Mass Effect 3.5 Does this thread have a soul?

[Landis963]

What might a Quarian Soldier look like? Think Kal'Reegar or Dorn'Hazt (the dying quarian from Zaal'Koris' rescue mission). Marksman is a shoo-in. Energy Drain or something to boost shields might be helpful. Sentry Turret? It impinges on Engineer territory a bit, but it might help with its effectiveness.

[Morty]

I think the Quarian Soldier should stick to combat powers to avoid stepping on the Engineers' and Infiltrators' toes.
And I'm having really rotten luck with multiplayer servers lately. Either I can't connect at all, or I get disconnected or the whole team gets disconnected...

[Xondoure]

I've found that a Vanguards best friend is other Vanguards. Suddenly mobs that would crush you are in a constant state of knock back as your syncopated charges and novas make short work of pretty much everything. Throw in a reave spamming adept and I imagine the results would be comical.

[Psyren]

Quarian Soldier could be given a techy feel via Defense Matrix or Defense Drone. But I would like another hybrid class like Justicar Adept (which is more of an Adept-Soldier than a true Adept.)

And I'd really like another class with Decoy.

[Ertwin]

GITP Name : Ertwin
Gaming System : PC
Name on Gaming System : Ertwin
Preferred Classes :Krogan Soldier, salarian/quarian infiltrator are my most played.

[Landis963]

Quarian Soldier could be given a techy feel via Defense Matrix or Defense Drone. But I would like another hybrid class like Justicar Adept (which is more of an Adept-Soldier than a true Adept.)

And I'd really like another class with Decoy.

I'd forgotten about Defense Matrix. That'd be a good secondary defense power. Maybe Proximity Mine for the offense power? Decoy seems too Engineer-ey to justify it in a class marked "soldier". It really is too bad that it's relegated to EDI and to the Salarian Engineer.

[Starsign]

Quarian Soldier could be given a techy feel via Defense Matrix or Defense Drone. But I would like another hybrid class like Justicar Adept (which is more of an Adept-Soldier than a true Adept.)

And I'd really like another class with Decoy.

Well Defense Matrix and Defense Drone sounds like it can work well, however I can't help but feel Defense Matrix is made for AIs (hence EDI) so instead I imagine them with Tech Armor (which does make them a Sentinel instead...) As an idea for a third power, how about another grenade type? I can very much so imagine a Quarian Soldier with something like Electricity Grenade or Shock Grenade, devastates Shields/Barriers and Synthetics while shocking everything within range.

Actually, here's what I'll suggest for Quarian Soldier/Sentinel.

Spoiler

Show

Soldier:
Marksman
Defense Drone
Shock Grenade

Sentinel:
Tech Armor
Overload
Cyro Blast

Any opinions? I figured most Sentinels had a serious lack of the "tech" side to them so one that is more techy might fit for a Quarian Sentinel.

EDIT: Actually, looking back on the Quarian Sentinel's setup, something about it doesn't seem very... Cooperative with it's powers. Probably the Cyro Blast and Overload part.

[ShinyRocks]

The Veteran Pack Gods finally smiled upon me!

Locust I and Ultralight Materials I! In the same Veteran Pack!

[Wraith]

Killing lots of stuff ISN'T always a real asset to the team as a whole, though, but it IS always an asset to someone's point score, whereas things that ARE (although not always, just as killing stuff isn't always a real asset) an asset to the team as a whole (completing objectives, reviving dead team members, placing decoys/turrets) are given disproportionately small point values. There are times where killing a lot of things is not helping the team at all. This is particularly true in the case of the objective rounds.

I am not asking this to be obtuse, I am genuinely interested; what examples are there, where killing lots of the enemy is not a good thing?

I can only think of one or two examples - a Banshee that has successfully been stun-locked into a distant, unthreatening corner can now respawn somewhere more threatening springs right to mind - where it's even just an inconvinience. I mean, yeah, killing enemies on the other side of the map isn't as helpful as killing the ones that are immediately threatening the team, but I'm struggling to see why it's ever a 'bad' thing. Especially since in 7/11 of the Waves the only requirement is to defeat a finite number of enemies.

