106 réponses à ce sujet

[capn233]

I don't see different classes having different strengths as "forced", sure, some classes will be outright better with guns and some specific builds may suffer, but over all you will get more play style options.

 

Want pure CC/DPS "caster"? You have Adept. "Summoner"/"Elemetalist"? Engineer. Semi-casters with gun training? Sentinel / Vanguard / Infiltrator variations.

 

The soldier would be either the "Heavy" with super-heavy armor that allows essentially tanking plus some related abilities, or a grenadier / commando with superb firearms training and grenades.

 

This way every class offers a unique perspective and gameplay.

 

I would also like the classes to be differentiated, and for each to have their strengths and weaknesses.  There shouldn't be any class that is good at everything.

 

But I don't know that Adept should be balanced such that powers are so good as to essentially not need guns, that was what started this part of the discussion.  I am personally fine with some sort of sensible weapon restrictions, or even acknowledging that if a class has a lot of utility they do not necessarily need to do a lot of damage  (or at least a lot of weapon damage).  That's not really the same as allowing a class to have max efficiency through the game without a weapon though.

[Laughing_Man]

What I don't get is, if the classes can already do the things you're describing, how is this adding new playstyle options?

 

Want a pure CC/DPS Caster? Adept that specs into Singularity and Pull, picking up Stasis as a bonus power.

 

Want a "Summoner"? Engineer with Drone and Sentry Turret. Pick up Decoy for an added summon.

 

Want a semi-caster with guns? Basically every class in the game has their own variant of this right now. Adept, Engineer, and Sentinel all take AP or Warp Ammo bonus. Soldier/Infiltrator focus on Concussive Shot/Incinerate and take a bonus power that compliments that, and Vanguard basically does this right out of the gate.

 

That's all true only in a very loose sense, meaning that while they have the abilities you say, they are not truly different,

they don't really change the battlefield in a unique manner. Every class still plays like traditional TPS plus a little extra,

when they don't really need to be so constrained.

 

Take engineer for example, I would suggest breaking engineer talents into two trees, one for elemental effects, and one for summons.

The elemental tree will have multiple options, possibly expended from what existed during ME3 (could be interesting to cover the ground in ice so enemies will fall down or become slowed), and the "summons" tree will also be strengthened and expended - I wouldn't mind seeing a tech version of seeker swarm, meaning a deploy-able nanobot swarm that damages enemies and causes them to panic.

 

So engineer and Adept could theoretically become mostly pure casters (with training only for - say - pistols), while classes like Vanguard and Sentinel would offer something similar to the current play-style, so no options would really be removed, and new ones will be added.

 

As for ammo "powers", as far as I am concerned they should remove them from the powers section anyway, back into the weapon upgrade section

or consumable item section. This way an adept may be able to pick warp-ammo (maybe this one specifically does need to remain in the power list - for lore reasons), but seeing as the Adept only has training for pistols, the effectiveness of warp ammo would be limited.

[Laughing_Man]

I would also like the classes to be differentiated, and for each to have their strengths and weaknesses.  There shouldn't be any class that is good at everything.

 

But I don't know that Adept should be balanced such that powers are so good as to essentially not need guns, that was what started this part of the discussion.  I am personally fine with some sort of sensible weapon restrictions, or even acknowledging that if a class has a lot of utility they do not necessarily need to do a lot of damage  (or at least a lot of weapon damage).  That's not really the same as allowing a class to have max efficiency through the game without a weapon though.

 

Why do you see guns as so important to the game?

 

Like I suggested in the above post, you could restrict Adepts and Engineers to pistols (possibly SMG as well) only,

by not giving them training for anything else.

 

And as those weapons should be less effective at DPS anyway, there's no real "danger" of a power-class becoming much stronger than say soldier with an LMG and explosive / AP / elemental ammo. (also, SP devs shouldn't be so concerned about DPS "balance" between classes, if every class has a different strength anyway.)

[capn233]

Why do you see guns as so important to the game?

 

Like I suggested in the above post, you could restrict Adepts and Engineers to pistols (possibly SMG as well) only,

by not giving them training for anything else.

 

And as those weapons should be less effective at DPS anyway, there's no real "danger" of a power-class becoming much stronger than say soldier with an LMG and explosive / AP / elemental ammo. (also, SP devs shouldn't be so concerned about DPS "balance" between classes, if every class has a different strength anyway.)

 

Mass Effect has always been a shooter, even if ME1 went about it with a certain clunkiness.

