Mass Effect 3.7: "That was for Thane"

[Dhavaer]

Geth challenge completions are starting to come in, and happily they don't seem to have a unit type that's going to be an absolute bastard to rack up points for, like the husk or nemesis. Bombers are staying a little behind the others, but not too badly. Loving the salarian engineer in particular; energy drain/incinerate is a wonderful combo. Yay Omni-Capacitors V!

[Psyren]

Spoiler

Show

I am fully expecting them to blow themselves into what was already a very deep crater. I just pray that they learned some lessons. As far as I can tell, they're keeping Casey Hudson away from this one, so that's a start.

Actually, Casey is still Executive Producer. With the new Project Director under him, he's probably going to have less hands-on with the game, but I have no doubt that big story decisions will still get his sign-off.

(I honestly have no clue where Sentinels fit into this theory you're suggesting, as I cannot see any common thread to that class anymore based on the multiplayer Sentinels.)

Well, for one, all of them have a defensive power of some kind. (I consider the omnishield to be a power due to its "plant" function.) Yes, there are members of other classes that also have defensive powers, but only Sentinels have them across the board.

[Corvus]

Thanks to the weekend challenge, I've discovered how fun the Brotarians are, going around Brofisting. Been playing a submission net sentiel with no shcokwave and all melee bonuses, and a soldier with inferno grenades and ballistic blades maxed out and 3 in blade armour with max health.

[Zevox]

Because they are defined by their defensive abilities, as a whole, where other classes can dip Into it with a single load-out but not capitalize on as well. A fury, a shadow, and a human infiltrator can all be made to work for melee (as can the Krogan soldier, sentinel, and human soldier). But while these individuals of other classes can handle close range combat, every vanguard can handle close range combat. Every sentinel can mainline defense successfully, where only select individuals of other load outs can. Every infiltrator can stealth-flank and go for critical strikes, while some of the other load outs can flank and critical strike. Every soldier can do whatever soldiers do, while other kits can but not all of them. Etc.

That's where we're hitting a wall, then. You accept that other classes can sometimes do the same thing as another is supposedly designed around without that detracting from the class system. I don't. I think that the class system loses any real purpose if there's that kind of overlap. Just having every Sentinel have some defensive ability isn't enough to make it a coherent class to me if plenty of others that get categorized in another class have the same abilities anyway. There's no longer anything setting Sentinels apart from other classes in that case: just the designers' arbitrary decision to call these characters with Tech Armor/Bloodlust/etc Sentinels while calling others with the same abilities Soldiers.

Also, tangent; apologies or just saying it was a stupid argument. I meant to clarify so it didn't just seem like I was angry and ranting, but work picked up and I forgot until now.

No worries, I didn't take it personally. There have certainly been times when I've been tempted to say similar things during various discussions around here anyway.

I can guarantee that a Krogan sentinel will be better at defensive play than a Krogan soldier, and that a Krogan soldier will be better at combat and weapons than a Krogan sentinel (though with Krogan, only just).

How? Seriously, please explain to me how that can be. I do not see how the Krogan Sentinel in any way is better at defensive play than the Krogan Soldier. Tech Armor and Fortification are essentially identical. Both have a grenade, both have a single homing-projectile power, and both have identical class talent and fitness substitute.

Same deal for the other such characters: how is the Vorcha Sentinel better at defense than either of its counterparts? Or the Batarian? When they all have the same defensive powers at their disposal, the same Fitness or fitness-analogue, and their other abilities aren't defensive, how can that be?

Zevox

[Edge]

How? Seriously, please explain to me how that can be. I do not see how the Krogan Sentinel in any way is better at defensive play than the Krogan Soldier. Tech Armor and Fortification are essentially identical. Both have a grenade, both have a single homing-projectile power, and both have identical class talent and fitness substitute.

Technically, Tech Armour provides 10% more damage reduction than Fortification does when both are fully specced for durability/protection.

[Illven]

So I completed the weekend challenge and got 4 extractions for the extract goal. 1 Turian, and 3 Vorcha


There is nothing more cathartic then shooting your enemies full of fire

[Zevox]

Technically, Tech Armour provides 10% more damage reduction than Fortification does when both are fully specced for durability/protection.

Okay, let's set aside the objections I'd like to make to that answer and say I just give you the Krogan, then. Still doesn't make the Batarians and Vorcha make any more sense, since three of the four Batarians and all Vorcha share the exact same defensive ability, and the Sentinel versions have no other such ability on top of that single one.