But the point system doesn't differentiate from either of those behaviors and that of being halfway across the map from either objective and killing enemies that are nowhere near the current objective while there is a group hitting the rest of the team. The Vanguard gets about as many points as the team completing the objectives (and a ton more than the person 'activating') and is actually contributing much less. And the game rewards this behavior (in the mind of many a player...as has been mentioned, scoring systems encourage going for a higher score).

[/quote]

Oh, okay. That makes a lot more sense. So you're not advocating giving LESS points to successful Vanguards, but instead it'd be a case of giving MORE points to Players who are achieving objectives so that the two balance out? In which case, I agree with you unanimously.

No it's not "always an asset" because as I've said before, the other team members have guns and powers too - they're not in the match merely to be tourists. (Though you can be forgiven for thinking they are if you only look at the scoreboard, which is the problem.)

For instance, your example - a crowd of Marauders might as well be so much tissue paper to a class with Chain Overload, Energy Drain or Bubble Stasis. The mighty hero Vanguard is not rescuing all the shrieking damsels in distress, he is robbing points from classes that could easily make those kills without him.

Ah, now I think I have an insight - please correct me if I am wrong or appearing rude, as I offer this merely as an observation, however: You are not entitled to any points at all.

Trying to get the highest score is not the objective of the game. You don't get a bigger reward for coming first than you do 4th, it's just a measure of what you have already earned. 50,000 in first place, is worth the same number of medals and bonuses even if you get 50,000 in 4th. No, the objective of the game is to survive to the end of the last wave and get extracted.

Whatever you do to get to that point, is entirely down to you. No one is "robbing" points from other players, they're going out there and getting them for themselves because those points are walking around waiting to be gotten.
You're right in saying that the other Players aren't there as 'Tourists' - that means that they're expected to fight and achieve for themselves, not be spoon-fed points or to expect the Vanguard to sit back and watch them have their fun.

This is a hard mentality to overcome, but the scoreboard, in so far as finishing the mission goes, is irrelevent. It is a PvP mechanic is a Co-Op setting and it's primary purpose is to promote competitiveness where there is no need for any. It's all part of the elaborate trap to make people keep playing, each time harder and faster to beat their own 'personal best' or - in this case - beat That Guy who pipped you to the post in the last game.

Quarian Soldier could be given a techy feel via Defense Matrix or Defense Drone. But I would like another hybrid class like Justicar Adept (which is more of an Adept-Soldier than a true Adept.)

I agree with the Defense Matrix idea - as well as being useful, it fits the 'fluff' of the game with the idea that Quarian Soldiers are forced to wear Enviro-suits... so why not wear ARMOURED Enviro-suits into combat?

Admittedly I would prefer to see the Drone, though that is because I just happen to like seeing them about.

[thugthrasher]

I am not asking this to be obtuse, I am genuinely interested; what examples are there, where killing lots of the enemy is not a good thing?

[I can only think of one or two examples - a Banshee that has successfully been stun-locked into a distant, unthreatening corner can now respawn somewhere more threatening springs right to mind - where it's even just an inconvinience. I mean, yeah, killing enemies on the other side of the map isn't as helpful as killing the ones that are immediately threatening the team, but I'm struggling to see why it's ever a 'bad' thing. Especially since in 7/11 of the Waves the only requirement is to defeat a finite number of enemies.

I never said killing enemies was necessarily a "bad" thing (although occasionally it has bad side effects, which I'll get into in a second), just that it doesn't always really help. (the "really" is kind of key there, there is always the benefit of there being less enemies currently on the screen, which is technically a plus, but if everyone dies because you are killing enemies, it is a net negative).

In most of the rounds (non-objectives), it is NEARLY always good for someone to be mass killing enemies, if they can. In objective rounds, it doesn't always provide any ACTUAL benefit to the party, though.

