230 réponses à ce sujet

[GeneralMoskvin_2.0]

silentstep79 wrote...

BW PLEASE LEAVE MY GUN ALONE!!!

Seriously? That is all you can say? No arguments? No reasons why you like it? Just capslock fury?

Imo it is fine. Lots of players dislike it, because if a weapon just requires a little skill, it is replaced by Harrier/Black Widow/Hurricane/Piranha/Paladin.

Modifié par GeneralMoskvin_2.0, 18 décembre 2012 - 08:28 .

[OD-Dragon]

Used it when it had a change mechanic, used it when said charge mechanic was removed. I will still keep using it with the charge mechanic re-added to it.

[Shyde01]

SolidBeast wrote...

Shyde01 wrote...

SolidBeast wrote...

KalilKareem wrote...

Shawn22OS wrote...

KalilKareem wrote...

Lol no. It was utter rubbish with the charge mechanic. A marauder/phantom/rocket trooper can kill you during that charge up. Stagger needs to happen NOW, not 1.5s from now. This is a total destruction of the weapon, and by extension the adept class.

It hardly destroys Adepts classes. If anything it might be a nerf to the flamer classes. I honestly think the Geth Trooper and both Vorcha will feel the hit the most. 

True. The statment was hyperbole. But it is a significant blow to classes that relied on it to strip shields for powers to kick in. And such a blow was hardly required, since heavy weapon classes were dominant even before this nerf. So; not "destruction" but maybe more "fading even further into obscurity".

Agreed. Never used it before the removal of charge-up, I gave it a try just now on platinum and the charge mechanic screwed my trooper over. I'll give it a few more tries before ditching it though. Very disappointed, however.

Scam_poo wrote...

Sure. But every time someone says "no"
in this thread I get a tad happier. Good to see BioWare's actions
actually affected all the newbies suddenly using the Acolyte on every
character when they removed the charge-up.

Gotta love elitists.

I think what is meant is that - you don't need the acolyte on your trooper as much as, say, a drell adept needs it. To the trooper, it's just another tool in your toolbox to put an enemy down. But for some casters, the gun plays a vital role in stripping shields so that powers can be applied. As well, as posters above have stated, the acolyte allows for different playstyles on non-shooter kits, making these kits more interesting. 

And remember: the whine-nerfs started after BW removed the charge mechanic and shooters started using it en masse. If the charge mechanic causes shooters to use it less, presumably they won't cry for a nerf - and casters can go back to using as before.

Uh, yes I do, as I have my trooper specced for maximum flamer damage, and the acolyte is essential in stripping shields before flaming the enemies. It's my primary and only weapon on the geth soldier. Your post is merely validating my point.

So your trooper has 3 primary things (hunter mode, fortification, flamer) that really aren't affected by the use or non-use of the acolyte. And your flamer (according to narida) does 380 damage per second (unmodified by hunter mode, passives, etc.) to shields/barriers. Hell, you can even spec it to do 570 damage per second to shields/barriers. All this damage is happening without you have to fire a single power or engage in another act (like pull/reave, for example).

Then you realized you could do even more damage - by using the acolyte. Except now they changed the acolyte back - with the result that casters can fire the weapon, cast their powers (hoping that they aren't dodged), then do some damage - but that's bad because you can't burn enemies as fast as you used to. Clearly, your need is greater than casters' needs.

I'm not sure how I validated your point. I think I did the opposite.

[SkylarV]

I never liked it much originally due the it's ridiculous charge-only fire mode that should never exist in the first place. I'll still put it to, albeit, limited use as a sidearm, but I will curse every time I switch to it because of it's stupid, bullsh*t charge-only mechanic.

[Tarelgeth]

Scam_poo wrote...

Sure. But every time someone says "no" in this thread I get a tad happier. Good to see BioWare's actions actually affected all the newbies suddenly using the Acolyte on every character when they removed the charge-up.

Exactly.  The "nerf" had precisely the intended effect.  Decent players who know how to use the weapon will still use it for what it was intended for, but will not use it for everything in the world anymore; FotM idiots will leave it alone and whine that their win has been taken away.

[MetalDeggial]

Nope. Talon X all the way. Charge mechanics are horrible.

