95 réponses à ce sujet

[Malanek]

starlitegirlx wrote...

Peer of the Empire wrote...

If the Harrier were nerfed no one would use assault rifles ever except for the gimmick charge up ones.  There would be no proper assault rifle.

I'd like more Striker and Collector Sniper graphical effects

For the weight of the weapon, if you are a power based character, there is no point to most ARs. I've tried that and the only time it works is when leveling up because you have no powers. Once you have powers, the smart option is to go light with a gun and use powers more. I've been using the Hornet SMG and done better than with the harrier because I'm using powers a lot more. With next to no recharge time, you are always at an advantage or at least that's how it feels.

Hmmm, may I ask what level and whether you have tried the Typhoon and the Prothean Pulse Rifle? The dps from those tends to overshadow most powers quite easily other than grenades (which dont care about weight anyway).

[Beerfish]

Aedolon wrote...


That's a good thought, although I'd greatly prefer it if mods came with both pros and cons - you know, so that they modify the weapon instead of just improving it. +30% against shields, -10% against everything else. +10% accuracy, -10% ROF. +30% mag capacity, +40% reload duration. Stuff like that. More mod slots. And ammo mods too, instead of one-time consumables or ammo powers.

I don't like that idea at all unless you find a really good reason for the +, - bit.  Nothing at all wrong with only pluses if you have enough choices built in.  Stuff like this would go through endless balance changes because some of the mods would be seen as optimum and some would never be used at all.  LOL at +40% reload duration.

[dudemacha]

Aedolon wrote...

FuriousFelicia wrote...

Why not make weapons just as kits, with unique upgrade trees instead of the current level up system where the weapon's stats go up automatically as it gains level?

You just doubled the variations.

Not a bad idea, however...

Trees are evil. For some reason they give players the impression that they increase the amount of choice, but in reality, they only limit it. Why do I have to take the +20% damage evolution first before I can take the +30% cooldown evolution? Why do I have to choose between shields and melee damage, why can't I take both? Let us just pick the individual evolutions. A simple point-buy system is all we need. +50% radius? 4 points. Extra grenade? 2 points. Affects shielded targets? 6 points. Etc.

As for weapons, this would lead to system that's functionally similar to what I suggested: you simply pick the mods you want to use, within certain restrictions.

How about a mix of ME1 and 3 style trees....5 or so independent aspects which can be upgraded to any level of your choice but having a limited no of point which are earned by rng store replacing the levels that we currently have.
That way we can have an upgrade system confined to the rng store and actually tune the weapon to our choice

The aspects can be divided into classes
For instance assault rifles can have accuracy, rof, clip capacity as standard and two other aspects unique to a gun

[LemurFromTheId]

tyhw wrote...

I wholeheartedly approve of everything Aedolon's said in this thread.

Thanks, I appreciate that!

tyhw wrote...

I would agree with larger maps, but also agree with the point that larger maps need more enemies to feel populated. No one likes sprinting back and forth on Rio to find enemies.

I'd love larger maps, but that would definitely necessitate more enemies. Luckily with Frostbite 3 that really shouldn't be a problem, but you never know...

[Tokenusername]

While we're on the note of reload times, I'd to pit on a vote for them to mean a god damn bloody thing.

[BridgeBurner]

The current weapon design is fine mostly, but I'd like to see a few tweaks. Less variety in guns, more variety in mods for the guns. Staple guns; an Assault Rifle (think harrier) a BFR (think Argus) an auto shotgun (think piranha) a heavy hitting shotgun (think claymore), a heavy sniper (think black widow), etc. Guns like the typhoon and javelin should be in their own class, as their design and mechanics are pretty awesome.

Projectile weapons should be kept to the places they belong; PvP PC shooters as their implementation in other games tends to be very disappointing.

Snipers need to be only capable of OHKs on headshots. Lower base damage, higher headshot multipliers and the BS that is shield gate should not exist.

Guns need more customization options and less general effectiveness. Weapons should be more niche, forcing players to choose their loadout carefully when facing the enemy for maximum effectiveness. No one gun should be effective against everything (a sniper headshot should still kill footies) but a gun you rock to combat X enemy should be only moderately effective versus Y enemy and Z enemy.

