239 réponses à ce sujet

[Lars10178]

Riot Inducer wrote...

It's overused because there are too few alternatives that offer similar handling and power. I fully expect the Lancer to take a chunk out of the Harrier's popularity once more people start getting it.

I would expect it to. 

[Dist0rt3d Hum0r]

born2beagator wrote...

Dist0rt3d Hum0r wrote...

born2beagator wrote...

Dist0rt3d Hum0r wrote...
I wouldln't mind seeing a small buff to its reserve ammo, or maybe a nerf to the firing rate and a buff to damage? Or a buff to ammo capacity and a nerf to damage to balance it out?

Nope.  Doesn't need anything.  The ammo clip is what keeps it balanced.  Its perfect the way it is.

This is why I suggested that if the clip were buffed, then a nerf to either the damage or RoF should also follow.

I'd rather high damage and a low clip.  again, leave it alone 

*Throws up hands* Settle down my good sir. I'd have you take a seat and take a few breaths, but it seems that you have that harrier shoved so far up your ass that that would be counter productive.

These were just humble opinions of mine. My word is not law after all. No need to get touchy.

[FeralJester616]

GeneralMoskvin_2.0 wrote...

ROBOTICSUPERMAN wrote...

nerf, no, buff everything else even to harrier, yes

I like this human! He understands.

As far as I can see it, the Avenger needs a small damage boost so it stops competing with the SMGs (and loosing I might add), all the burst fire weapons need a damage buff and less recoil, the rest of the automatics need more damage per shot (revenent levels, it should also get a small buff too) but with their smaller clips and higher acuraccy this would keep the variation.

As it stands there are only the URs and revenent that are actually useful and/or have their own niche. 

(Yes I know I didn't mention the Falcon, thats not a rifle it's a fracking grenade launcher and needs its original damage restored)

[Major Durza]

They aren't going to patch a fix for the recoil bug, so I guess we are stuck with it.

That would be the best way to balance it, make it so that it actually shakes your screen outside of hardcover like it is supposed to (instead of screenshaking in hardcover) As it stands, if they nerf it I'll wager 10% in damage and jack its weight at X from 1.25(Revenant weight, incidentally) to maybe 1.40 or somewhere near it.

Nerfing the weight will exaggerate the Lancer as a caster weapon and get rid of the fact that the Harrier is objectively better, but I would rather that damn recoil bug be fixed.  After that, we'll see... perhaps the Harrier will still need a slight weight nerf, not as much as it does now with its razor sharp accuracy in the standing positiog, allowing longrange headshots with some of the most insane DPS in the game.

Its not really the DPS that is the issue, its that it is so easy to achieve the same DPS at short, mid, and long range.
Good lord I wish they would fix more things in this game before they stop the patches.


Eh, that was a bit of a rant.
TL:DR, it should have its recoil fixed, the screen should shake outside of hardcover.  Barring that, weight nerf to make it no longer objectively better than the Lancer at the same level, perhaps 10% or so damage nerf for both lore reasons(Not supposed to have the same damage per shot as the Mattock, description says it was weakened to control recoil) and possibly to put it back in line.

Modifié par Major Durza, 10 mars 2013 - 06:29 .

[A Huge Surprise]

I say buff the AR's. not all but we all know the ones which are now useless. My argument is that if you nerf the harrier then it makes most of the AR's now obsolete. If you want people using the other AR's then make them better to be more competitive. Sorry but this talk is just swaying towards an AR buff.

Modifié par A Huge Surprise, 10 mars 2013 - 06:27 .

[smeckie]

TheBunz wrote...

It's not overpowered. It has so little ammo that you have to hug the ammo boxes for it to be useful. In platinum runs, I hate those noobs because they do no damage and steal all your nades and ammo. It's a **** gun if you know how to play.

This!

[JaimasOfRaxis]

Bull****, the Argus is awesome. Rock that thing on any class willing to tolerate it, and it proves its worth. I tend to use mine with the Krosent. Slam on stability mods, take aim, and blow enemy heads out their asses.

