I find the whole premis of tiers in a co-op game rediculous. Its not a competative game so why try and make it so
When you put it like that, I completely agree. Tier lists are too much work, because a tier list can work for very specific niches, like...a group with 4 members with high cunning will get the best results with x classes.
I find the whole premis of tiers in a co-op game rediculous. Its not a competative game so why try and make it so
BioWare themselves said (I think it was Graham) they have little interest in adjusting the AW in regards to him being "stronger" than other classes for that same reason.
BioWare themselves said (I think it was Graham) they have little interest in adjusting the AW in regards to him being "stronger" than other classes for that same reason.
I think its fair to say that the role of the kits are varied so it would be hard to rank them even if their was a competative aspect to the game. I remember having a similar conversation on the ME3 forums with someone who claimed that all Volus kits were useless because they dont kill as quickly as a Fury or Drell Adept. Unfortunatly some people try to make everything comptetative and ignore the part about cooperation and teamwork (note i'm not refering to anyone in particualr here in case anyone takes offense)
I absolutely agree.
Before I fell in love with the Hunter, I played Drell Infiltrator.
Sure, I could bomb a few troopers/cannibals for quick score, but I'd rather take down a brute while the casters & Krogans do their thing. Or jump in and revive someone cloaked etc.. While I do that, I miss out on a lot of killing, too. I'm not saying I'm some kind of selfless messiah; it's simply the function I chose to assume. But it's hard to really judge the quality of supporting, rather than scores for kills.
If anything, you learn to get used not finishing #1 and dreading when you don't get the Invincible Medal :] In fact, I've finished way more matches #1 in which I didn't enjoy myself at all, than vice versa.
P.S.: Arguably both of these classes can be killers. I just think a mine spamming Drell INF is as boring as a Stealth+KITS+FD Hunter.
I think its fair to say that the role of the kits are varied so it would be hard to rank them even if their was a competative aspect to the game. I remember having a similar conversation on the ME3 forums with someone who claimed that all Volus kits were useless because they dont kill as quickly as a Fury or Drell Adept. Unfortunatly some people try to make everything comptetative and ignore the part about cooperation and teamwork (note i'm not refering to anyone in particualr here in case anyone takes offense)
All Volus kits are useless though...
Edit - w000t!!!! 800 posts.
All Volus kits are useless though...
Edit - w000t!!!! 800 posts.
I liked your comment just so I could unlike it! If I didnt have issues with my 360 I would challenge you to a thunderdome for those blasphemous remarks!
FBG/Bronze/Reapers when you're ready.
FBG/Bronze/Reapers when you're ready.
Inbf I hack the game to rek u /w Quarian Warlord
I find the whole premis of tiers in a co-op game rediculous. Its not a competative game so why try and make it so
Not really. You just need to establish what the Tier criteria is.
Is it DPS? Is it Survivability?
In a competitive format tier will just matter much more than in a cooperative one and in a competitive format you want to address tier issues and probably don't need as much effort in co-op.
Understanding how the classes stack in tiers can help find the class that offers the most according to what each player values.
Typically, people will rank tiers according to personal preference which is a "fun" factor or according to raw effectiveness and the ability to perform whatever the game's grind is but most often Tier rankings are a blend of both of these factors.
That's the interesting part for me, Why does she think that class is fun? What am I missing? Why does he think that class is highly effective? What does he do differently than I do???
I like Tiers, even when they are clearly wrong.
Not really. You just need to establish what the Tier criteria is.
Is it DPS? Is it Survivability?
In a competitive format tier will just matter much more than in a cooperative one and in a competitive format you want to address tier issues and probably don't need as much effort in co-op.
Understanding how the classes stack in tiers can help find the class that offers the most according to what each player values.
Typically, people will rank tiers according to personal preference which is a "fun" factor or according to raw effectiveness and the ability to perform whatever the game's grind is but most often Tier rankings are a blend of both of these factors.