Modifié par Annomander, 28 janvier 2014 - 08:40 .

[Tokenusername]

Annomander wrote...

The current weapon design is fine.

Projectile weapons should be kept to the places they belong; PvP PC shooters.

Snipers need to be only capable of OHKs on headshots. Lower base damage, higher headshot multipliers and the BS that is shield gate should not exist.

Guns need more customization options and less general effectiveness. Weapons should be more niche, forcing players to choose their loadout carefully when facing the enemy for maximum effectiveness. No one gun should be effective against everything (a sniper headshot should still kill footies)

The weapon design is fine, now let me tell you why it isn't.

[BridgeBurner]

Tokenusername wrote...

Annomander wrote...

nothing to see here

The weapon design is fine, now let me tell you why it isn't.

At least give me time to edit my damn posts so I can say what I really want to say after a couple of proof reads!

Now my initial drivel is imortalised in your quote....

Modifié par Annomander, 28 janvier 2014 - 08:42 .

[LemurFromTheId]

Nik6454 wrote...

Aedolon wrote...

FuriousFelicia wrote...

Why not make weapons just as kits, with unique upgrade trees instead of the current level up system where the weapon's stats go up automatically as it gains level?

You just doubled the variations.

Not a bad idea, however...

Trees are evil. For some reason they give players the impression that they increase the amount of choice, but in reality, they only limit it. Why do I have to take the +20% damage evolution first before I can take the +30% cooldown evolution? Why do I have to choose between shields and melee damage, why can't I take both? Let us just pick the individual evolutions. A simple point-buy system is all we need. +50% radius? 4 points. Extra grenade? 2 points. Affects shielded targets? 6 points. Etc.

As for weapons, this would lead to system that's functionally similar to what I suggested: you simply pick the mods you want to use, within certain restrictions.

How about a mix of ME1 and 3 style trees....5 or so independent aspects which can be upgraded to any level of your choice but having a limited no of point which are earned by rng store replacing the levels that we currently have.
That way we can have an upgrade system confined to the rng store and actually tune the weapon to our choice

The aspects can be divided into classes
For instance assault rifles can have accuracy, rof, clip capacity as standard and two other aspects unique to a gun

I think that would be a good way to do weapon scaling if implemented right, but it could also lead to obvious min-maxing solutions. If designed well, everything would have reasonably diminishing returns so that you'd have to find the sweet spot that suits you best.

But no RNG store, please.

[TurianRebel212]

all the assault rifles need a base damage. Then they all need individual ROF.

The attatchments should work like what dice did with BF4's attachment system. They do not increase damage, but they do help with accruacy, weapons handling, and things like automatic recoil reduction and a first shot multiplier reduction.

The attachments in ME4 need not increased ANY weapons base damage.

They should only improve the weapons handling, accuracy and control patterns.

The OP brought up the harrier as a case in point of how broken and un-blanced the weapons are in Mass Effect 3. The harrier has a Great ROF and very high damage at base. Then the attatchments can make it even worse. It's unbalanced. Like most of the weapons are in ME3.

They need to balance everything out in terms of base damage. Now, not every weapon should do equal base damage. But then the ROF should balacne it out.

For example, there's a AR with say 20 base damage that does 800 RPM and has a 25 shot mag and it's ADS accuracy is 1.25 Then theres another heavier AR that does 30 base damage per shot but at 550 RPM and has 20 shot mag with an ADS accuracy deviation of 1.10.

See, balance. And the attachments should not increased base damage, nor fire rate, nor reload time, nor clip size.

That is how you do it. Like Dice did with the weapons in BF4 (one of the bright spots in the game) the weapon stats are pretty balanced as theirs not really the end all be all GOD weapon. There are certain weapons that perform better for certain scenarios. Such as CQC, mid range, longer ranges, and so on and so on.

No attachments that increase damage or ROF for weapons. That would be a good place to start.

[Fortack]

Beerfish wrote...

Aedolon wrote...


