Grumpy Old Wizard wrote...
No offense, but a lot of people don't want to play the adept as a soldier. I see you are constantly shooting. When I what to play like a soldier I play a combat class. The adept I play as a "wizard." In fact, the official adept video talkes about the adept killing and controling crowds without firing a shot. As an adept I should be able to play without firing a shot except in the early stages of the game and still be effective. The adept is supposedly the biotic master.
I certainly think that making the warp not damage health would be a very very very poor change. It is strange to say "Oh, let's make warp less useful so that the players will be forced to use skills that are not as useful." Not my idea of how to balance the adept.
Oh, and I disagree that the speed that classes that clear levels at does not matter.
I was shooting a lot because I was running with jacob and grunt in tight quarters.
I can upload a video of me running through that mission again with a different squad setup and without firing a single shot if you want. I bet I could clear it as quickly or even more quickly.
But lets be honest here, in ME1, on insanity mode... Adepts shot a LOT. You CC everything and then you sit there for what seems like ages shooting at the helpless ragdolls. Are you going to tell me you went through ME1 as an adept on insanity without firing your weapon? How long did that take?
You might not think that nerfing warp would be the best decision, but I can tell you that it's very likely that is what a game designer would do. Lets assume warp is the best ability we have, and that spamming it is by far the most effective way to play. (I disagree, but a lot of the community thinks this, so lets just assume it's true.)
There are two options: Buff up the other skills so that they are as strong as warp, or nerf warp so that people use all the skills.
1. Which of those changes would take the most reprogramming? The one where you change one ability, or the one where you change 3?
2. What makes more sense from a game design standpoint?, to make the hardest difficulty in the game harder, or to make the hardest difficulty in the game easier? It's insanity mode, not "jaunty walk in the park" mode. It should be challenging.
3. What happens to players who like a challenge if you do make the hardest difficuly in the game easier? They have no options but to mod out the changes through the .ini files. 360 players would be boned. What happens to players who want the game to be easy if you make the hardest mode harder? They play a lower difficulty setting and have the same level of challenge.
In game design, it's almost always easier to nerf one outstanding ability than to buff every other ability up to that level. It's easier to program, and if you constantly buff a class to iron out disparities, you end up inflating the power of a class to the point where you need to nerf everything again anyway because it's too easy to play. This is especially true when you're balancing difficulties that are supposed to be hard! All things being equal, you should always favor changes that make it more difficult over ones that make it easier.
If we were balancing casual mode, then I would say sure, buff everything! It's casual mode, what harm would making it easier have? I wouldn't ever reccomend a nerf to anything in casual mode, because if people want a harder difficulty, they can just turn up the difficulty setting.
-edit-
rumination888 wrote...
...I have absolutely no clue how you came up with the conclusion that its the same logic.
Spamming cloaksnipe means you're spamming an ability.
Do you want to know what the Soldier and Infiltrator, and to a lesser extent the Sentinel and Engineer, have in common compared to the 2 classes that people complain about the most(Vanguard and Adept)? The former have different, but effective, variations within their class. The latter? Not so much.
It's exactly the same. Read the optimality topic and look at all the stuff hoffburger has to say about the most effective way to play the infiltrator class. It was pretty much accepted by everyone in the topic but me that maxing out tungsten ammo and cloaksniping was the most efficient and best way to play the class.
I was all for actually using cryo ammo and the pistol in certain situations but nobody agreed with me and everyone insisted that they're a complete waste of points and should never be used.
It's the same logic. Every class has multiple ways to play the class, and by definition some of them are going to be slightly less effective than others. But we're playing a single player game so as long as you can get through a level reasonably quickly, there's no reason to use one build over another besides the fact that that build fits your playstyle.
Nobody would ever reccomend an engineer use cryo blast, even though it's a fun ability to use and very useful in a lot of situations. The community decided it was slightly less useful than the rest of the skills and now everyone reccomends new players not to use it at all.
And finally, what is your threshold for effectiveness? Do you only ever use the most effective strategy for every class no matter what the difference in effectiveness is and no matter how boring it is? Do you think you could quantify a little so that I can try to prove it's doable with my setup?
Modifié par Soruyao, 11 février 2010 - 09:01 .
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
