247 réponses à ce sujet

[TheTechnoTurian]

Let's all fight each other over which video game character is the best video game character in this shooting alien and robot game.

 

lolDPS arguments

 

Don't lol NightSlasher this is serious ****** business

[Zjarcal]

Juggernaut is better than all of them combined.

[me0120]

I still vote Drell.

[Argent Xero]

I will step in to defend lightswitch here, because I have the feeling you guys are just pushing him around in some kind of ugly mob mentality. He has presented his case. You can call it "theoretical" all you like, because you have presented nothing but finger pointing.
I dont know lightswitch IRL but we have played together on and off for over a year now. He is an excellent player that continously tests new builds on platinum. He has come to the conclusion that Tsol outperferms Hsol on merit of superior single target dps. And I fully agree.

nothing against lightswitch, but he's failed to acknowledge anything further than paper DPS. If that alone is the case then this isn't even a discussion of opinion, it's fact stating.

of course he's entitled to his own opinion, as you are entitled to your own, but that doesn't excuse him to throw dirt all over somebody elses opinion.

opinion =/= fact.

[KalilKareem]

"Paper" DPS is the same and only argument not to spec out of hunter mode and use a scanner on the GI. It is a perfectly valid argument for class comparison of kits, not the only tool but certainly an important one. Granted LS is not entirely suave in this thread, but that does not make his argumentation any less valid.

[Argent Xero]

"Paper" DPS is the same and only argument not to spec out of hunter mode and use a scanner on the GI. It is a perfectly valid argument for class comparison of kits, not the only tool but certainly an important one. Granted LS is not entirely suave in this thread, but that does not make his argumentation any less valid.

I always spec into Hunter Mode because it's Geth Scanner and an Adrenaline mod in a single package at the cost of some Shields. It also makes my Armor and Gear slot available for other equipment.

anyway, I never said his argument wasn't valid, it's an ok argument but it's very limited in this discussion because it only involves 1v1 encounters.

[me0120]

"Paper" DPS is the same and only argument not to spec out of hunter mode and use a scanner on the GI. 

 

Wrong. 

 

First, that is a situation where you increase DPS with no drawback (lol half base shields is nothing) on the same character. This analogy is only comparable to the Vanilla Soldier and Turian Soldier in an "Adrenaline Rush vs no AR and Marksman vs no MM" scenario. 

 

Second, Hunter mode increases more than just direct DPS and scanner. Increased movement speed, and decreased recharge speed are not directly associated with DPS but have an advantage over using Geth Scanner.

 

Lastly, choosing Hunter Mode allows you to use a Gear slot that would be taken up by Geth Scanner. That, along with the fact that Geth Scanner is more eye friendly with a slightly different overlay. This all means your premise is both wrong and irrelevant.

[megabeast37215]

Destroyer.. without fitness.
Tsol without Proxy Mine.
Hsol a myriad of ways.
Quarksman 6/6/6/6/6

Hey look at that... A 6/6/6/6/6 build is inferior to 3 non maxed kits. Shocker.

[Cyonan]

"Paper" DPS is the same and only argument not to spec out of hunter mode and use a scanner on the GI. It is a perfectly valid argument for class comparison of kits, not the only tool but certainly an important one. Granted LS is not entirely suave in this thread, but that does not make his argumentation any less valid.

 

You can make the argument by listing all of the benefits that you get from Hunter Mode which Geth Scanner does not provide such as damage, movement speed, accuracy, and potentially recharge speed, power damage, and rate of fire. It does not require theorycrafted DPS in order to do so.

 

To make an argument about rate of fire vs straight damage you generally are going to end up in a theorycrafted argument at some point since while they're both DPS buffs they behave in entirely different ways. I could go back and forth with myself for days theorycrafting out which one is better and not come up with a definite answer, because the answer is going to vary based on what angle I look at it from.

 

Theorycrafting is a tool, but not one that is meant to be used as evidence that one kit is better than the other. That would be like trying to hammer in a nail using a screwdriver.