 

Sensible weapon restrictions have been fine with me, stated it several times.  There are a whole lot of people who don't want any weapon restrictions, and I am sort of surprised none of their representatives have really chimed in.

 

However, if ME3 demonstrated anything it was that BW is capable of slapping in pistols and SMGs that are hands down better than LMGs or anti-materiel rifles.  Of course if you look at ME1 pistols had the top burst DPS (spectre X with Master Marksman), and Carnifex was the best anti-armor dps weapon in ME2 outside of the Mattock on Soldier.  But this made a certain amount of sense within the confines of those two games on the whole.  In ME3 power was supposed to be tied to weight, but that didn't materialize and so the system in actuality made little sense.

 

What I haven't been able to put together with the original post is that the Adept you describe doesn't really sound all that different to me from ME2 Adept... specialized powers with pistol / smg restriction. *shrug*

[straykat]

I'm all for emphasizing the action in these games, but I always liked the weapon restrictions. It's what was supposed to make a soldier unique. 

 

Perhaps if the melee system wasn't ass, I might not even think about it. That wouldn't be a bad tradeoff.

[MGW7]

The only issue with the mass effect three system is the weapons, not the underlying mechanics.

 

Making your weapons encumber you and reduce your ability to use powers in exchange for raw firepower is a great system, as the casters will choose to take light weapons, while the gunners take heavier guns, and reserve their power use.

 

Soldier powers are less cooldown intensive, such as grenades, and semi passives like adrenalin rush, as well as passives like the destroyer, allowing them to load up on guns without hurting.

 

Adept powers tend towards comboing, making high cooldowns dangerous, and reducing their damage output in many scenarios.

 

And here's where the trouble starts, light guns with huge firepower.

 

Such weapons as the harrier, lancer, and hurricane allow casters to outmatch soldiers in powers while maintaining parity with guns, and that defeats the point of the soldier.

 

Even the typhoon is light for how much power it outputs, to say nothing of the wraith, paladin, and others

 

Meanwhile the spitfire suffers huge weight issues, and although powerful does not even vaguely compete with the weight to power ratio of the other weapons. Most weapons fall into this category, not weak, just way to heavy for how much they do, while others are light, but do next to nothing, although these are not actually the problem guns, they are the ones that fit on the power curve and are balanced.

[AresKeith]

I'm all for emphasizing the action in these games, but I always liked the weapon restrictions. It's what was supposed to make a soldier unique.

Perhaps if the melee system wasn't ass, I might not even think about it. That wouldn't be a bad tradeoff.

It actually didn't make Soldiers unique, what would make them unique is having them solely having access to heavy weapons

[straykat]

It actually didn't make Soldiers unique, what would make them unique is having them solely having access to heavy weapons

 

Having all of them was unique. What am i missing here?

 

And heavy weapons didn't come until ME2, I thought?

[Laughing_Man]

What I haven't been able to put together with the original post is that the Adept you describe doesn't really sound all that different to me from ME2 Adept... specialized powers with pistol / smg restriction. *shrug*

 
The ME2 Adept might have specialized powers, but the idea that every second enemy is immune to biotics half of the time makes it a much less enjoyable class to play, I first have to go through the chore of stripping down the blue bar with my SMG.
 
And assuming you have many enemies with multiple defenses, that's even worse.
 
I can accept strong and Boss type enemies being able to resist crowd control effects, but if everyone was immune to biotics as long as they have the flimsiest shield on them, Asari Commandos (not to mention Justicars) and Krogan battle-masters wouldn't have been as scary as they are.
 
I guess it's a mixture of lore Vs. gameplay and rather tiresome (for me) gameplay mechanics.
 
I would say either remove CC immunity from most enemies regardless of shields and armor, or make most techniques at least partially effective all the time.

 

Adding more variety to damaging powers like Reave, Flare, Annihilation Field, Dark Channel, and similar, might also spice up gameplay experience.

 

Personally I would have also liked to choose between evolving the class to rely almost entirely on powers and disregard weapons,

Vs. sacrificing some biotic training for the ability to use some weapons more effectively.

(essentially the same idea as the two evolutions for Samara: Caedo Justicar Vs. Sapiens Justicar)

[capn233]

The only issue with the mass effect three system is the weapons, not the underlying mechanics.

 

Making your weapons encumber you and reduce your ability to use powers in exchange for raw firepower is a great system, as the casters will choose to take light weapons, while the gunners take heavier guns, and reserve their power use.

 

All things being equal, I would say a PRS system could help balance weapons versus powers.