That's a good thought, although I'd greatly prefer it if mods came with both pros and cons - you know, so that they modify the weapon instead of just improving it. +30% against shields, -10% against everything else. +10% accuracy, -10% ROF. +30% mag capacity, +40% reload duration. Stuff like that. More mod slots. And ammo mods too, instead of one-time consumables or ammo powers.

I don't like that idea at all unless you find a really good reason for the +, - bit.  Nothing at all wrong with only pluses if you have enough choices built in.  Stuff like this would go through endless balance changes because some of the mods would be seen as optimum and some would never be used at all.  LOL at +40% reload duration.

Well, I prefer a customization- over an upgrade system. I don't see the point of getting progressively stronger only. For me the fun part of games like ME are customizing my characters to do the things I want them to do. I don't particularly enjoy mindless grinding just to levelup / unlock stuff to finally play the game the way I want to.

The upgrade system you seem to prefer is actually a lot worse as far as balance is concerned. Customization naturally improves balance simply b/c that is how stuff works in reality.

Aedolon's +reload duration example makes perfect sense and enhances gameplay options > the shooting + reloading + casting rhythm is critical to get the most out of a setup.

Modifié par Fortack, 28 janvier 2014 - 09:21 .

[Cyonan]

TurianRebel212 wrote...
The OP brought up the harrier as a case in point of how broken and un-blanced the weapons are in Mass Effect 3. The harrier has a Great ROF and very high damage at base. Then the attatchments can make it even worse. It's unbalanced. Like most of the weapons are in ME3.

They need to balance everything out in terms of base damage. Now, not every weapon should do equal base damage. But then the ROF should balacne it out.

For example, there's a AR with say 20 base damage that does 800 RPM and has a 25 shot mag and it's ADS accuracy is 1.25 Then theres another heavier AR that does 30 base damage per shot but at 550 RPM and has 20 shot mag with an ADS accuracy deviation of 1.10.

See, balance. And the attachments should not increased base damage, nor fire rate, nor reload time, nor clip size.

That is how you do it. Like Dice did with the weapons in BF4 (one of the bright spots in the game) the weapon stats are pretty balanced as theirs not really the end all be all GOD weapon. There are certain weapons that perform better for certain scenarios. Such as CQC, mid range, longer ranges, and so on and so on.

No attachments that increase damage or ROF for weapons. That would be a good place to start.

I once got the idea to rebalance everything in the game around a numbers based system like what you're talking about. Trust me, it doesn't work anywhere near as good as you think it does in Mass Effect.

Battlefield has an advantage in a system like that because nobody has things like Biotic Charge. A weapon balanced to be bad at long range doesn't mean anything to the Vanguard who can make every situation a CQC situation.

It also helps that in modern military shooters most of the guns within a category are already really similar to begin with.

[Beerfish]

Fortack wrote...

Beerfish wrote...

Aedolon wrote...


That's a good thought, although I'd greatly prefer it if mods came with both pros and cons - you know, so that they modify the weapon instead of just improving it. +30% against shields, -10% against everything else. +10% accuracy, -10% ROF. +30% mag capacity, +40% reload duration. Stuff like that. More mod slots. And ammo mods too, instead of one-time consumables or ammo powers.

I don't like that idea at all unless you find a really good reason for the +, - bit.  Nothing at all wrong with only pluses if you have enough choices built in.  Stuff like this would go through endless balance changes because some of the mods would be seen as optimum and some would never be used at all.  LOL at +40% reload duration.

Well, I prefer a customization- over an upgrade system. I don't see the point of getting progressively stronger only. For me the fun part of games like ME are customizing my characters to do the things I want them to do. I don't particularly enjoy mindless grinding just to levelup / unlock stuff to finally play the game the way I want to.

The upgrade system you seem to prefer is actually a lot worse as far as balance is concerned. Customization naturally improves balance simply b/c that is how stuff works in reality.

Aedolon's +reload duration example makes perfect sense and enhances gameplay options > the shooting + reloading + casting rhythm is critical to get the most out of a setup.

You don't see the humor in talking about reaload time when we have a heavy weapon with massive damage with one of it's main drawbacks being slow reload time being utterly negated by something called reload cancel thus makiing it very over powered?