 

There is a reason it is called theorycrafting.

[d_nought]

accuracy

[Fortack]

The playstyle of being a weapons platform.
 
The Shadow might be able to have her melee buffed, but I doubt if you'd want to just buff up the passive weapon damage for the N7 Destroyer or Quarian Female Infiltrator. That would just negate the entire point of removing the weapon damage bonuses from their abilities.
 
The problem is that the weapon platforms need to be more effective with weapons in some way because they aren't as effective with their direct ability based damage, and if you buff up their ability damage then they aren't weapon platforms anymore.
 
I'm not really trying to get you to come up with specific answers to everything. I'm just listing kits as examples to get you to think about what this would mean to weapons platforms and people who enjoy that playstyle.
 
With the Destroyer example obviously Devastator Mode would be completely reworked, but the Destroyer needs to remain competitive on damage output with high ability damage kits like the N7 Fury or Drell Vanguard/Adept. Without the damage benefits of Devastator Mode and with the Fury being able to use weapons equally as good as him, he would be reliant on Hawk Missile Launcher and Multi-Frag Grenade spam in order to pick up the lost damage.
 
Even if you buffed up the damage of them to let him compete, that's a completely different playstyle than the Destroyer that I enjoy playing. I wouldn't want to see that playstyle go away just because it's difficult to balance.

 
I suppose I play all kits as a weapon platform since I am using guns on all of them. Is that bad?

 

Why is it a problem to remove the weapon bonuses for the Destroyer and FQI? Give me a single argument why it is IMPOSSIBLE (which is what you seem to be saying all the time) to replace those bonuses with something else (you know, something you actually use, has cool SFX effects, does nasty things to the enemy etc).

 

Again there are NO weapon platforms. You seem to be OK with the fact that some kits get their own weapon mod(s) and call it a damn power. Again, give me a single reason why those mods are not available to everyone.

 

Furthermore, your so-called weapon platforms (I have really no idea what they are, but I assume you mean everything that gets a completely random weapon (damage) bonus - please correct me if I am wrong) do NOT need weapon damage bonuses to be superior compared to others when it comes to using (some) weapons. The Destroyer's stagger immunity alone makes him a much better weapon user, no?

 

If you seriously believe that weapon-mod-powers are mandatory to make (some) kits competitive, I am done talking with you. Then you simply lack the required imagination and creativity for a decent discussion about (game) design, sorry. I also have no idea where you got the idea that I want to take stuff away. I clearly stated in a previous post that I want all the weapon enhancing stuff in the weapon modding section, so my Volus can shoot the same (modified) weapons my GI is using - that, at least, would make Volus a little more competitive compared to the kits you've mentioned. I don't see any issues with that as far as the current state of (balance) things go.

[Kislitsin]

k, biower plz remove the marksman from TSol and give him Pull (and sentry turret instead of PM). Also, nerf his fitness and speed.

And give MMed claymoar to the krogans... seems legit. 

[Fortack]

Thank you for your well thought out response, unfortunately you are completely and utterly ignoring my previous criticism. Namely that you cannot pick the ability MM in itself, you have to pick a kit, either TSol, or QSol. So MM as a power (which has no cons, but few power has cons on the first place) is tied to a kit which has cons and pros but mostly cons when it comes to survivability (see my previous list, which you also ignored). This is a constraint on using MM. You are ignoring this constraint and pretending that MM exists independently of this constraint.

 

My point is that you do NOT want to make things impossibly complicated to try and balance the game as a whole. Hence why powers and weapons should be designed (and balanced) separately and independently from one another.