Examples:

Spoiler

Show

In any objective round, if you are killing enemies on the other side of the map from the objectives and your party members are dying or unable to complete the objectives because there are too many enemies actually NEAR the objectives, you are not providing any actual help. Sure, you are killing the enemies before they can get to the party, but if the difference between killing the far-away enemies now or killing the close enemies now and the far-away enemies when they get there is the difference between success and failure (I've seen it happen), then you aren't actually doing any good.

As odd as it sounds, if it is a "kill the target" objective round, there are times in which I have seen a Vanguard bounce around to non-target after non-target as the rest of the party died and/or time ran out. The first I can understand, the second one I can't. I understand trying to keep enemies off the party, but if there are 20 seconds left on the clock and the target is at full health, you better be pounding him with everything you have or you aren't helping at all.

Even in the "regular" waves, though, just killing lots of enemies isn't always the best plan. If you have 3 party members down and are within rezzing distance, you should be heading towards them and only hitting enemies that are either likely to kill you immediately OR get you closer to the party (advantages of being a vanguard, there). If you don't do that, you are hindering success. As good as you are, chances are that you will have a better chance of beating the wave with the rest of the party. Of course, this is a moot point if there are only a few enemies left.

The situations where mindlessly killing enemies doesn't help much are definitely less common than the ones where lots of killing helps, but they aren't exactly where.

Oh, okay. That makes a lot more sense. So you're not advocating giving LESS points to successful Vanguards, but instead it'd be a case of giving MORE points to Players who are achieving objectives so that the two balance out? In which case, I agree with you unanimously.

Well, I'm advocating either giving less points for killing or giving more points for objectives (I'd prefer the second one). So that players are encouraged to do things that help the party. I wouldn't mind seeing something that gives you a slight bonus for staying within X yards of a non-kill objective (kind of like with hack, but extending beyond the area of the hack itself), but I can understand why that would not get put into place.

Ah, now I think I have an insight - please correct me if I am wrong or appearing rude, as I offer this merely as an observation, however: You are not entitled to any points at all
....<snip>...
This is a hard mentality to overcome, but the scoreboard, in so far as finishing the mission goes, is irrelevent. It is a PvP mechanic is a Co-Op setting and it's primary purpose is to promote competitiveness where there is no need for any. It's all part of the elaborate trap to make people keep playing, each time harder and faster to beat their own 'personal best' or - in this case - beat That Guy who pipped you to the post in the last game.

This whole thing is part of my point. The points don't ACTUALLY matter, yes, but they encourage people to try to get higher point scores. So, some people will do whatever they can to get higher point scores (as they have the mentality of "I need more points, regardless of actual objectives"), regardless of how useful it is. This leads to people just mindlessly killing everything they can, regardless of strategy (and it's especially obvious when Vanguards do it, as they/we draw attention, with the fast, destructive movement).

[SiuiS]

I think that referring to this sort of thing as either "Bad" or "Good" is a misnomer until you know the intention of the player, rather than the class.

Each of the classes have a specific role to play - the Vanguard's role is high-risk shock tactics, and their abilities are suited to hitting small crowds.

This I disagree with, just in general.
Each class, even each specific class/race combo, has several builds viable to it; only human vanguard and to a lesser extent sentinels have obvious best choices or an obvious bad choice. A human vanguard can be sapper, dropping shock waves and nova. They can be a standard nova!guard and play the part of the smart bomb. They could work like soldiers as well; snipers with evac buttons. Medics with field clearing capacity. That the vanguard has a certain role is kind of against the point of having five options in every class with plenty of room for practice and play.

Does anyone know where you can get Ultra-Rares? I'd love to get my Javelin on, plzthx.

I got one from a specter pack; whichever one says 'small chance of ultra rarest' has a shot. But it's not a good shot.

Well, I'd say my worst experiences have been with Vanguards. Like you suggest, they fall into two categories. There's the non-charging ones who just run around punching stuff and die. And then there's the ones who do charge around but end up miles away and die. But at least they kill stuff first. However, the fact that they get lots of kills before they die leads them to believe that they're Doing It Right.