Zevox

[SiuiS]

That's where we're hitting a wall, then. You accept that other classes can sometimes do the same thing as another is supposedly designed around without that detracting from the class system. I don't. I think that the class system loses any real purpose if there's that kind of overlap. Just having every Sentinel have some defensive ability isn't enough to make it a coherent class to me if plenty of others that get categorized in another class have the same abilities anyway. There's no longer anything setting Sentinels apart from other classes in that case: just the designers' arbitrary decision to call these characters with Tech Armor/Bloodlust/etc Sentinels while calling others with the same abilities Soldiers.

This amount of overlap exists in pretty much every game though.

How? Seriously, please explain to me how that can be. I do not see how the Krogan Sentinel in any way is better at defensive play than the Krogan Soldier. Tech Armor and Fortification are essentially identical. Both have a grenade, both have a single homing-projectile power, and both have identical class talent and fitness substitute.

Same deal for the other such characters: how is the Vorcha Sentinel better at defense than either of its counterparts? Or the Batarian? When they all have the same defensive powers at their disposal, the same Fitness or fitness-analogue, and their other abilities aren't defensive, how can that be?

Zevox

A Krogan soldier has DR 40 for about 50% of his matches, while a Krogan sentinel has DR 50 for about 100% of his matches. Fortification woks mostly for its purge, with a secondary defense effect. Iff you want armor for the entire match, you won't pick the soldier. His only benefit is acute increase to melee damage followed by a shotgun blast with no ill effects. Even the battlemaster doesn't have that unless you build them to work like the soldier. Essentially, given all the resources possible, odds are identical powers wot work the same because of different allocation.

Batarian soldier; standard build is ballistic blades and medium weapon primary; grenades and passive secondary, Armor tertiary (usually for damage and damage returned), to the batarian sentinel who uses submission net and shockwave as a primary/secondary set, usually followed by armor with damage prevention and damage recharge as primary/secondary, an the brawler focuses on close quarters with fitness and charge primary, armor secondary with damage and recharge, and lash as a tertiary backup.

Vorcha are weird, yes. Can they be made identical? Yes. But a human engineer and human infiltrator can be made about identical as well. The human soldier gets the primary benefit of a power infiltrator; adrenaline rush gives them a 70% damage boost with a better duration than tac cloak. They also get 40% DR from it. I don't suppose you've tried the human soldier enough to accuse it of infringing on sentinel and infiltrator rights?

A two level dip I mink gives you three fighter bonus feats. This doesn't make them better fighters than fighters. It doesn't invalidate the fighter class, despite the fighter class being a better monk than the monk (or the barbarian being a better fighter or monk than either of the original classes!), so it's not a waste.

Picking 'infiltrator' has value in that you know what your intended goal is and you have a slew of options you can cherry pick to get there with carrying levels o fidelity? Specialization and diversification. picking 'Vanguard' gives you similar, but with different specific options and a different end goal. You could go out of your way to build a similar character with each, but you're missing the point. Having such open options rewards you with fidelity to concept by Wong better at it than most. It also does not punish you for wanting to stray from those bounds! Being a sniper vanguard is okay. If the classes were more rigid, being a sniper vanguard would be stupid. But what about the player who likes to snipe and wants to be a vanguard? He's not screwed because VANGUARD = SHOTGUN CHARGE BIOTICS CLOSE RANGE ONLY NO DISTANCE. Because that is far, far too limiting for a game which set out to model a workable setting.

[Zevox]

This amount of overlap exists in pretty much every game though.

No. No it does not. Whether you mean that in reference to Mass Effect games or games that use class systems, that is not the case. In any normal class system there are traits that clearly set each class apart from the others basically at a glance - that is not the case here. Since I believe the line encapsulates what bothers me the most about this whole situation, I'll repeat something I said previously word-for-word:

"There's no longer anything setting Sentinels apart from other classes in that case: just the designers' arbitrary decision to call these characters with Tech Armor/Bloodlust/etc Sentinels while calling others with the same abilities Soldiers."

There's the heart of my problem here, as best as I can lay it out. If I'm to believe that Sentinels are now defined by their defensive abilities rather than their mix of biotic and tech powers, then I can only conclude that the selection of which characters with defensive abilities are categorized as Sentinels and which are not is basically arbitrary, because so many others have such abilities as well, and as such, under this definition, could have been classified as Sentinels if the developers had felt like it without changing anything about them.

And the more that overlap creeps into other classes - i.e. the Turian Havoc fitting as a Vanguard (if they're no longer defined by their biotics), or the N7 Paladin and Volus Mercenary fitting as an Engineers - the more I see that problem throughout the whole system, rather than with just Sentinels alone.