That's the interesting part for me, Why does she think that class is fun? What am I missing? Why does he think that class is highly effective? What does he do differently than I do???
I like Tiers, even when they are clearly wrong.
One could list all the pros and cons of each class kit and then order everything according to their personal weigh-in's.
This way if I read person X said Alchemist is rank B- I don't have to take it for granted but actually read that he thinks it's B- because it has annoying viice, which I can them choose to disagree.
Personally I really don't care about the tiers and/or rankings, I'm here just to increase my post count with meaningless blabbering.
How does one create a tier on kits that have different purposes? Especially when you have to factor in teamwork/ team synergy? Tiers arent ranked on personal preference, they are made for competative games (a perfect example would be fighting games) where certain kits may even be banned from tournements if they are considerd to be giving a player an unfair advantage. Its one thing to rate kits you enjoy playing or kits you find effective but having tiers is entirley different and unhealthy to a co-operative environment, it also discourages variety
Did you ever Mass Effect 3? As great as that game was, it still was full of elitsts and people who were determined to be first in terms of score, these are the same people who overlook certain kits because they dont score highly
Oh, you're still trying to justify the asswhooping you got in SFIV?
Oh, you're still trying to justify the asswhooping you got in SFIV?
Dan Hibiki vs Sagat was unfair and you know it!
Blanka? Cammy? Zangief?
FBG/Bronze/Reapers when you're ready.
ME4. Volus with Snap Freeze and Flamer confirmed. 1v1 me. I will wield my Venom with pride.
Not really. You just need to establish what the Tier criteria is.
Is it DPS? Is it Survivability?
In a competitive format tier will just matter much more than in a cooperative one and in a competitive format you want to address tier issues and probably don't need as much effort in co-op.
Understanding how the classes stack in tiers can help find the class that offers the most according to what each player values.
Typically, people will rank tiers according to personal preference which is a "fun" factor or according to raw effectiveness and the ability to perform whatever the game's grind is but most often Tier rankings are a blend of both of these factors.
That's the interesting part for me, Why does she think that class is fun? What am I missing? Why does he think that class is highly effective? What does he do differently than I do???
I like Tiers, even when they are clearly wrong.
What are you new? It's who finishes first on the scoreboard.
Blanka? Cammy? Zangief?
You refused to give me a rematch you coward! You have no honour!
You refused to give me a rematch you coward! You have no honour!
Rematch? We had 5 or so back to back games. I don't think you even won a round.
Rematch? We had 5 or so back to back games. I don't think you even won a round.
Now you are exaggerating - I won at least 1 round and we both know I was rusty at the time
Now you are exaggerating - I won at least 1 round and we both know I was rusty at the time
Can't remember for sure, but I'll give you that. Let's not act like I wasn't rusty as well.
Legionaire - A good class, often played well, players who play this class are often helpful and are team based. Viable on Perilous but had strain occurs because weapons take a long time to kill stuff.
Katari - Like all two handed classes in BioWare games, overall very shi**y. Weapon and ability damage does not make up for lack of shield and defense. Good times such as rings are a necessity. Crappy for perilous, you don't see them often and when you do they are on their face.
Assassin - Good class but played badly at higher levels at times. Fun class to play and cleans up on up to threatening. Can do well in small spawns if you have a good group, gets smacked hard on bigger spawns especially if the person is too aggressive.
Archer - Good class and fun, if played intelligently very viable on perilous, good choice of top notch weapons.
Elementalist - Very good class but off set by being perhaps the most annoying class. Wall of fire and firestorm are excellent abilities but are akin to flamers in ME3MP, the melee guys can't see shi*. Ele's that have and use barrier are loved by team mates and the class is viable on perilous even if the annoying skills are skipped.
Keeper - Excellent class all around. Excellent support and yet very useful offensively especially if using static cage. just about every one is happy to have a keeper in their group and most play a smart game.
Alchemist - Excellent class, one of the most fun to play. Viable on perilous but like the assassin you can't get away with things you could on threatening. Has really good crowd control abilities, even larger spawns.