I also had one yelling at me (like literally over his mic, 'I'M RIGHT THERE!!') for not rezzing him even though it was the end of the wave so he was about to pop up again anyway, and the fact that the reason he died was because a Cerberus Turret tore through him so I was taking that out first because there's no way I'd have survived a Turret ripping me apart for the length of time it takes to do a rez.

But then I've played with/seen loads of good Vanguards. And loads of bad players of other classes. (An Infiltrator with just a shotgun. An Engineer who never once used Overload on a Geth match. And so on.)

I think that bad Vanguards are just more noticeable because their style of play is so attention-grabbing. You notice what the Vanguard on your team is doing more than the other classes, in my experience.

What makes a good vanguard?
I've settled on either being That Vanguard and just pulling back when my score gets too up there, or sniping with a pistol for most of the match and only dropping bombs when things get hairy. But that's not being a good vanguard, that's just not being a Gilda.

How do you notice which enemies are the ones not immediately being killed by allies but who will become a threat? Does a good vanguard create situations to showcase his talents or does he practice mindfulness?

The only kind of Vanguard I usually play for Gold matches is the Asari Vanguard... With no points in Biotic Charge. (instead I make ludicrous use of Stasis and Lift Grenades) I'd use the Asari Adept instead, but I don't have either of them.

...Would it be considered wrong to play a Vanguard without using it's signature skill? My weapon options are garbage (best thing I have is a Geth Plasma SMG II and a Widow I) so I typically end up having a set that gives maximum power cooldown. I really, really, REALLY wish I had the Geth Plasma Shotgun...

Not at all! The most successful Asari vanguard I've ever games with used stasis bubble and a sniper rifle. Sucker was a beast with that set-up. Heck, it wasn't until he hit a husk with charge to save himself during a TPK that irvrnknew he was a vanguard!
Bloke is apparently a US marine stationed in Okinawa, so he might just be more adept at the toolset, but he told me otherwise so *shrug*

The point of the game right now is to beat missions. If you meet that minimum, you're good. If you want to play the adept with a claymore, a widow, and like, twenty second cool downs? Do it! I have. It's hilarious.

[James the Dark]

To weigh in on the Vanguard KotH issue:

One of the hardest fights I had as a Vanguard that didn't involve Banshees was Geth on Silver on Fire Base... the red city one. It dropped the Hill on the worst spot: The spawn. Now, that's low ground surrounded on all sides by defended highground, so the three were in the worst of possible positions, made worse by the fact that I hadn't had enough time to force the flashlights to spawn where I wanted them to.

I spent the entire round bouncing through the buildings which were utterly vomiting forth geth, pounding out Pyros and Hunters by the dozen, just to give the people down in the ditch the freedom to deal with the Primes which were sauntering their way. Say what you will about a Novaguard, they're great at dealing with the trash which diverts attention. And there are few things as attention diverting as suddenly finding a shotgun going off in your face.

I think the easiest way to say it is that if the Novagard is a dink, he's going to be a dink no matter what he's playing. It's just that he'll be a high-scoring dink. But if your Novagard wants to earn his payday, then he'll clear brush like no other.

[Landis963]

Actually, here's what I'll suggest for Quarian Soldier/Sentinel.

Spoiler

Show

Soldier:
Marksman
Defense Drone
Shock Grenade

Sentinel:
Tech Armor
Overload
Cyro Blast

Any opinions? I figured most Sentinels had a serious lack of the "tech" side to them so one that is more techy might fit for a Quarian Sentinel.

I'd actually completely forgotten about Shock Grenade (didn't know it existed, in fact), so that would be the perfect fit for a Quarian Soldier. However, disagree on the "built for AIs" thing; Quarians need engineering training in order to provide the necessary maintenance for their ships, and all quarians should reflect that beyond the racial shield bonus (and most do: the only quarians available are Engies and Infs), hence why Defense Matrix can be easily and literally handwaved with the Quarian Soldier whipping out his omni-tool every time he turns it on or purges the armor.
EDIT: Also, Shepard can use Defense Matrix (as a bonus power). If he can use it, so can a Quarian.