[robarcool]

Harrier isn't overpowered. Most ARs suck in this game. The only ones I find good are Mattock, Argus(sort of), Typhoon, PPR, Harreir. Out of curiosity, what difficulty you play on?

Modifié par robarcool, 10 mars 2013 - 06:32 .

[Bolo Xia]

what would be the point of trying to get an UR if it was equal to all the lower tiers?

a good portion of the MP consists of upgrading and unlocking new stuff.

basically you guys are saying that, BW should just remove the store and hand out all the stuff for free, plus make everything the same.

people like progression, its the same reason people like to have level 20 characters.
maybe BW should nerf character levels too, because its not fair that someone starts at level 1 compared to a level 20 player.

seriously, look at the big picture people.

[GeneralMoskvin_2.0]

robarcool wrote...

Harrier isn't overpowered. Most ARs suck in this game. The only ones I find good are Mattock, Argus(sort of), Typhoon, PPR, Harreir. Out of curiosity, what difficulty you play on?

Mostly gold, I dislike Platinum, boss rape is not mine. :/

[Moby]

"The Harrier's low ammo capacity balances it out!"

So the Spitfire's ginormous ammo capacity balances it out, too?



Logic.

(Not saying the Harrier's OP or whatever)

[kitty209]

bearly using harrier here,used it once or twice on plat with turian ghost cause my soldier class was premoted so i couldent be mobile decoy/tank, and i know its "overpowered" on the ghost but i just dident wanted to marry an ammo box trying to kill something >.>

[templarphoenix]

I don't use Harrier, because you will run out of ammo soon and I am not the one who camp ammo box.

[DeathIsHere]

etm125 wrote...

born2beagator wrote...

GeneralMoskvin_2.0 wrote...
 According to the newest telemetrical data we received, the Harrier is the most used weapon in the game. To all the people claiming that the Harrier is not overused, perfectly balanced and that I should GTFO, consider this a middle finger towards you. I've made my point often enough and would like to toss my Harrier IV (second highest UR...kill it..) away in the fires of Mount Doom.

So, Bioware once said they only balance stuff to prevent overusing. I say now is the time.
Hopefully there will be some looking into this in the next balance changes. Any words on that? 

if it hasn't happened by now, its not going to happen.  Sorry nerfers.  I think you are out of luck on this one.  Might as well stop whining about it

OP where is this data? I'm interested.

Gator, I think most so called nerfers would also be ok with a buff to the other ARs so long as you don't see blatantly skewed use statistics like OP says. It's just a whole lot of work to buff everything else rather than tone down 1 thing. If you buff all other ARs then you run the risk of making ARs overpowered in relation to other weapon types and have to consider a chain reaction of buffing all other weapon types-- which makes the game easier-- which means you have to consider buffing enemies.

Edit: It's just really sad to see a game with boatloads of kits and weapons boiled down to a handful that see actual use. I think even by Stikman's "dominant theory" argument against balancing this says the Harrier has become the dominant strategy.

For the record, as a nerfer, I'm in the air on this one. The harrier has incredible damage but even at 10 you get like 5 clips. Gone in the blink of an eye. But, if I'm being faithful to an idea of balance, if 90% of the people are using it then that says it has made the AR selection irrelevant. What holds me back is the fact that it's one of the few ARs that is serviceable. I'd take a hurricane over 90% of the ARs. Hell I'd take most of the pistols over the ARs. Yeesh. If we look at AR balance then it's clearly out of whack. This suggests a nerf. But if we look at overall weapons, I can't really justify nerfing an AR.....

This is what's messing up balance for this game, extremely evident with the Carnifex nerf. Popularity doesn't mean something is overpowered. Especially when everything else in the class sucks apart from Ultra Rares that are hard to unlock for some people. With ARs, all of the non-UR ARs are practically garbage on non-soldier classes. The PPR and Typhoon are somewhat good, and the Lancer seems great, but they're both Ultra Rare. All of the rare ARs have niches but are waaaaay too underpowered to actually fill them.