 

When you are gonna try and add stuff randomly, without considering the consequences (which is exactly what Bioware did with this game), you end up with all sorts of broken things:

 

The point of single-shot, hard-hitting sniper rifles is to kill infantry units with a single (well-aimed) shot. It's easy to design such a weapon with the system I favor whilst the current one creates all sorts of problems -> either those without damage bonuses cannot OHK infantry (which defeats the purpose of those weapons completely) or they can, which will mean that those with the bonus are able to (almost) OHK bosses (which defeats the whole point of having boss units who are supposed to soak up tons of damage before dying).

 

The point of CQC weapons is to be exceptional at short ranges, but abysmal beyond mid-range. That's how those kind of guns are balanced and it is what sets them apart from the sniper rifles I mentioned above. What's the point of even designing a set of weapons that are good at different ranges when you add (passive) powers that turn short-range weapons into sniper rifles?

 

The simple truth is that the current weapon enhancing stuff you find in some "powers" has a radical impact on weapon behavior. Perhaps it is odd when I say that the player's aim ought to be making the difference between OHK'ing stuff with sniper rifles (instead of the class that deals double SR damage for no reason at all). The player's maneuvering skill should determine how effective they can use CQC weapons (not some cheap accuracy bonus). The purpose of powers is to make those things easier, but should never be mandatory to even be able to use (some) weapons the way they are supposed to. That's silly.

 

Regarding racial abilities: They should be designed separately as well. Turians cannot dodge? Then give them stuff like higher shields; higher weight capacity; better, faster, more powerful melee; or whatever else is part of the racial things, to compensate. There is no need to drag this stuff into the complicated power & weapon arena unless you want to make things miserable for yourself (as a designer).

[Fortack]

k, biower plz remove the marksman from TSol and give him Pull (and sentry turret instead of PM). Also, nerf his fitness and speed.

And give MMed claymoar to the krogans... seems legit. 

 

I though Turians had bigger brains, but you start to make me question their intelligence. Tip, if you don't understand what someone is saying better remain silent, else you're just making an utter fool of yourself. Also, L2READ.

[Deerber]

Deerber, quit being so hypocritical. You present your opinions as 'absolutes' on this forum all the time. If I had a quarter for every time you 'lol'ed at a post that contained something you disagreed with and consequently decided was stupid I'd be rich. But god forbid I dare disagree with your opinion on the human soldier in a blunt manner.

I have a viewpoint. If I'm going to go to the trouble of sharing it at all, I'm going to share it like I actually mean it.

O.o

... Did you even watch my signature?

[Clips7]

Hmmm...i haven't read all of the pages, and even tho the conversation is getting a tad heated, i like the debate you cats are having. I'm not that knowlegeable on the gaming mechanics and certain combinations of weapons/powers and mods (i just stick to the basic fundamentals) so i'm not even going to enter that conversation.

 

As far comparing characters goes? The only character i play out of the ones mentioned is the destroyer and i run him with hawk missles and DM with a level X Typhoon with AP ammo 4. I just press and squeeze and watch lesser enemies and Bosses drop like flies. He's a powerful kit, but he can get into trouble since he can't dodge, even without DM, his dodge is still weak. I play him with alot of hard cover and just try not to get overrun by enemies.

 

I guess the other two kits can out damage him, when specced really well (i've played with a guy who destroyed everything easily with a male quarian soldier i believe), but i haven't played with those kits enough to find out for myself personally.

[Turian Master Race]

My point is that you do NOT want to make things impossibly complicated to try and balance the game as a whole. Hence why powers and weapons should be designed (and balanced) separately and independently from one another.

 

 

I do not have the time to respond to all your post so I give you only a short reply: this is impossible. They interact in the game, and that is the whole point of the game! This makes it different from other shooters.

 

I think the fundemental difference between us is that while you apparently think the game is a big mess and it is broken on many levels, I think that despite some of the problems BW overall did a great job at balancing. Proof of my position is that after 2 years of release, after they stopped supporting the game many month ago we are still here playing the game and arguing about which soldier is the better ... and we cannot decide it!

[Turian Master Race]

 
I suppose I play all kits as a weapon platform since I am using guns on all of them. Is that bad?

