Biower didn't have a character designed primarily as a power user? Then WTF is the Fury? Or the Slayer? Or the Novaguard? Or the MQE? Or the (poorly executed) FQE? I can remember when the Talon Merc was introduced and one of the devs said, "with his bow you won't need your weapon hardly at all." Please son.. of course there are kits that are designed with powers first and others designed with weapon use first (Marksman classes). You would have to be trying not to see that, to not see it.
I would be glad to see a Fury played with 0 weapon use. Some examples would be enlightening.
The first issue is that you first cite the original metagame as vision for Bioware's intentions. There are no "gun only" or "power only" characters in the original metagame. And in the current game there are really only a few "gun only" builds because they have don't have active powers. Human Soldier and Turian Soldier both have active powers that support weapon use. They directly buff the gun... but surprise, they are affected by cooldown. I can hit Marksman or ARush more often with lighter weapons.
You keep speaking in absurdities. The original intention of the game was that any class could balance weapon vs power use. Heavier guns were supposed to be more powerful and PRS would take care of this balance. The shipped balance wasn't correct and we moved even further from that with balance changes and DLC guns. This isn't a difficult concept.
Of course Warp has debuff evolutions.. IMO this was designed to suppliment the lighter/weaker weapons that allow for a fast cooldown like pistols and smgs. This is further evidenced by the armor weakening evo.. which was made before the SMG HVB existed.
This is all very interesting, but armor weakening also helps shotguns and even the Claymore. Given that armor weakening does not stack directly with piercing and the fact that the rest of the weapon classes had piercing mods, Bioware certainly realized warp was going to be combined with various weapon classes and that they might have piercing.
And indeed more powerful weapons don't need the debuff on as many targets. So you don't need to use Warp as often. It's almost as if there was some system intended to balance how powerful your weapon is with how often you can use Warp!
I'm not trying to say they made kits to be SOLELY one or the other.. I'm trying to say their design is slanted to lean one way or the other. Why is the tech combo window for Incinerate and Overload 3 seconds if the Human Engi was not meant to have a fast cooldown? Maybe it was done so you couldn't slap a Claymore on them and still have access to 6+6 combos.. maybe, just maybe, heavy weapon use was discouraged by design.. and if you can't make tech combos with the Human Engi, then why play it? You're just playing a gimped Ghost or SI at that point.. bc all you're going to be doing is overload/energy drain and then shooting.. just like the infiltrators.
More assumptions about intentions. I would submit that they didn't expect the game to be all about combo spamming from single characters. This is why combos weren't remotely balanced between biotics and techs to begin with and tech combos were revised to allow easy detonations for the CE's and FE's.
And it isn't like Bioware got everything right from release, nor do I believe they would claim that. If they wanted to punish people for using heavier weapons on an HE, why did they increase TB priming window to 5s? Was it because they thought people should only use light guns on them?
Speaking of which.. why does Warp ammo give the biggest bonus? So Adepts can keep up with their guns obvs.. and the game won't be slanted in favor of infiltrators as much. I'm not saying you can/should go all powers all the time.. I'm pretty confident you're supposed to shoot on cooldown (unless Novaguard/Slayer and a few others).
So WA gives a higher primed bonus so weak guns can keep up with Infiltrator weapon damage? I would agree with that starting point, but disagree with the conclusion. It isn't so Adepts can use wimpy guns and make up ground towards infiltrators. It is so I can run a Claymore on an Adept and do similar damage to cloaked Claymore potentially.
Otherwise the "math" only works out when you compare a grossly overpowered light weapon like the Arc Pistol with a not so overpowered gun like the Valiant.
You know what.. F it. You're not gonna change your mind, you'll sit here and argue till you're blue in the face. Kiss my ass. Have a nice day.
It wasn't very taxing to me. I am just applying a little logic to a set of arbitrary rules summed up in a soundbite: "playing the weapon." The irony here is how you are being obstinate and getting upset because someone doesn't agree with your interpretation of how various classes
have to be played.
Retour en haut
).