If you nerf the Harrier, you're not gonna make other ARs more viable. That doesn't even make sense. What you're gonna do is make the AR class as a whole less viable, and you'll just stop seeing as many people using Assault Rifles. People will go for SMGs instead, or sniper rifles.

Also, saying a buff to ARs would cause a buff to all weapon types and make the game easier, that's not necessarily true. Right now, barely any of the ARs are even viable. So buffing them to a point where they're viable wouldn't hurt balance at all, it'd just give more variety which is apparently the ultimate goal. What would hurt balance is nerfing the Harrier, which would make the entire class of ARs pointless. If balance is the actual goal then ARs as a whole need to be looked at and balanced around the Harrier. That way, more weapons are viable and thus the Harrier isn't the only choice for ARs.

[GeneralMoskvin_2.0]

templarphoenix wrote...

I don't use Harrier, because you will run out of ammo soon and I am not the one who camp ammo box.

There are lots of guys who do this nevertheless. Damage eats fun obviously.

[stysiaq]

So, OP, you've got your "I told you so" moment. What now?

(personally, I don't use the Harrier very often)

[GeneralMoskvin_2.0]

stysiaq wrote...

So, OP, you've got your "I told you so" moment. What now?

(personally, I don't use the Harrier very often)

Now? Hehehehe...

Let's go practice medicine....

*grabs Executioner, Kishock, Crusader and other not-boring-but-good weapons*

[Lord Chun]

Ok I'll nerf the Harrier if we also nerf the acolyte and hurricane. And buy nerf I mean Krysae nerf. I mean that Thor brought down the nerf hammer of doom. Then the next week whatever is used and so on and son. Until we all shoot marshmallows out of our gun.

[GeneralMoskvin_2.0]

Lord Chun wrote...

Ok I'll nerf the Harrier if we also nerf the acolyte and hurricane. And buy nerf I mean Krysae nerf. I mean that Thor brought down the nerf hammer of doom. Then the next week whatever is used and so on and son. Until we all shoot marshmallows out of our gun.

Typical misunderstanding of why people want nerfs.

[DullahansXMark]

It's at a very delicate place right now. Reduce its effectiveness at all and that low ammo count is way too big of a hindrance to make using the gun worth the trouble. It's already a hindrance as it is.

[wotmaniac]

If only other AR's were not so ****. You want me to use a Revenant on Plat so I take an hour to kill something?
Oh wait, the Phaeston XXXVIII is good. Shame only Marauders have it.

[SavagelyEpic]

wotmaniac wrote...

If only other AR's were not so ****. You want me to use a Revenant on Plat so I take an hour to kill something?
Oh wait, the Phaeston XXXVIII is good. Shame only Marauders have it.

Lancer, PPR, Brophoon, Saber, Mattock.

[RaptorSolutions]

kitty209 wrote...

bearly using harrier here,used it once or twice on plat with turian ghost cause my soldier class was premoted so i couldent be mobile decoy/tank, and i know its "overpowered" on the ghost but i just dident wanted to marry an ammo box trying to kill something >.>

Which is why they released the Lancer. So you can marry it later because of its pure awesomeness.

[Major Durza]

DeathIsHere wrote...

If you nerf the Harrier, you're not gonna make other ARs more viable. That doesn't even make sense. What you're gonna do is make the AR class as a whole less viable, and you'll just stop seeing as many people using Assault Rifles. People will go for SMGs instead, or sniper rifles.

Also, saying a buff to ARs would cause a buff to all weapon types and make the game easier, that's not necessarily true. Right now, barely any of the ARs are even viable. So buffing them to a point where they're viable wouldn't hurt balance at all, it'd just give more variety which is apparently the ultimate goal. What would hurt balance is nerfing the Harrier, which would make the entire class of ARs pointless. If balance is the actual goal then ARs as a whole need to be looked at and balanced around the Harrier. That way, more weapons are viable and thus the Harrier isn't the only choice for ARs.