A Krogan soldier has DR 40 for about 50% of his matches, while a Krogan sentinel has DR 50 for about 100% of his matches. Fortification woks mostly for its purge, with a secondary defense effect.

Only if you choose to use it that way. It is perfectly within reason to use Fortification the same way as any other Tech Armor knock-off, never purging it at all.

Batarian soldier; standard build

Stop - problem right there. Assuming specific builds doesn't answer my question. My question is about the inherent design of the class: is one by its nature more defensive than the other? Not can you make one more defensive than the other if you build each a certain way, or how do the builds you assume are peoples' default for them compare as far as defense goes. The character itself, given the options it has. If it helps, think of it as asking if the most defensive build of the Sentinel will be better at defensive play than the most defensive build of the others - that ought to be close enough.

But a human engineer and human infiltrator can be made about identical as well.

No they can't. The Human Engineer and Infiltrator have no overlap between their powers at all, nor even any similarities between their powers.

I don't suppose you've tried the human soldier enough to accuse it of infringing on sentinel and infiltrator rights?

I haven't, no, which is why I haven't brought it up. Of course, by the same token, there may be something to that for all I know. Though since I don't think of Cloak as being defined solely by its damage boost I'd be unlikely to say that for Infiltrators at least.

A two level dip I mink gives you three fighter bonus feats. This doesn't make them better fighters than fighters. It doesn't invalidate the fighter class, despite the fighter class being a better monk than the monk (or the barbarian being a better fighter or monk than either of the original classes!), so it's not a waste.

Now you're talking about a completely different can of worms - D&D's multiclassing system by its very nature muddles things substantially in that game compared to basically any other, and its merits and problems are a whole other conversation altogether.

Zevox

[SiuiS]

No. No it does not. Whether you mean that in reference to Mass Effect games or games that use class systems, that is not the case. In any normal class system there are traits that clearly set each class apart from the others basically at a glance - that is not the case here. Since I believe the line encapsulates what bothers me the most about this whole situation, I'll repeat something I said previously word-for-word:

"There's no longer anything setting Sentinels apart from other classes in that case: just the designers' arbitrary decision to call these characters with Tech Armor/Bloodlust/etc Sentinels while calling others with the same abilities Soldiers."

There's the heart of my problem here, as best as I can lay it out. If I'm to believe that Sentinels are now defined by their defensive abilities rather than their mix of biotic and tech powers, then I can only conclude that the selection of which characters with defensive abilities are categorized as Sentinels and which are not is basically arbitrary, because so many others have such abilities as well, and as such, under this definition, could have been classified as Sentinels if the developers had felt like it without changing anything about them.

And the more that overlap creeps into other classes - i.e. the Turian Havoc fitting as a Vanguard (if they're no longer defined by their biotics), or the N7 Paladin and Volus Mercenary fitting as an Engineers - the more I see that problem throughout the whole system, rather than with just Sentinels alone.

Well, first, what is the huge differentiation between a sentinel, a vanguard and an adept in mass effect 1? The sentinel is most unique, but vanguard and adept are damn near identical. Same with infiltrator and engineer.

Second, "tech and biotics" is not a definition, it is not a class. It is a toolset. Saying sentinels were defined by tech and biotics is the same as saying they were defined by pistols or that infiltrators are defined by sniper rifles or that vanguards are defined by shotguns. That's a huge failure and is assuming a variable is an equation. Now, what that tech and biotic mixture was used for, that's a defining feature. An making that more concise through time, specifically because of how slapdash and bonded unitive 'tech an also biotics' actually is, is hat they've been doing.

You occasionally bring up inconsistencies, but those inconsistencies are caused by this very problem, assuming tech+combat=ifiltrator's, instead of, you know, infiltrating.

Only if you choose to use it that way. It is perfectly within reason to use Fortification the same way as any other Tech Armor knock-off, never purging it at all.

No, even if you do not choose to use it that way, it is inferior defensively, and inhibits other functions by its application as a primary effect. A soldier Krogan who uses his powers to play sentinel will be inferior as both a sentinel and a soldier. A Krogan soldier cannot equal a Krogan sentinel, so they are different.

Stop - problem right there. Assuming specific builds doesn't answer my question. My question is about the inherent design of the class: is one by its nature more defensive than the other?

No, your exact words were how they play out.

Spoiler

Show

I do not see how the Krogan Sentinel in any way is better at defensive play than the Krogan Soldier.