As for the other part, I've seen the old give a bonus but give a penalty thing before and you will have far worse blancing issues that way.  10% better accruacy but 10% less rate of fire?  Not going to take it, ever.  It is possibly doable but you have to be very very careful because some negatives will be non starters with players.

[Deerber]

Beerfish wrote...

Fortack wrote...

Beerfish wrote...

Aedolon wrote...


That's a good thought, although I'd greatly prefer it if mods came with both pros and cons - you know, so that they modify the weapon instead of just improving it. +30% against shields, -10% against everything else. +10% accuracy, -10% ROF. +30% mag capacity, +40% reload duration. Stuff like that. More mod slots. And ammo mods too, instead of one-time consumables or ammo powers.

I don't like that idea at all unless you find a really good reason for the +, - bit.  Nothing at all wrong with only pluses if you have enough choices built in.  Stuff like this would go through endless balance changes because some of the mods would be seen as optimum and some would never be used at all.  LOL at +40% reload duration.

Well, I prefer a customization- over an upgrade system. I don't see the point of getting progressively stronger only. For me the fun part of games like ME are customizing my characters to do the things I want them to do. I don't particularly enjoy mindless grinding just to levelup / unlock stuff to finally play the game the way I want to.

The upgrade system you seem to prefer is actually a lot worse as far as balance is concerned. Customization naturally improves balance simply b/c that is how stuff works in reality.

Aedolon's +reload duration example makes perfect sense and enhances gameplay options > the shooting + reloading + casting rhythm is critical to get the most out of a setup.

You don't see the humor in talking about reaload time when we have a heavy weapon with massive damage with one of it's main drawbacks being slow reload time being utterly negated by something called reload cancel thus makiing it very over powered?

As for the other part, I've seen the old give a bonus but give a penalty thing before and you will have far worse blancing issues that way.  10% better accruacy but 10% less rate of fire?  Not going to take it, ever.  It is possibly doable but you have to be very very careful because some negatives will be non starters with players.

Jesus ****ing Christ Beerfish, will you EVER drop this reload cancel idiocy? I mean goddamit, you're not even stupid to begin with, and on other topics one might even have a decent conversation with you... But as soon as you bring this **** out, everyone starts to either mock you or stop arguing, and with good reason. Ever wondered why?

For god's sake, let it ****ing go and accept that

Reload. Cancel. Was. Intended. To. Be. Used. By. The. Bloody. Developers.

[BridgeBurner]

Deerber wrote...

Jesus ****ing Christ Beerfish, will you EVER drop this reload cancel idiocy? I mean goddamit, you're not even stupid to begin with, and on other topics one might even have a decent conversation with you... But as soon as you bring this **** out, everyone starts to either mock you or stop arguing, and with good reason. Ever wondered why?

For god's sake, let it ****ing go and accept that

Reload. Cancel. Was. Intended. To. Be. Used. By. The. Bloody. Developers.

Just like with GallowsPole, nothing which you will say will ever convince him.

Developers telling us "it's intended, we put it there as a legitimate mechanic" isn't enough, they'll still call it "illegit" even though they are objectively wrong.

Do I like the mechanic? Nope. I don't. I used to, but I changed my mind. RC isn't a skill it's just something you either learn about and use or don't. Using it boosts the effectiveness of all your guns, some quite significantly. Not using it has a large impact on DPS / TTK / KPM for a handful of guns, and a small effect on DPS / TTK / KPM for others.

The claymore is hardly "overpowered" even with reload cancelling. Even with SC and aiming at the centre of the enemy, outside close range you'll get pellets missing, meaning the chances of scoring an OHK without having a few pellets hit the head is unlikely.

[Fortack]

Beerfish wrote...

You don't see the humor in talking about reaload time when we have a heavy weapon with massive damage with one of it's main drawbacks being slow reload time being utterly negated by something called reload cancel thus makiing it very over powered?

No. I am a proud follower of the High Lord.

As for the other part, I've seen the old give a bonus but give a penalty thing before and you will have far worse blancing issues that way.  10% better accruacy but 10% less rate of fire?  Not going to take it, ever.  It is possibly doable but you have to be very very careful because some negatives will be non starters with players.