 

The issue is the only iteration we have really seen was ME3 and it wholly failed in this task.  Not only were the guns not balanced via weight, but really the system itself pushed cooldowns artificially low, which in turn also had an impact on the combo system balance (or lack thereof).

 

Of course you can go through and attempt to balance the game by fixing all the weapon weights and possibly base damages, but the game would end up being fairly different.

[capn233]

Having all of them was unique. What am i missing here?

 

And heavy weapons didn't come until ME2, I thought?

 

Having all the weapons made sense within the confines of ME1 and ME2 (even though ME2 Soldier didn't actually get all the weapons, was ironically the only class that could never use a specific weapon class).

 

So it would depend on how specialized the weapon classes are.  If there is a reason to take a sniper or assault rifle over an SMG outside of simple RP, then it might matter.  If there largely isn't a practical difference, as was the case in ME3, then you can't really use that as the main feature of Soldier design.

[capn233]

 
The ME2 Adept might have specialized powers, but the idea that every second enemy is immune to biotics half of the time makes it a much less enjoyable class to play, I first have to go through the chore of stripping down the blue bar with my SMG.

 

Well this isn't really unique to Adept within ME2.  Everybody has to strip defenses from the enemies.

 

As far as how that is accomplished, there are a variety of options available.  Miranda or Garrus were my preferred choice for getting rid of that blue bar.

 

edit: I doubt that you can really start adding in many damaging biotics when you give Adept ability to CC protected units with basic type powers.  The class would end up essentially as a do everything class.

[Laughing_Man]

It actually didn't make Soldiers unique, what would make them unique is having them solely having access to heavy weapons

 

Having all of them was unique. What am i missing here?

 

And heavy weapons didn't come until ME2, I thought?

 

Personally, I think that making Soldier the only class capable of using LMGs and other heavy weapons makes sense.

 

Possibly also infiltrator as the only class capable of using sniper rifles. (most infiltrator builds are either shotgun infiltrator or sniper infiltrator anyway)

[straykat]

Having all the weapons made sense within the confines of ME1 and ME2 (even though Soldier didn't actually get all the weapons, was ironically the only class that could never use a specific weapon class).

 

So it would depend on how specialized the weapon classes are.  If there is a reason to take a sniper or assault rifle over an SMG outside of simple RP, then it might matter.  If there largely isn't a practical difference, as was the case in ME3, then you can't really use that as the main feature of Soldier design.

 

I think it depends on the maps/encounters. The better those are designed, the more fun a soldier is. At times, the variety of weapons made them feel like a person of tools... a tool for every job. No other class gave that feel. You had an answer for just about everything.. except maybe biotic shields (if you didn't have the bonus). 

[AresKeith]

Personally, I think that making Soldier the only class capable of using LMGs and other heavy weapons makes sense.

Possibly also infiltrator as the only class capable of using sniper rifles. (most infiltrator builds are either shotgun infiltrator or sniper infiltrator anyway)

That makes the most sense to me to give Soldiers their own special feel

[Laughing_Man]

Well this isn't really unique to Adept within ME2.  Everybody has to strip defenses from the enemies.

 

As far as how that is accomplished, there are a variety of options available.  Miranda or Garrus were my preferred choice for getting rid of that blue bar.

 

Only other classes are not dependent on the lack of shields to fulfill (or excel at) their role.

 

In essence, the role of Biotics becomes rather minor if it is reduced to only dealing with enemies that have a red bar.

 

As I mentioned above, adding more variety to the damage powers might be a partial solution as well.

[capn233]

I think it depends on the maps/encounters. The better those are designed, the more fun a soldier is. At times, the variety of weapons made them feel like a person of tools... a tool for every job. No other class gave that feel. You had an answer for just about everything.. except maybe biotic shields (if you didn't have the bonus). 

 

Yeah, as I said this works out alright in ME1 and ME2.  But it wouldn't have worked in ME3, even though they sort of attempted to go this route via PRS and alleged extra weight capacity bonus.  The main problems in ME3 were that there weren't really specialized tools any longer, to a large extent, and Soldier really didn't have more weight capacity than Adept or Engineer in practice (50 bonus).

[straykat]

Yeah, as I said this works out alright in ME1 and ME2.  But it wouldn't have worked in ME3, even though they sort of attempted to go this route via PRS and alleged extra weight capacity bonus.  The main problems in ME3 were that there weren't really specialized tools any longer, to a large extent, and Soldier really didn't have more weight capacity than Adept or Engineer in practice (50 bonus).