I got one from a specter pack; whichever one says 'small chance of ultra rarest' has a shot. But it's not a good shot.

Dingit. Why did you remove those 99000-cred packs, Bioware/EA/whoever's in charge of MP balance?

[Sholos]

The Veteran Pack Gods finally smiled upon me!

Locust I and Ultralight Materials I! In the same Veteran Pack!

Too bad ULM only works on the Geth SMG...

And I must disagree with whoever said that an Infiltrator with only a shotgun is a bad build. Cloak, get in close, lay waste to whatever you want. The damage boost is stupid.

[Mr._Blinky]

But then I've played with/seen loads of good Vanguards. And loads of bad players of other classes. (An Infiltrator with just a shotgun. An Engineer who never once used Overload on a Geth match. And so on.)

This is actually a completely legitimate play-style, and is easily the second most popular build for Infiltrators; in fact, all of my Infiltrators use shotguns exclusively. Shotfiltrators benefit from the cloaked damage boost just as much as the snipers do, but are instead played as flankers and harassers, using cloak to get behind enemies and take them out with headshots while their attention is diverted. Played right, it's absolutely devastating.

[Starsign]

Not at all! The most successful Asari vanguard I've ever games with used stasis bubble and a sniper rifle. Sucker was a beast with that set-up. Heck, it wasn't until he hit a husk with charge to save himself during a TPK that irvrnknew he was a vanguard!
Bloke is apparently a US marine stationed in Okinawa, so he might just be more adept at the toolset, but he told me otherwise so *shrug*

The point of the game right now is to beat missions. If you meet that minimum, you're good. If you want to play the adept with a claymore, a widow, and like, twenty second cool downs? Do it! I have. It's hilarious.

Ah, right! Well the build has been really good so far. The only weapon my character uses atm is a Geth Plasma SMG II, which isn't exactly the most useful weapon to use. I have a Widow I which I might use. That's been reliable with my Geth Infiltrator. Would that be a good idea or would it end up in the "dumb idea" strategy? I'm typically not the best when it comes to good strategies in multiplayer.

I'd actually completely forgotten about Shock Grenade (didn't know it existed, in fact), so that would be the perfect fit for a Quarian Soldier. However, disagree on the "built for AIs" thing; Quarians need engineering training in order to provide the necessary maintenance for their ships, and all quarians should reflect that beyond the racial shield bonus (and most do: the only quarians available are Engies and Infs), hence why Defense Matrix can be easily and literally handwaved with the Quarian Soldier whipping out his omni-tool every time he turns it on or purges the armor.

Um... Shock Grenade doesn't actually exist, at least not yet. It was just an idea I came up with. Well either way, sure Defense Matrix can work, just for Sentinel I feel Tech Armor is better and for Soldier I feel it needs a move like Marksman to give it a more "gunny" feel

[Zevox]

No it's not "always an asset" because as I've said before, the other team members have guns and powers too - they're not in the match merely to be tourists. (Though you can be forgiven for thinking they are if you only look at the scoreboard, which is the problem.)

That's completely beside the point. That other players could make those kills too doesn't change the fact that the Vanguard did, and deserves recognition for such, nor that not having to make those kills makes things easier on the others - just as others killing enemies makes the Vanguard's life easier since there becomes fewer enemies he has to deal with.

Also, lines like this:

The mighty hero Vanguard is not rescuing all the shrieking damsels in distress, he is robbing points from classes that could easily make those kills without him.

really make it sound like you just don't like Vanguards. Other players making kills is not robbing you or anyone else of those kills, it's just other players making kills, no matter who it may be.

Zevox

[SiuiS]

Ah, right! Well the build has been really good so far. The only weapon my character uses atm is a Geth Plasma SMG II, which isn't exactly the most useful weapon to use. I have a Widow I which I might use. That's been reliable with my Geth Infiltrator. Would that be a good idea or would it end up in the "dumb idea" strategy?