The difference between simply upgrading stuff and customizing is that the latter maintains a natural form of balance whilst the former only makes all the previous stuff obsolete. I have no idea why you wouldn't want to modify your equipment in a logical and realistic way.

I believe most people understand the basic concept that choices have consequences and that one who chooses to wear heavy plate armor won't be as agile and fast as before, for example. The way I see it, the choice between speed and protection makes sense and they balance each other out naturally. The concept to start a game as naked moron who has to pay or play alot to figure out that wearing armor is a smart thing, especially when it doesn't affect anything else, looks kinda silly if you ask me.

[LemurFromTheId]

Beerfish wrote...

Fortack wrote...

Beerfish wrote...

Aedolon wrote...


That's a good thought, although I'd greatly prefer it if mods came with both pros and cons - you know, so that they modify the weapon instead of just improving it. +30% against shields, -10% against everything else. +10% accuracy, -10% ROF. +30% mag capacity, +40% reload duration. Stuff like that. More mod slots. And ammo mods too, instead of one-time consumables or ammo powers.

I don't like that idea at all unless you find a really good reason for the +, - bit.  Nothing at all wrong with only pluses if you have enough choices built in.  Stuff like this would go through endless balance changes because some of the mods would be seen as optimum and some would never be used at all.  LOL at +40% reload duration.

Well, I prefer a customization- over an upgrade system. I don't see the point of getting progressively stronger only. For me the fun part of games like ME are customizing my characters to do the things I want them to do. I don't particularly enjoy mindless grinding just to levelup / unlock stuff to finally play the game the way I want to.

The upgrade system you seem to prefer is actually a lot worse as far as balance is concerned. Customization naturally improves balance simply b/c that is how stuff works in reality.

Aedolon's +reload duration example makes perfect sense and enhances gameplay options > the shooting + reloading + casting rhythm is critical to get the most out of a setup.

You don't see the humor in talking about reaload time when we have a heavy weapon with massive damage with one of it's main drawbacks being slow reload time being utterly negated by something called reload cancel thus makiing it very over powered?

As for the other part, I've seen the old give a bonus but give a penalty thing before and you will have far worse blancing issues that way.  10% better accruacy but 10% less rate of fire?  Not going to take it, ever.  It is possibly doable but you have to be very very careful because some negatives will be non starters with players.

Obviously any mod that affects reload time would also affect cancelled reload time.

Also, you're an idiot if you still think the devs didn't put reload canceling intentionally in the game or that the Claymore - or any other weapon - wasn't balanced with reload canceling in mind. RCing with Claymore was a big thing in ME2 already and even back then the devs confirmed that they knowingly let the capability to do so remain in the game.

Of course, all this has been explained to you multiple times but still you keep up with the same boneheaded BS.

And as for the numbers in my examples - obviously I just pulled them out of a hat. Do you think I've done some actual playtesting or what?

And if you seriously think that weapon mods with both both positive and negative modifiers would be worse for balance than mods with only bonuses, you've completely lost your mind. A mod that alters the operation of a weapon without making it significantly better or worse in general is likely to be less detrimental for balance than a mod that makes a weapon just flat out better. The whole point is to modify the weapon to better suit individual needs.

[dontnerfshotgun]

lightswitch wrote...
Second, shotguns should actually be limited to a very short (10m or less) effective range. Insta-gib weapons in general need to be toned down and limited to specific roles.

Shut up.

Relevant:


Haha in all seriousness I do think the shotguns need some sort of adjustment, but I don't think giving them a ludicrously short range is the way to go.

[lightswitch]

tyhw wrote...

Lightswitch, if there's one weapon in the game that is god mode it is clearly the lolReegar. I honestly find the Harrier to be pretty well balanced with the elite weapon class of Talon, Hurricane, Wraith, and PPR. (Leaving only Sniper Rifles as a class without an "elite weapon" imo).

ehh. Only on specific kit map combos. Obviously you can put the Reegar on anything if you're on Glacier. Not nearly as sexy on Rio. Harrier provides a solution for every situation for every kit.

[lightswitch]

Aedolon wrote...