Necromancer - Excellent class, fun to play and helpful to team mates. Viable on perilous, has an added bonus in that it's two initial abilities can carry you a long way and are good crowd controllers. Fearing and freezing enemies before the fighters get in close really helps. Some of their higher level abilities imo are a bit overrated however.
Reaver - Garbage class like the Katari. Fun enough to play on the lower levels but class design is similar to the lousy design of Korgans in ME3MP, you are weak, your weapons are only okay so we will make you main abilities give up health to get that awesome damage. Reavers end up on their face a lot.
Templar - Good class, much like the Legionnaire quite often played well. They have a few really great abilities and are viable on Perilous for sure.
Hunter - See the archer, yeah yeah...but they are oh so different, not really.
Arcane Warrior - Over played class, well played about half the time. A rare treat if they actually use pull of the abyss. Can carry whole teams on perilous, the unfortunate aspect is that they cannot afford to raise anyone at all it seems. More non team dirtba.....i mean players, play this class than any other by a wide margin.
My words are the LAW! This thread can now be close as their are not viable counter points to my unassailable logical post.
Only quoting you since you're the last person to post, but man, so many people saying assassin has no survivability or do bad in higher difficulties. What the hell is wrong with you people?
"Can do well in small spawns if you have a good group, gets smacked hard on bigger spawns especially if the person is too aggressive." Really? I use my assassin to carry low level members of my group just fine on perilous. Granted I can't always save their asses if they get downed. And no, I'm not barrier dependent. The only reason for an assassin to get smacked by a big group is if you are the last man standing and you're reckless, or everyone else in your party is stealthed. Enemies won't even notice you taking them out one by one until everyone else in your group is dead, in which case you can still easily finish any round (except maybe when the demon commander is around) if you are patient.
Assassin isn't bad but like most rogues she is highly dependent on weapons and gear, not to mention the fact archers still perceive you in stealth doesn't help either.
Every DPS class is weapon and gear dependent. And no, archers cannot perceive you in stealth unless they see you going into stealth after killing something, in which case they will shoot in your general direction once. They also have one skill somewhat like full draw that will track you and hit you even if you are stealthed, but then again, only IF they see you going into stealth. You have ample time to avoid that. The Templar horror also has a homing attack that can also be avoided simply by using your surroundings. As far as I know, the only things that will perceive you while you are stealthed are hyenas, wolves and the RTC.
How does one create a tier on kits that have different purposes? Especially when you have to factor in teamwork/ team synergy? Tiers arent ranked on personal preference, they are made for competative games (a perfect example would be fighting games) where certain kits may even be banned from tournements if they are considerd to be giving a player an unfair advantage. Its one thing to rate kits you enjoy playing or kits you find effective but having tiers is entirley different and unhealthy to a co-operative environment, it also discourages variety
Did you ever Mass Effect 3? As great as that game was, it still was full of elitsts and people who were determined to be first in terms of score, these are the same people who overlook certain kits because they dont score highly
One creates the tier based on whatever one wants to, as long as you define it you can do it.
you're really arguing that that tiers based solely on personal preference are limited value to anyone else, and for the most part you are right, except that it is fun an sometimes enlightening to understand someone else's tiers and hopefully why they have sorted them as they did.
Regardless, you are overlooking the obvious tier that most people will attempt to create for a cooperative game and that is which classes will most efficiently accomplish the cooperative goal(s). If that is defined as generating the most completions/xp/gold per unit of time allocated to the game then it becomes obvious that some classes exist in different tiers. It might discourage variety, but if it does, then perhaps the game should be tweaked to bring any agreed upon bottom tier classes some improvements.
In this game, I think it would relatively easy to land on a general consensus of a bottom third of the classes in an effective tier structure that would allow for greater variety if those classes were made more effective in some fashion.
Also, I did ever ME3, but not with even as much effort as I have in DAI. My son played regularly in platinum though, so I do know some of what you're referring to.
Retour en haut