 

Why is it a problem to remove the weapon bonuses for the Destroyer and FQI? Give me a single argument why it is IMPOSSIBLE (which is what you seem to be saying all the time) to replace those bonuses with something else (you know, something you actually use, has cool SFX effects, does nasty things to the enemy etc).

 

Again there are NO weapon platforms. You seem to be OK with the fact that some kits get their own weapon mod(s) and call it a damn power. Again, give me a single reason why those mods are not available to everyone.

 

 

Give me a single reason why singularity or overload is not available to everyone? hm ...

 

Is it that hard to understand that these powers are class and race specific, which makes them unique? Which makes the game unique?

 

 

Furthermore, your so-called weapon platforms (I have really no idea what they are, but I assume you mean everything that gets a completely random weapon (damage) bonus - please correct me if I am wrong) do NOT need weapon damage bonuses to be superior compared to others when it comes to using (some) weapons. The Destroyer's stagger immunity alone makes him a much better weapon user, no?

 

If you seriously believe that weapon-mod-powers are mandatory to make (some) kits competitive, I am done talking with you. Then you simply lack the required imagination and creativity for a decent discussion about (game) design, sorry. I also have no idea where you got the idea that I want to take stuff away. I clearly stated in a previous post that I want all the weapon enhancing stuff in the weapon modding section, so my Volus can shoot the same (modified) weapons my GI is using - that, at least, would make Volus a little more competitive compared to the kits you've mentioned. I don't see any issues with that as far as the current state of (balance) things go.

 

 

You thick skulled krogan, do not you understand that this will NEVER happen? They will (have to) nerf these guns immediatly as soon as they move the MM/DM bonuses into weapon mods.

[Zyzimorph]

Note to self: never make or participate in a thread with vs. in the title.

[coelacyanth]

C'mon guys lets look at it objectively shall we? I think....aah screw it! I'll cut to the chase!

Spoiler

[Fortack]

I do not have the time to respond to all your post so I give you only a short reply: this is impossible. They interact in the game, and that is the whole point of the game! This makes it different from other shooters.

 

I think the fundemental difference between us is that while you apparently think the game is a big mess and it is broken on many levels, I think that despite some of the problems BW overall did a great job at balancing. Proof of my position is that after 2 years of release, after they stopped supporting the game many month ago we are still here playing the game and arguing about which soldier is the better ... and we cannot decide it!

 

ME isn't different than games like Crysis or Bioshock - they too have special abilities one can use to improve combat performance yet they do not have abilities that turn shotguns into sniper rifles. Why? Because those devs do understand that it defeats the point of having long and short range weapons (knowing that range is one of the few variables to accomplish variety in weapon design, beyond using different skins and sound effects).

 

Unlike fun, which is subjective, the quality of design & balance can be measured quite accurately and ME3 isn't doing well at all. Bioware did a very poor job with their balance changes - most either didn't make sense or had little to no impact. I do not know how Bioware approached this, but to me, it looks a lot like all they did was look at how often stuff was being used (instead of doing proper QA themselves): Nobody's using kit A or weapon B? Lets give them a random buff; Everyone using the Krysae SR? Lets nerf it into the ground! (apparently oblivious to the fact that TC was the main problem and a textbook example of the point I'm making).

 

If you're willing to accept some basic advice about good and bad design; the former is beautiful and elegant in its simplicity, the latter an incomprehensible mess. ME3 is a bit of both.

[Cyonan]

 
I suppose I play all kits as a weapon platform since I am using guns on all of them. Is that bad?

 

Why is it a problem to remove the weapon bonuses for the Destroyer and FQI? Give me a single argument why it is IMPOSSIBLE (which is what you seem to be saying all the time) to replace those bonuses with something else (you know, something you actually use, has cool SFX effects, does nasty things to the enemy etc).

 

Again there are NO weapon platforms. You seem to be OK with the fact that some kits get their own weapon mod(s) and call it a damn power. Again, give me a single reason why those mods are not available to everyone.