Depends on if you can make it work, of course!

Widow and geth SMG work relatively well. You're going to be a sniper who freezes enemies instead of slowing time. Especially since you've got grenades
You'd be rather backline, unless you're good at quickly scoping in at close range (which is the sniper rifle version of just not using the aim function at all, but more complicated for almost no reason), but you've got a couple good panic buttons. Stasis (especially a bubble version if you can, it's totally fabulous) gives you time to flee, grenades work swell when you heave them into someone's face at point blank, the heavy melee is... Better than nothing, especially after a charge, and if you're clever you can use the biotic slide to get out of dodge - its faster to slide than run, except it eats barriers all to heck.

[Psyren]

The Veteran Pack Gods finally smiled upon me!

Locust I and Ultralight Materials I! In the same Veteran Pack!

I wouldn't rejoice at ULM; I think it's still bugged.

This is a hard mentality to overcome, but the scoreboard, in so far as finishing the mission goes, is irrelevent.

If that's truly the case, why include a scoreboard at all? If they're not going to make it account for actions it should be accounting for, then it's poor design.

That's completely beside the point. That other players could make those kills too doesn't change the fact that the Vanguard did, and deserves recognition for such, nor that not having to make those kills makes things easier on the others - just as others killing enemies makes the Vanguard's life easier since there becomes fewer enemies he has to deal with.

You keep making that assumption; as long as you hold it so dear then we're just not going to see eye to eye.

Also, lines like this:

really make it sound like you just don't like Vanguards.

Nonsense - I do play them, you know
My issue is with the scoreboard - Vanguards are merely the easiest way to see its failings.

[Mr._Blinky]

So the Geth Infiltrator melee build is insane, though ridiculously vulnerable. I chose to ignore Networked AI completely, going 6/6/6/0/6 on powers. General strategy was to cloak, run up to some guys and prox. mine them, and then drop to the floor and start repeatedly hitting the heavy melee; if you can get the rhythm down it's actually far better to pulse, let yourself stand up, and then pulse again rather than holding the attack. You end up with no shields by the end of an attack, but you also usually end up wiping out everything in about a 5 meter radius, so it's absolutely brutal for clearing out mooks; I can usually take out a Phantom in at most two pulses, even on Gold. The one downside is that between Tactical Cloak and the pulse eating up your shields, you almost never have shields and you're rarely beyond a sliver of health, so you'll get downed by Assault Troopers and Cannibals a lot. It's an extremely high-risk, high-reward style of play, but good lord is it fun.

[Starsign]

So the Geth Infiltrator melee build is insane, though ridiculously vulnerable. I chose to ignore Networked AI completely, going 6/6/6/0/6 on powers. General strategy was to cloak, run up to some guys and prox. mine them, and then drop to the floor and start repeatedly hitting the heavy melee; if you can get the rhythm down it's actually far better to pulse, let yourself stand up, and then pulse again rather than holding the attack. You end up with no shields by the end of an attack, but you also usually end up wiping out everything in about a 5 meter radius, so it's absolutely brutal for clearing out mooks; I can usually take out a Phantom in at most two pulses, even on Gold. The one downside is that between Tactical Cloak and the pulse eating up your shields, you almost never have shields and you're rarely beyond a sliver of health, so you'll get downed by Assault Troopers and Cannibals a lot. It's an extremely high-risk, high-reward style of play, but good lord is it fun.

I've noticed that a Geth Infiltrator Melee build can seemingly be viable. Why Proximity Mine however? I thought Networked AI gave bonuses to melee damage.

[Mr._Blinky]

I've noticed that a Geth Infiltrator Melee build can seemingly be viable. Why Proximity Mine however? I thought Networked AI gave bonuses to melee damage.