Sorry, but a bunch of classes at 20 with no points whatsoever slotted to skills is useless for this discussion, as is a bunch of classes at 20 with every skill at 6. A batarian soldier generally will, 80% of the time, intuitively, play different from a batarian soldier or batarian vanguard. This is because they come prepackaged with a single rank in a power, which guarantees that until the recent update and until promotion, they will operate differently. And again, choosing specifically to build classes similar in capacity is a choice, and you can do it, but that's indicative of lack of coantraint not failure of purpose.

Even with all skills at rank six (which apparently all the new classes can do, kinda annoying to have a maxed out vorcha engineer at 16 ) they will operate differently an primarily within their role. Being "sufficient for play" and being "good" are two different things. My first havoc soldier was specked purposefully towards an adept/engineer style of play. It had six ranks in all powers. It was okay. Now he has normal skill allotment and operates better, but he operates closer to a soldier who can get a minor in Vanguarding. He cannot really mainline being a vanguard, and doing so has him suffer both at vanguard and at soldier

If it helps, think of it as asking if the most defensive build of the Sentinel will be better at defensive play than the most defensive build of the others - that ought to be close enough.

Yes. There will be some overlap – healing makes a battlemaster, trooper, destroyer and Justicar can all give them a run for their money though they hold up less well user strained fire (battlemaster excepted, who still suffers under direct fire more than a sentinel until biotic charge happens) – but as a whole, sentinels will w defensive where yet classes are defensively a crapshoot. Even volus; without caution, cover and oblique fire angles the engineer an the adept will drop like a ton of bricks while the sentinel laughs at decoy getting hit and sends a drone to flank.

No they can't. The Human Engineer and Infiltrator have no overlap between their powers at all, nor even any similarities between their powers.

Passive 6, fitness 6, cryoblast/incinerate 6 can cover you for a good 16 levels, over 75% of their career, and be almost identical.

I haven't, no, which is why I haven't brought it up. Of course, by the same token, there may be something to that for all I know. Though since I don't think of Cloak as being defined solely by its damage boost I'd be unlikely to say that for Infiltrators at least.

They don't operate the same at all, luckily. And while cloaking and running is useful in a tight spot, so is grenade spam. They limited the ability to sneak forever, but they also cut damage boost by about two thirds. Shows you what it was used for once upon a time.

Now you're talking about a completely different can of worms - D&D's multiclassing system by its very nature muddles things substantially in that game compared to basically any other, and its merits and problems are a whole other conversation altogether.

Zevox

Unfortunately, no. You're saying a certain amount of overlap invalidates a class system in general. Bringing in other examples I. How overlap actually reinforces the classes instead of invalidating them is perfectly fine, since it points out that a defining trooper or battlemaster characteristic is that they operate almost like a decent backup for a sentinel, and can "play like a sentinel". The fact that it further ensconced that playstyle as the sentinel playstyle is proof that the concept holds. Sure, the Krogan can only play sentinel at vanguard ranges (cqc) an the trooper can only play sentinel at soldier levels (easy access to cover and control of eny firing vectors) but that's intentional. There's a lot o wiggle room without getting into actual venndiagrams.

[Zevox]

Well, first, what is the huge differentiation between a sentinel, a vanguard and an adept in mass effect 1? The sentinel is most unique, but vanguard and adept are damn near identical. Same with infiltrator and engineer.

The Vanguard had the ability to use shotguns effectively, as well as to wear heavier armor, and had more abilities that provided passive stat boosts, in exchange for a smaller array of biotic abilities than the Adept. Similar can be said of the Infiltrator vs Engineer.

Second, "tech and biotics" is not a definition, it is not a class. It is a toolset. Saying sentinels were defined by tech and biotics is the same as saying they were defined by pistols or that infiltrators are defined by sniper rifles or that vanguards are defined by shotguns.

But classes are defined by their abilities - by their "toolset," if that's what you wish to call it. That's what gives them their options in combat, and thus their play style. In which case, if classes have substantial overlap in those abilities, they necessarily have substantial overlap in their available play style as well.

And I can't help but notice that you didn't address the point I tried to emphasize so much. So again: the abilities that Sentinels have been given to improve their defense are no different than those that have been given to various other classes - completely literally, in the case of the Batarian and Vorcha, nearly so in the case of Tech Armor vs Fortification/Barrier. In which case, what separates the Sentinel classes from their counterparts is nothing but the arbitrary decision of the designers to stick them under that category rather than one of the others they could have been put into. Is this not accurate? Because it certainly seems to be to me, and I see it as a substantial problem.

Sorry, but a bunch of classes at 20 with no points whatsoever slotted to skills is useless for this discussion, as is a bunch of classes at 20 with every skill at 6.