 

Furthermore, your so-called weapon platforms (I have really no idea what they are, but I assume you mean everything that gets a completely random weapon (damage) bonus - please correct me if I am wrong) do NOT need weapon damage bonuses to be superior compared to others when it comes to using (some) weapons. The Destroyer's stagger immunity alone makes him a much better weapon user, no?

 

If you seriously believe that weapon-mod-powers are mandatory to make (some) kits competitive, I am done talking with you. Then you simply lack the required imagination and creativity for a decent discussion about (game) design, sorry. I also have no idea where you got the idea that I want to take stuff away. I clearly stated in a previous post that I want all the weapon enhancing stuff in the weapon modding section, so my Volus can shoot the same (modified) weapons my GI is using - that, at least, would make Volus a little more competitive compared to the kits you've mentioned. I don't see any issues with that as far as the current state of (balance) things go.

 

Weapon platforms are the setups who use mostly gunplay for their damage like the common setups with the Human/Turian Soldier, N7 Destroyer, etc. They have weapon performance boosting abilities because they don't deal high amounts of direct power/combo damage like N7 Fury, Human Adept, N7 Paladin, etc.

 

It's not impossible to remove those bonuses, nor did I ever state or even suggest that it was.

 

What I did say is that removing those bonuses is a nerf to their damage output, and in order to remain competitive they would need something else. While you would want to give them something they can spam to deal damage to the enemy, that puts them more in the camp with the high power damage kits to use powers to deal the bulk of their damage and weapons are just there to augment that damage.

 

That's a change in the playstyle from mainly gunplay to ability spam. If I wanted to spam damage powers on my Human Soldier, I would have specced into Concussive Shot.

 

The Destroyer's immunity mainly helps with ramp up guns, which if I have an ability that I "actually use and does something nasty to the enemy" then I can't use ramp up guns because they conflict with each other. You could add defensive bonuses, but that's not damage compensation and ultimately would just make you a tanky power spammer. You could lower the weight of weapons for them, but that just means you do even more power spam. Unfortunately if you want them to keep weapon superiority while being weaker on powers to compensate, then ultimately at some point these kits are going to have to do more damage with their weapons one way or another.

 

I'm aware that you don't want to remove them entirely, but if they become mods or not is irrelevant. Regardless of if the Volus can use a GI's Talon or not, as long as all kits have equal weapons the argument still stands.

 

As I said before it's not impossible to remove these things and keep the kits competitive, but you change what the kits are about. Think of it like this:

 

If they took the Claymore and cut the damage down to 1/3 of what it is now, increased the clip size and rate of fire and reduced the weight would that really still be the Claymore?

 

You could make it competitive, but a Claymore is a single shot heavy weapon that deals massive damage per shot. Anything else is a completely different weapon that just happens to share the same name. That is the argument that I am making for the weapon platforms. A N7 Destroyer that spams abilities for damage isn't the N7 Destroyer that I know and enjoy playing.

 

If you want to make personal attacks and claim I lack the imagination or creativity, then I can easily just turn them back on you. That would be a completely pointless discussion, however.

[megabeast37215]

I don't get why Fortack can't understand what a weapon platform is.. it's a pretty simple concept.

The Turian Soldier kills stuff with his gun 95% of the time.. this makes him a weapon platform. He does not make lots of things dead with Proxy Mine and Concussive Shot.

On the opposite side of the spectrum is the Fury, who doesn't really even need a gun. She can get by using her powers alone for 85%+ of her damage output. She is not a weapon platform, she is a power spammer.

The difference between the two is that one of them can get by using powers almost exclusively while the other cannot, and must use their weapon to make stuff dead.

As far as balance goes.. I think the real issue is giving power spam classes weapons that can perform up to the level of weapon platforms.. like the Fury with a Hurricane and Warp ammo IV.

[Slojack]

Its an ME3 Mega sighting