That's a good thought, although I'd greatly prefer it if mods came with both pros and cons - you know, so that they modify the weapon instead of just improving it. +30% against shields, -10% against everything else. +10% accuracy, -10% ROF. +30% mag capacity, +40% reload duration. Stuff like that. More mod slots. And ammo mods too, instead of one-time consumables or ammo powers.

The system basically already accomplishes this as long as there are multiple good choices for weapon mods. Bugs largely defeated the system (shotgun HVB anyone) in ME3. They probably shouldn't have made heavy barrels that duplicated functionality of other mods +1 other feature.

But in theory, by equipping one mod I'm not getting the benefit of another. Assault Rifles mod design exemplified this. Do I want to maximize damage output with a damage barrel? Or do I want a piercing barrel so that I can afford to equip an elemental ammo? Stability for better control or clip size for higher damage output? You can't have both, so the system essentially forces the same kind of decision making. If course if you ever used assault rifles you would have noticed this 

I do wish there had been accuracy mods for assault rifles that weren't scope dependent.

Modifié par lightswitch, 29 janvier 2014 - 12:33 .

[TurianRebel212]

Cyonan wrote...

TurianRebel212 wrote...
The OP brought up the harrier as a case in point of how broken and un-blanced the weapons are in Mass Effect 3. The harrier has a Great ROF and very high damage at base. Then the attatchments can make it even worse. It's unbalanced. Like most of the weapons are in ME3.

They need to balance everything out in terms of base damage. Now, not every weapon should do equal base damage. But then the ROF should balacne it out.

For example, there's a AR with say 20 base damage that does 800 RPM and has a 25 shot mag and it's ADS accuracy is 1.25 Then theres another heavier AR that does 30 base damage per shot but at 550 RPM and has 20 shot mag with an ADS accuracy deviation of 1.10.

See, balance. And the attachments should not increased base damage, nor fire rate, nor reload time, nor clip size.

That is how you do it. Like Dice did with the weapons in BF4 (one of the bright spots in the game) the weapon stats are pretty balanced as theirs not really the end all be all GOD weapon. There are certain weapons that perform better for certain scenarios. Such as CQC, mid range, longer ranges, and so on and so on.

No attachments that increase damage or ROF for weapons. That would be a good place to start.

I once got the idea to rebalance everything in the game around a numbers based system like what you're talking about. Trust me, it doesn't work anywhere near as good as you think it does in Mass Effect.

Battlefield has an advantage in a system like that because nobody has things like Biotic Charge. A weapon balanced to be bad at long range doesn't mean anything to the Vanguard who can make every situation a CQC situation.

It also helps that in modern military shooters most of the guns within a category are already really similar to begin with.

Yep. And there's the x factor so to speak. True weapon balance would also require class and power balance. And now, we're talking about the things that make Mass Effect, Mass Effect-y so to speak. 

Tough job. I wish BioWare Montreal nothing but the best of luck. I think the MP will be very good for ME4. I hope it is at least. 

[Tokenusername]

Lolreloadcancel

[LemurFromTheId]

lightswitch wrote...

Aedolon wrote...

That's a good thought, although I'd greatly prefer it if mods came with both pros and cons - you know, so that they modify the weapon instead of just improving it. +30% against shields, -10% against everything else. +10% accuracy, -10% ROF. +30% mag capacity, +40% reload duration. Stuff like that. More mod slots. And ammo mods too, instead of one-time consumables or ammo powers.

The system basically already accomplishes this as long as there are multiple good choices for weapon mods. Bugs largely defeated the system (shotgun HVB anyone) in ME3. They probably shouldn't have made heavy barrels that duplicated functionality of other mods +1 other feature.

But in theory, by equipping one mod I'm not getting the benefit of another. Assault Rifles mod design exemplified this. Do I want to maximize damage output with a damage barrel? Or do I want a piercing barrel so that I can afford to equip an elemental ammo? Stability for better control or clip size for higher damage output? You can't have both, so the system essentially forces the same kind of decision making. If course if you ever used assault rifles you would have noticed this 

I do wish there had been accuracy mods for assult rifles that weren't scope dependent.

