

GeneralMoskvin_2.0 wrote...

What really bugs me on the harrier is not its full auto capability or high damage, it is just that every monkey could use it. The avenger (bad example, but meh) has bad bullet spread, the vindicator too much recoil to make its precision count, the phaeston still has some more spread etc......

The only gun that is as easy to use than the harrier is the GPR. And no one uses it because it is a super soaker - I open fire on an atlas, five hours later.....it is down. Well. No one would use that thing except for when needing a lightweight AR (though there are much better alternatives), using a geth class or just grinding a challenge.

Harrier's everywhere. Always. A destroy with a harrier is pretty much the most boring way to play ME3. Weapons should actually reward practice and skill when playing with them. Not just point, shoot, dead, like the harrier, the black widow, the hurricane......

You get it now. I see.

 

lol.

So every weapon in this game needs to be some hipster BS weapon that is complicated to use/master.

I have a news flash for you: The Harrier DOES reward practice and skill when playing with it. It's called AIMING.

I did not say every weapon needs to be a weapon difficult to fire. I just not want the weapons that the greatest ****** in history could fire make the greatest damage - this makes ME3 extremely boring and frustrating. 

You see what happened after the acolyte change: Now it will take dust in the arsenal of people who are unable to use soft cover properly. 

Hell, people call the particle rifle a "WTF gun". It is Mass Effect. The frickin' future. The laws of todays weaponry should not apply here.

Then don't use them

The Acolyte change was dumb, it was done to stop missile glitching and failed.

Partcle rifle is fine, it has a steeper learning curve than the Harrier, but is better once you practice due to the Harrier's crappy amo capacity. 

The Harrier is bemoaned as the noob and the scrub weapon by some, well frankly most of the other ARs are complete rubbish, so why would I ever bother with them? Exceptions being The Sabre, Typhoon and PPR. Possibly the Revenant, but I wouldn't recommend it outside a Turian Sol. or Sent.

Well there's your problem.

[billy the squid]

GeneralMoskvin_2.0 wrote...

billy the squid wrote...

GeneralMoskvin_2.0 wrote...

Lord_Sirian wrote...

GeneralMoskvin_2.0 wrote...

What really bugs me on the harrier is not its full auto capability or high damage, it is just that every monkey could use it. The avenger (bad example, but meh) has bad bullet spread, the vindicator too much recoil to make its precision count, the phaeston still has some more spread etc......

The only gun that is as easy to use than the harrier is the GPR. And no one uses it because it is a super soaker - I open fire on an atlas, five hours later.....it is down. Well. No one would use that thing except for when needing a lightweight AR (though there are much better alternatives), using a geth class or just grinding a challenge.

Harrier's everywhere. Always. A destroy with a harrier is pretty much the most boring way to play ME3. Weapons should actually reward practice and skill when playing with them. Not just point, shoot, dead, like the harrier, the black widow, the hurricane......

You get it now. I see.

 

lol.

So every weapon in this game needs to be some hipster BS weapon that is complicated to use/master.

I have a news flash for you: The Harrier DOES reward practice and skill when playing with it. It's called AIMING.

I did not say every weapon needs to be a weapon difficult to fire. I just not want the weapons that the greatest ****** in history could fire make the greatest damage - this makes ME3 extremely boring and frustrating. 

You see what happened after the acolyte change: Now it will take dust in the arsenal of people who are unable to use soft cover properly. 

Hell, people call the particle rifle a "WTF gun". It is Mass Effect. The frickin' future. The laws of todays weaponry should not apply here.

Then don't use them

The Acolyte change was dumb, it was done to stop missile glitching and failed.

Partcle rifle is fine, it has a steeper learning curve than the Harrier, but is better once you practice due to the Harrier's crappy amo capacity. 

The Harrier is bemoaned as the noob and the scrub weapon by some, well frankly most of the other ARs are complete rubbish, so why would I ever bother with them? Exceptions being The Sabre, Typhoon and PPR. Possibly the Revenant, but I wouldn't recommend it outside a Turian Sol. or Sent.

Well there's your problem.

Not a problem with the Harrir then is it.

I'm not going to bother going through all the AR's but the majority are fairly dire. SR's are universally better, Shotguns outclass them easily, Pistols are better, especially on power classes and SMGs are a mixed bag, but do the job better, than any AR, apart from the ones I pointed out. 

So why should I use any AR other than the Harrier, PPR, Mattock, Sabre or Typhoon again? None of the other ARs provide any measurable difference that isn't covered by these.