Networked AI improves Power Damage, Weight, and Weapon+Geth Weapon Damage, none of which do anything to help your melee. I don't even need the weight, since I just run around with a pistol with a Melee Stunner and have 200% cooldowns, and I've barely even used the gun for shooting. Instead I use Prox. Mine because I can blast it into a group of enemies without uncloaking for the 20% damage bonus and to soften them up a bit, and then I run in and start the pulses.

[Zevox]

You keep making that assumption; as long as you hold it so dear then we're just not going to see eye to eye.

I do not see what you find so hard to understand about the concept, since you seem to keep misunderstanding that statement in ways that baffle me. Enemies shooting at someone else or dead = easier time for the players who didn't get shot at by them or have to kill them themselves. This is universally true. Even if they'd be no real threat - and given the number of enemies Vanguards can distract or kill relatively quickly, that's an assumption you shouldn't necessarily make - no effort needed is still less than minor effort needed.

Zevox

[Psyren]

I do not see what you find so hard to understand about the concept, since you seem to keep misunderstanding that statement in ways that baffle me. Enemies shooting at someone else or dead = easier time for the players who didn't get shot at by them or have to kill them themselves.

Yes, but there is a level of opposition that any class can handle (this goes back to my "we have guns too, you know" point.) Making the team's lives easier is one thing, while forcing them to hunt around the map for something, anything to kill is quite another. I see a lot of Vanguard-led groups end up doing the latter - and the scoreboard turns around and lavishes praise on that individual, reinforcing the behavior.


Let me try one last time to summarize the issue. Say you have two hypothetical vanguards:

Spoiler

Show

Vanguard A is a team player who locks down groups of enemies near objectives. His support prevents the others from being overwhelmed as their mobility is more restricted, and his ability to offensively teleport allows him to quickly flank oncoming forces, providing a tactical advantage to his fellows.

Vanguard B couldn't care less about anyone else's fun - his teammates are there to grab the mission objectives he can't be bothered with because his eyes are glued to the scoreboard. Because he can effectively heal himself and attack at the same time, he has no real reason to stay with the group - and the higher score he gets by locating enemies on his own actually discourages such teamwork. Due to being off by himself, hacks take longer (3 players hacking), and he likes it that way because that means more spawns to beef up his count.

The question is - which of these Vanguards does the game say is doing better in the end? Which playstyle does the game encourage?

The answer is that the scoreboard doesn't care. Even if A and B break even with one another, that's still a problem because B's playstyle should not be rewarded.

The scoreboard is the only feedback provided by the game at the end of a match, and the player ranked "first" on it is merely the one that has dealt the most damage. The game validates and rewards a "lone wolf" playstyle because that's the surest way to rack up lots of points - taking on a pack of enemies by yourself.

I have nothing against Vanguards - they are simply the class best equipped for this style of play. It's the scoreboard that says "look how awesome this guy is! Why does he have to carry the rest of you?" that I take issue with.

And if you don't see my perspective after that, further back-and-forth is meaningless so I'll drop it.

[MachineWraith]

*Snip*

What Psyren is saying, I think, is that the Vanguard in question running about and clearing the map makes the game less fun for everyone else.

Yes, it's easier to have less people shooting at you. But having only a few people shooting at you is also boring. I, for one, don't join a Gold match so that I can do nothing but sit in the circle and win. I like a bit of a challenge, and I like to get a few kills myself. If the Vanguard runs off, ignoring the objective, while the rest of the team takes care of it for him, and gets all the kills, nobody but the Vanguard is having any fun.

That's my take, anyway.

[Zevox]

Yes, but there is a level of opposition that any class can handle (this goes back to my "we have guns too, you know" point.)

You keep going back to that. Again, I have never said anything otherwise - that's simply completely beside the point. That other players on the team could handle what any given other player killed does not invalidate the value of that other player killing them. Otherwise everyone's contributions on a team full of competent people would all be completely null, because after all, their teammates could handle things without any given one of them.

Making the team's lives easier is one thing, while forcing them to hunt around the map for something, anything to kill is quite another. I see a lot of Vanguard-led groups end up doing the latter - and the scoreboard turns around and lavishes praise on that individual, reinforcing the behavior.