My way would allow a significanly larger number of mods without making balancing a nightmare.

Also, I'll have you know that these days I actually use assault rifles regularly. Well, Saber is a battle rifle, Typhoon is a machine gun and PPR is a ray gun... but you get the point.

[Tybo]

lightswitch wrote...

tyhw wrote...

Lightswitch, if there's one weapon in the game that is god mode it is clearly the lolReegar. I honestly find the Harrier to be pretty well balanced with the elite weapon class of Talon, Hurricane, Wraith, and PPR. (Leaving only Sniper Rifles as a class without an "elite weapon" imo).

ehh. Only on specific kit map combos. Obviously you can put the Reegar on anything if you're on Glacier. Not nearly as sexy on Rio. Harrier provides a solution for every situation for every kit.

Fair point.  In my opinion though, the degree to which the Reegar is superior to all other options where applicable is absurd and what makes it the most god mode.  

That still ignores my larger point that the Harrier is well balanced with other elite weapons.  I agree that the Harrier is the most universal weapon:  you can put it on any kit and do fairly well with it, more so than any other weapon.  However, IMO it is actually the optimal weapon only as frequently as the Talon, Hurricane, or Wraith.  Basically it is pretty much only optimal on grenade kits.  The spare ammo is a severe limitation without either a large boost in weapon damage or a good secondary method of dealing damage.  The Wraith is superior with quick cooldown cycles, and the Talon is superior at closer ranges.  Both are significantly better vs mooks with the ability to one shot, and improve much more with reload hiding.  The Hurricane is superior with accuracy bonuses due to the better mod options (HS + Clip).  The Harrier is a consistently good choice, but not out of line in terms of power with the other top tier weapons. 

If you were to say all are better than they should be, fine.  I'd probably agree with you.  But it is pointless IMO to single out the Harrier.  

Modifié par tyhw, 28 janvier 2014 - 11:40 .

[Caldari Ghost]

Deerber wrote...

Beerfish wrote...

Fortack wrote...

Beerfish wrote...

Aedolon wrote...


That's a good thought, although I'd greatly prefer it if mods came with both pros and cons - you know, so that they modify the weapon instead of just improving it. +30% against shields, -10% against everything else. +10% accuracy, -10% ROF. +30% mag capacity, +40% reload duration. Stuff like that. More mod slots. And ammo mods too, instead of one-time consumables or ammo powers.

I don't like that idea at all unless you find a really good reason for the +, - bit.  Nothing at all wrong with only pluses if you have enough choices built in.  Stuff like this would go through endless balance changes because some of the mods would be seen as optimum and some would never be used at all.  LOL at +40% reload duration.

Well, I prefer a customization- over an upgrade system. I don't see the point of getting progressively stronger only. For me the fun part of games like ME are customizing my characters to do the things I want them to do. I don't particularly enjoy mindless grinding just to levelup / unlock stuff to finally play the game the way I want to.

The upgrade system you seem to prefer is actually a lot worse as far as balance is concerned. Customization naturally improves balance simply b/c that is how stuff works in reality.

Aedolon's +reload duration example makes perfect sense and enhances gameplay options > the shooting + reloading + casting rhythm is critical to get the most out of a setup.

You don't see the humor in talking about reaload time when we have a heavy weapon with massive damage with one of it's main drawbacks being slow reload time being utterly negated by something called reload cancel thus makiing it very over powered?

As for the other part, I've seen the old give a bonus but give a penalty thing before and you will have far worse blancing issues that way.  10% better accruacy but 10% less rate of fire?  Not going to take it, ever.  It is possibly doable but you have to be very very careful because some negatives will be non starters with players.

Jesus ****ing Christ Beerfish, will you EVER drop this reload cancel idiocy? I mean goddamit, you're not even stupid to begin with, and on other topics one might even have a decent conversation with you... But as soon as you bring this **** out, everyone starts to either mock you or stop arguing, and with good reason. Ever wondered why?

For god's sake, let it ****ing go and accept that

Reload. Cancel. Was. Intended. To. Be. Used. By. The. Bloody. Developers.

No.........beerfish is right.