[GeneralMoskvin_2.0]

Lord_Sirian wrote...

GeneralMoskvin_2.0 wrote...

Lord_Sirian wrote...

GeneralMoskvin_2.0 wrote...

What really bugs me on the harrier is not its full auto capability or high damage, it is just that every monkey could use it. The avenger (bad example, but meh) has bad bullet spread, the vindicator too much recoil to make its precision count, the phaeston still has some more spread etc......

The only gun that is as easy to use than the harrier is the GPR. And no one uses it because it is a super soaker - I open fire on an atlas, five hours later.....it is down. Well. No one would use that thing except for when needing a lightweight AR (though there are much better alternatives), using a geth class or just grinding a challenge.

Harrier's everywhere. Always. A destroy with a harrier is pretty much the most boring way to play ME3. Weapons should actually reward practice and skill when playing with them. Not just point, shoot, dead, like the harrier, the black widow, the hurricane......

You get it now. I see.

 

lol.

So every weapon in this game needs to be some hipster BS weapon that is complicated to use/master.

I have a news flash for you: The Harrier DOES reward practice and skill when playing with it. It's called AIMING.

I did not say every weapon needs to be a weapon difficult to fire. I just not want the weapons that the greatest ****** in history could fire make the greatest damage - this makes ME3 extremely boring and frustrating. 

You see what happened after the acolyte change: Now it will take dust in the arsenal of people who are unable to use soft cover properly. 

Hell, people call the particle rifle a "WTF gun". It is Mass Effect. The frickin' future. The laws of todays weaponry should not apply here.

 

The Harrier doesn't put out the best damage. Neither did the Acolyte. 

Stop Q_Qing.

I beg to differ.

With all the damage bonuses aquired, the harrier grinds an atlas on platinum in eleven seconds. The particle rifle needs 13 seconds, the typhoon about 16 if I remember correctly.

Also, stop claiming I am Q_Qing. This makes me Q_Q and thus pick a M-451 firestorm and make some BBQ_Q.

[COLZ7R]

Not really the crown jewel, mention claymore and nerff in the same post will bring the wrath of the elite mob down like thors hammer. Think thats what you are looking for

[BlueTobimon]

I want it :/

[GeneralMoskvin_2.0]

The test just counts pure firing in, glitch-less. That's what the test a user posted some time ago was about. Debuffs - njet.

Double/triple hit glitch surely is some damn annoying thing. But it rarely occurs to me. Strange.

[VerySeed]

Lord_Sirian wrote...

I've killed a Gold Atlas from full health and shields in 4 seconds. Guess which gun that wasn't with? The Harrier.

Technically I've killed a Gold Atlas from full health and shields in less than a second (i.e. a single shot), but that was with ultra debuffs. 

Also, you cannot with any certainty say how long it takes for x, y, z weapons to kill an Atlas. Why? Because the double/triple hit glitch is inconsistent, meaning you will get hugely varying results when trying to kill an Atlas.

I'm guessing that it was the raider and not the PPR, even though with warp+tac scan the PPR killed full health atlases in like 3 seconds.

I think its time to post that scoreboard of you using the PPR GI and use BSN logic against them. "I got a high score with that gun, therefore that gun is good."

[GeneralMoskvin_2.0]

Lord_Sirian wrote...

It occurs, you just don't notice it because you're clueless and oblivious.

...Let's stay civil, shall we?

Yes, I notice it. Was a few days ago when taking the Indra out for a walk, shot a round, trooper is left with half of his health despite no consumables are equipped. I noted three hits on him. Like an incisor pretty much.

[VerySeed]

GeneralMoskvin_2.0 wrote...

Lord_Sirian wrote...

It occurs, you just don't notice it because you're clueless and oblivious.

...Let's stay civil, shall we?

Yes, I notice it. Was a few days ago when taking the Indra out for a walk, shot a round, trooper is left with half of his health despite no consumables are equipped. I noted three hits on him. Like an incisor pretty much.

......

[GeneralMoskvin_2.0]

Lord_Sirian wrote...

Yup... clueless.

The double/triple hit only happens on Atlases.

Also, I am pretty sure that whoever calculated that a Plat Atlas could be dropped by a Harrier in 11 seconds, WITHOUT the triple hit, is wrong. Unless it had been debuffed a lot.

I beg to differ on that. Noticed it on phantoms and praetorians as well.

Here ist the test I am referring to btw.

And on a side note, your manners leave a lot of room for improvement. Next step would be "OP is a ****got" I assume.