 

If they go that route again, then the weight needs some severe restrictions to it. And by severe, I mean it... screw them over, I say

[Laughing_Man]

If they go that route again, then the weight needs some severe restrictions to it. And by severe, I mean it... screw them over, I say

 

Just restrict weapon training and be done with the problem.

 

Casters use pistols and possibly SMGs, Vanguard get access to Shotguns and possibly Rifles in addition to pistols & SMG,

Infiltrators SR and Shotgun, Sentinel Rifles, Soldier uses all weapons + LMG & heavy weapons.

[straykat]

Just restrict weapon training and be done with the problem.

 

Casters use pistols and possibly SMGs, Vanguard get access to Shotguns and possibly Rifles in addition to pistols & SMG,

Infiltrators SR and Shotgun, Sentinel Rifles, Soldier uses all weapons + LMG & heavy weapons.

 

So basically, ME2? I'm cool with that. The whole weight thing is just a roundabout way of getting there.

 

However, I still think Biotics (and even some tech powers) need more flashiness/environmental impact. Even a minor improvement would be nice.

[Laughing_Man]

It would also help if weapon designs are less insane and we don't have pistols that are better than shotguns, shotguns that are used as sniper rifles,

sniper rifles that are used as assault rifles, etc.

[capn233]

Only other classes are not dependent on the lack of shields to fulfill their role.

 

In essence, the role of Biotics becomes rather minor if it is reduced to only dealing with enemies that have a red bar.

 

As I mentioned above, adding more variety to the damage powers might be a partial solution as well.

 

Every class has to deal with shields on shielded enemies.

 

I already addressed the red bar thing.  It doesn't make sense if the majority of enemies you fight have more health than shields, and you can always damage protections faster than health.

 

Basic merc human/batarian/salarian trooper is 150 shields 200 health on Insanity.  Basic turian/asari mercs are 150 / 250.  Your SMG either does 1.5x or 2.25x dmg to shields vs 1x damage to health.  Overload does 2x damage to shields, 1x to synthetic health or 0x to organic health.  There are no damage powers that do more damage to health than to protections.

 

Bonus to health via non-ammo powers is indirect via ragdoll, and Adept has four different ways to ragdoll for different situations.  The role of biotics is only minimized if the player chooses to minimize it.

[Laughing_Man]

Every class has to deal with shields on shielded enemies.

 

But every other class is only about either simply shooting the enemy / stripping said protections / "summoning",

and their abilities are effective 100% of the time. (hell, Incinerate and Overload both strip defenses AND provide some CC)

 

Telling me to rely on an SMG or that I should use a particular squad-mate isn't really solving the problem.

[Giantdeathrobot]

Still don't see what weapon restrictions add to the game. Maybe the weight system needs a rebalance, but that doesn't mean we must go back to the overly restrictive ME1/ME2 system.

 

Give the Soldier exclusive use of specialised heavy weapons to fit their niche, sure. But the base weapon types (rifles, sniper, shotgun, pistol, SMG) should be available to everyone. Classes should be distinguished by unique mechanics, not telling an Adept he's too inept to fire a rifle or a shotgun. Soldiers will have heavy weapons, Vanguards their Charge, Engineers their drone (hopefully made better/customisable in Andromeda), Sentinel their tech barrier making them the tankiest class, Infiltrators their cloak and sniper slo-mo, and Adepts have... I dunno, the only class able to prime and detonate their own biotic explosions? or maybe a new, class definiing power.

 

All of this, of course, assumes Andromeda uses the same classes and power suites as the original trilogy did. Maybe they will change the formula much more than we imagine. I wonder how a classless model would work in Mass Effect, where you pick and chose your abilities. I guess the one big obstacle is biotic vs non-biotic in this case.

[Laughing_Man]

Still don't see what weapon restrictions add to the game. Maybe the weight system needs a rebalance, but that doesn't mean we must go back to the overly restrictive ME1/ME2 system.

 

...

 

...and Adepts have... I dunno, the only class able to prime and detonate their own biotic explosions? or maybe a new, class definiing power.

 

It's less that I like weapon restrictions so much and more that some people are very concerned about balance.

I'd rather an adept stronger at what makes him unique - Biotics, than a jack of all trades that isn't a master even of his own unique craft.

 

And the way you described adepts is precisely my point, compared to other classes they feel... uninteresting despite the fact that by logic and lore they should have access to some rather awesome stuff.

 

Edit: A class-less system could work by presenting you with a single choice at the begining, Biotic Vs. non Biotic,

the rest would be more or less up to you.