[Riot Inducer]

Eh, it was already mainly just an anti-boss shield side-arm for the characters who carried it so that's not likely to change, will really only require me to re-learn my drell vanguard who used it as a primary.

[SolidBeast]

Shyde01 wrote...

SolidBeast wrote...

Shyde01 wrote...


I think what is meant is that - you don't need the acolyte on your trooper as much as, say, a drell adept needs it. To the trooper, it's just another tool in your toolbox to put an enemy down. But for some casters, the gun plays a vital role in stripping shields so that powers can be applied. As well, as posters above have stated, the acolyte allows for different playstyles on non-shooter kits, making these kits more interesting. 

And remember: the whine-nerfs started after BW removed the charge mechanic and shooters started using it en masse. If the charge mechanic causes shooters to use it less, presumably they won't cry for a nerf - and casters can go back to using as before.

Uh, yes I do, as I have my trooper specced for maximum flamer damage, and the acolyte is essential in stripping shields before flaming the enemies. It's my primary and only weapon on the geth soldier. Your post is merely validating my point.

So your trooper has 3 primary things (hunter mode, fortification, flamer) that really aren't affected by the use or non-use of the acolyte. And your flamer (according to narida) does 380 damage per second (unmodified by hunter mode, passives, etc.) to shields/barriers. Hell, you can even spec it to do 570 damage per second to shields/barriers. All this damage is happening without you have to fire a single power or engage in another act (like pull/reave, for example).

Then you realized you could do even more damage - by using the acolyte. Except now they changed the acolyte back - with the result that casters can fire the weapon, cast their powers (hoping that they aren't dodged), then do some damage - but that's bad because you can't burn enemies as fast as you used to. Clearly, your need is greater than casters' needs.

I'm not sure how I validated your point. I think I did the opposite.

Did you actually use the fully flamer specced GS or are you just arguing for the sake of arguing? If I simply flame away at a banshee with full barriers, she'll close in on me and I'm done - hence why I *need* the acolyte, unless I want to run around kiting it for a prolonged amount of time = not always possible, efficient and definitely not my idea of fun. Could I use another weapon with less effect? Yes I could. So could any adept. My flamer is my main source of damage, as combos are to an adept - therefore it makes perfect sense that I only take a shield-stripping weapon with me.

As for my need being "greater" than that of other casters - please point me to where I stated that. My point was that I play the GS as a caster class, therefore his need to strip shields is the same as that of other caster classes.

Modifié par SolidBeast, 18 décembre 2012 - 09:02 .

[Lukrecja]

I want my acolyte back

[born2beagator]

Absofreakinglutly!!!!

Loved it before the charge was taken out.

[Leland Gaunt]

Yes, I'll still use it occasionally. It's not meant to be a main weapon, so everything's cool.

[born2beagator]

Leland Gaunt wrote...

Yes, I'll still use it occasionally. It's not meant to be a main weapon, so everything's cool.

I'll use it as I always have, a side arm for stripping shields on my casters, both tech and biotic.

People will just have to learn how to use it.  I already haveB)
Plus we get the damage taken by the nerf back.  The acolyte is back baby

Modifié par born2beagator, 18 décembre 2012 - 09:09 .

[Bzilla]

Been using the Acolyte since it came out so I'll still keep using it.

Don't really understand why some are saying it is "crappy" or "unusable" but whatever i'm happy with it.

[mybudgee]

Won't miss it

[Lathlaer]

Answer to the title question: I already did

Charge mechanic aside, it's rof is better and it also reloads faster. I like it

[OurSin_360]

I'll try it once, but i was looking forward to using it on my asari sentinel again after i finished with these challenges and then they go and make it terrible again. Things they do really make me not want to play the game half the time smh

[Parallax Demon]

Nope. A gun you can't charge while in hard cover, why would I want to use that on a AA? Will revert back to the Scorpion.

Yet another prove that BW only want you to use Infiltrators and Soldiers.

ME4 will probably have a PvP MP, with only Soldiers and Infiltrators or mayby (when we're lucky) Engineers and Medics (sounds familiar somehow).

[unokolo]

No. I hate charge weapons... But I will miss using it.