If the game ever gets to that point, it means the Vanguard has done so well he's effectively won the fight for the team. In which case he fully deserves that praise.

Let me try one last time to summarize the issue. Say you have two hypothetical vanguards:

Spoiler

Show

Vanguard A is a team player who locks down groups of enemies near objectives. His support prevents the others from being overwhelmed as their mobility is more restricted, and his ability to offensively teleport allows him to quickly flank oncoming forces, providing a tactical advantage to his fellows.

Vanguard B couldn't care less about anyone else's fun - his teammates are there to grab the mission objectives he can't be bothered with because his eyes are glued to the scoreboard. Because he can effectively heal himself and attack at the same time, he has no real reason to stay with the group - and the higher score he gets by locating enemies on his own actually discourages such teamwork. Due to being off by himself, hacks take longer (3 players hacking), and he likes it that way because that means more spawns to beef up his count.

The question is - which of these Vanguards does the game say is doing better in the end? Which playstyle does the game encourage?

The answer is that the scoreboard doesn't care. Even if A and B break even with one another, that's still a problem because B's playstyle should not be rewarded.

The scoreboard is the only feedback provided by the game at the end of a match, and the player ranked "first" on it is merely the one that has dealt the most damage. The game validates and rewards a "lone wolf" playstyle because that's the surest way to rack up lots of points - taking on a pack of enemies by yourself.

I have nothing against Vanguards - they are simply the class best equipped for this style of play. It's the scoreboard that says "look how awesome this guy is! Why does he have to carry the rest of you?" that I take issue with.

And if you don't see my perspective after that, further back-and-forth is meaningless so I'll drop it.

I see where you're coming from to an extent - and as I've said before, I agree that the scoreboard is flawed and can be inaccurate in certain circumstances, that included. I simply think you overstate the problem vastly, particularly when you argue that the scoreboard is always a bad metric for how well players performed.

What Psyren is saying, I think, is that the Vanguard in question running about and clearing the map makes the game less fun for everyone else.

I don't think that's what he's saying at all, nor do I think it's an accurate statement. If the Vanguard can clear the map without the rest of the team, he's either extremely good, or he's high level and playing on Bronze, in which case he probably was doing it solely because he wanted an easy match.

Zevox

[Xondoure]

So I did something awesome today. Last week I stopped buying things. This week I promoted my entire team and then bout 345000 worth of recruit packs 420000 worth of veteran packs and a single specter pack.

That was possibly the most rewarding moment I've ever had in any multiplayer ever. Or maybe it was all the double headshots I was getting with my armor piercing ammo mantis afterwards.

[ShinyRocks]

So is ULM definitely still bugged? Because it shows the weight reduction and cooldown reduction. Is it just that the bars show it, but it's not actually doing it?

I get that shotgun Infiltrator works; I should have been clearer. It was a shotgun Infiltrator who wasn't cloaking and was just shotgunning from cover. That I take issue with.

As to the 'good Vanguard' question - one that plays to their strengths but doesn't overdo it, basically. Blamming around taking out mooks so that others can focus on the 'boss' mobs, great. Taking out boss mobs, great too. Getting overconfident and dying halfway across the map surrounded by enemies so that you can't be revived, leaving your team 3-manning it for the rest of the wave, not great. (Obviously on Bronze, that doesn't really matter so much...)

Firebase White Geth Gold with four Salarian Engineers last night. So many Decoys! It was actually not as smooth as I thought it would be, but we still got Full Extraction, so eh.

[Dhavaer]

So is ULM definitely still bugged? Because it shows the weight reduction and cooldown reduction. Is it just that the bars show it, but it's not actually doing it?

Apparently it works but only on the geth smg.

[Sholos]

RE: Vanguards:

My biggest problem is that most Vanguard players I've teamed with seem to have very poor target prioritization skills. There are some targets that don't need to be charged, like that lonely unit with a few bars of health left and someone actively firing on him. Find something worthwhile to charge.