(TL DR the Lancer's advantages over the Harrier are insignificant.  Capacity is overrated, and the weight discrepancy means very little on classes that use both weapons well)


Indeed, nerfing the Harrier would not make other AR's more viable.
However, that does not mean that the Harrier is a bit over the top at the moment.
If the other AR's are buffed into viability, it will exaggerate this fact.  I did not consider the Harrier very OP until rather recently
When I got my Lancer to X, I have found that I despise the Harrier more, and part of that is because I have a new standard to compare it to.

This standard showed that the Harrier as it stands is objectively more useful on most if not all of the classes that the Lancer works well on if you are willing to tolerate the Ammo box.  The only thing the Lancer has on it is weight and ammo capacity, Harrier wins by a considerable margin in every other respect.  Such as


---Raw Damage, A Harrier I outDPS's a Lancer X by a comfortable amount.
Singleclip DPS
Lancer X 848
Harrier I 973 (1,187.08 at X)
Multiclip DPS
Lancer X 540
Harrier I 598(729.2 at X)
(Also consider that a "clip" is somewhere in the area of 50 rounds for Lancer, and 20 for Harrier)
---Sustained over distance, it is much easier to get Harrier headshots at long range than a Lancer, both because of greater accuracy and lower recoil.  Not only do headshots on the Harrier do a lot more damage, but it is much easier to make those headshots at mid to long range.  On the lancer, inconsistent headshots are all you can really hope for if you do not have a scope on while using a Turian.
---Condensed damage.  Exposure while doing damage is an issue on the higher difficulties, and the Harrier wins there comfortably.
---Damage between casts.  Again, the Harrier's burst damage is great for when you are on cooldown, and it comfortably beats other weapons with such high burst damage in range, comfortably


As mentioned before, the Lancer wins in weight and ammo count (at X one extended "clip" is slightly more than the Harrier's total ammo reserve, which is somewhat meaningless since 100 rounds on a Harrier does *much* more *reliable* damage than 102 lancer rounds)  Harrier weighs 1.25 at X, whereas Lancer is 0.80
Now, how much of a difference does that make?


Lets take a look at a few classes that use both weapons effectively and how the cooldowns are affected by the Lancer and Harrier

--Asari Justicar (bubbleless, both weight evos taken)
Reave CD is 2.67s with Harrier X
Reave CD is 2.46s with Lancer X
--Human Soldier(first weight evo taken)
ARush CD is 2.18s with Harrier X
ARush CD is 1.88s with Lancer X
--Quarian Male Engineer(first weight evo taken)
Incinerate CD is 3.08s with Harrier X
Incinerate CD is 2.62s with Lancer X
--N7 Demolisher
No cooldowns, objectively better, no contest.
--Turian Seninel(first weight evo taken, recharge speed taken on Overload and not Warp)
Warp CD 2.76s Harrier X
Warp CD 2.46 Lancer X
Overload CD 2.54 Harrier X
Overload CD 2.29 Lancer X
--Turian Vanguard (The best one by far, no weight evos taken or recharge speed evos)
PS CD 1.49 Harrier X
PS CD 1.26 Lancer X


So do these (at most slightly less than half a second) coodown time differences make up for the *huge* difference in reliable DPS (DPS over distance, meaning)?  I hardly think so, neither does this joke of low ammo count.  If I amped the Harrier as much as I do the Lancer(I never take AR amp V *and* AR rail amp III on the Harrier) I would achieve much, much better results.  Furthermore, even mildly experienced players will be making the rounds around the ammo boxes all match or hit the thermal clip packs in a pinch.

The Harrier and Lancer are both excellent AR's, and one is *clearly* better than the other.  Unless they fix the recoil bug in balance changes, this gun needs a weight nerf to exaggerate the differences, to make their respective niches more definite, instead of the Harrier being better 9.9 times out of 10.

Modifié par Major Durza, 10 mars 2013 - 07:43 .