[sirdario1986]

unokolo wrote...

No. I hate charge weapons... But I will miss using it.

How true 

[ElectronicPostingInterface]

It's still stupid good.

[Shyde01]

SolidBeast wrote...

Shyde01 wrote...

SolidBeast wrote...

Shyde01 wrote...


I think what is meant is that - you don't need the acolyte on your trooper as much as, say, a drell adept needs it. To the trooper, it's just another tool in your toolbox to put an enemy down. But for some casters, the gun plays a vital role in stripping shields so that powers can be applied. As well, as posters above have stated, the acolyte allows for different playstyles on non-shooter kits, making these kits more interesting. 

And remember: the whine-nerfs started after BW removed the charge mechanic and shooters started using it en masse. If the charge mechanic causes shooters to use it less, presumably they won't cry for a nerf - and casters can go back to using as before.

Uh, yes I do, as I have my trooper specced for maximum flamer damage, and the acolyte is essential in stripping shields before flaming the enemies. It's my primary and only weapon on the geth soldier. Your post is merely validating my point.

So your trooper has 3 primary things (hunter mode, fortification, flamer) that really aren't affected by the use or non-use of the acolyte. And your flamer (according to narida) does 380 damage per second (unmodified by hunter mode, passives, etc.) to shields/barriers. Hell, you can even spec it to do 570 damage per second to shields/barriers. All this damage is happening without you have to fire a single power or engage in another act (like pull/reave, for example).

Then you realized you could do even more damage - by using the acolyte. Except now they changed the acolyte back - with the result that casters can fire the weapon, cast their powers (hoping that they aren't dodged), then do some damage - but that's bad because you can't burn enemies as fast as you used to. Clearly, your need is greater than casters' needs.

I'm not sure how I validated your point. I think I did the opposite.

Did you actually use the fully flamer specced GS or are you just arguing for the sake of arguing? If I simply flame away at a banshee with full barriers, she'll close in on me and I'm done - hence why I *need* the acolyte, unless I want to run around kiting it for a prolonged amount of time = not always possible, efficient and definitely not my idea of fun. Could I use another weapon with less effect? Yes I could. So could any adept. My flamer is my main source of damage, as combos are to an adept - therefore it makes perfect sense that I only take a shield-stripping weapon with me.

As for my need being "greater" than that of other casters - please point me to where I stated that. My point was that I play the GS as a caster class, therefore his need to strip shields is the same as that of other caster classes.

If I used the flamer every day would it make my argument more or less persuasive? (See how that's irrelevant?)

You can play the GS as a caster class all you like, it doesn't make it a caster class - you don't rely on powers the way a HA or a DA does.

You don't "need" the acolyte: you prefer to use it to maximize your efficiency and avoid kiting (the horror). It makes the game easier, essentially. (Which is why shooters cried for nerfs, not incidentally.)  Compared to the use to which actual casters put the weapon - needing the weapon to strip shields before they can even kill, hoping throw isn't dodged so they get a BE to knock out the other enemies closing in or it's gel time - this is trivial.

[Miniditka77]

Yes.  I won't like it as much, but I'll still use it.

[born2beagator]

unokolo wrote...

No. I hate charge weapons... But I will miss using it.

Thank youB)

I knew the acolyte sucks posts would start if they brought the charge back.  now I think it is safe ffom future nerfs.

[Little Queen]

sirdario1986 wrote...

unokolo wrote...

No. I hate charge weapons... But I will miss using it.

How true [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/crying.png[/smilie]

[Miniditka77]

Parallax Demon wrote...

Nope. A gun you can't charge while in hard cover, why would I want to use that on a AA? Will revert back to the Scorpion.

Yet another prove that BW only want you to use Infiltrators and Soldiers.

ME4 will probably have a PvP MP, with only Soldiers and Infiltrators or mayby (when we're lucky) Engineers and Medics (sounds familiar somehow).

Use the Talon if you don't like the Acolyte.  It has a 1.5x damage multiplier for shields and barriers.  It's the 2nd best shield stripper in the game, and it's pretty light.  It will also do pretty good damage, especially when applied directly to the forehead.

Modifié par Miniditka77, 18 décembre 2012 - 09:31 .