Quite the contrary, removing specific builds from the equation is the only way this discussion has any merit. Otherwise we're not examining the inherent differences of the characters, just our own personal use of them, or how they could theoretically be made to work more or less alike. And if the difference isn't inherent, then it makes for a very poor way to define a class.

Yes. There will be some overlap – healing makes a battlemaster, trooper, destroyer and Justicar can all give them a run for their money though they hold up less well user strained fire (battlemaster excepted, who still suffers under direct fire more than a sentinel until biotic charge happens) – but as a whole, sentinels will w defensive where yet classes are defensively a crapshoot. Even volus; without caution, cover and oblique fire angles the engineer an the adept will drop like a ton of bricks while the sentinel laughs at decoy getting hit and sends a drone to flank.

I'm seeing the assertion there, but not explanation (save for the Volus, which I acknowledge is fair enough, though importantly there it is because it actually has more defensively-oriented abilities than its counterparts). How can that be, when their abilities defensively are identical, as in the case of the Batarians and Vorcha? Again, when dealing with the most defensively-oriented build of the characters, so that we're actually examining the inherent difference between the characters in this respect.

Passive 6, fitness 6, cryoblast/incinerate 6 can cover you for a good 16 levels, over 75% of their career, and be almost identical.

Cryo Blast and Incinerate are extremely different skills - one is a debuff and status effect, the other an attack. They're nothing alike.

Unfortunately, no. You're saying a certain amount of overlap invalidates a class system in general. Bringing in other examples I. How overlap actually reinforces the classes instead of invalidating them

But it doesn't reinforce them - it simply gives the player the option of mixing and matching class abilities when creating their characters, effectively creating custom classes of their own. And again, it's a whole other conversation worth of topics in its own right, and I'd rather stay on this one.

Zevox

[Luzahn]

Hm, unlocked the Asari Valkyrie, Volus Adept, and Cerberus Adept from Spectre packs, and pulled an N7 Valkyrie level from the event pack.

Not a bad night, to be honest.

However, Biotic Orbs are strange.

[Zevox]

Hm, unlocked the Asari Valkyrie, Volus Adept, and Cerberus Adept from Spectre packs, and pulled an N7 Valkyrie level from the event pack.

Not a bad night, to be honest.

However, Biotic Orbs are strange.

Lucky bastard .

Yeah, Biotic Orbs are a weird power, to be sure. Honestly, I gave up on playing the Volus Adept largely because of them. They're his only offensive power, but the heavy cooldown on them when you re-summon a new batch makes them prohibitive to use offensively, since the Volus are so dependent on Shield Boost. Just wasn't working out for me.

Zevox

[SiuiS]

The Vanguard had the ability to use shotguns effectively, as well as to wear heavier armor, and had more abilities that provided passive stat boosts, in exchange for a smaller array of biotic abilities than the Adept. Similar can be said of the Infiltrator vs Engineer.

Armor was almost insubstantial, the differences between weapons were basically moot (a shotgun is a pistol is an assault rifle; only snipers really had defining characteristics which weren't eventually subsumed entirely) and both had to be unlocked. By your own reckoning, specific builds shouldn't be counted, aye? And if they are, being a pistolero was just as valid for both.

But classes are defined by their abilities - by their "toolset," if that's what you wish to call it. That's what gives them their options in combat, and thus their play style.

Poppycock. Classes are defined by how those toilets are used – or do you fail to see a distinction between smash, singularity, reave, biotic sphere, barrier, and biotic charge? Because those all fall under "biotic" which is a tool. Each power is a specific application of a tool.

However! I think this is actually a separate but related question. It will get confusing if I have to jump back and forth between different parameters to answer different questions which you might view as the same question.

And I can't help but notice that you didn't address the point I tried to emphasize so much.

On the contrary. I did answer it, with the entire rest of that post. It's a hollsitic system. It's not a bullet point. It is nuanced, and reducing it to too simple a form not only doesn't do it justice but opens it up for semantic dissection which the original thought would survive.

So again: the abilities that Sentinels have been given to improve their defense are no different than those that have been given to various other classes - completely literally, in the case of the Batarian and Vorcha, nearly so in the case of Tech Armor vs Fortification/Barrier

And again;

"Yes. There will be some overlap – healing makes a battlemaster, trooper, destroyer and Justicar can all give them a run for their money though they hold up less well user strained fire (battlemaster excepted, who still suffers under direct fire more than a sentinel until biotic charge happens) – but as a whole, sentinels will w defensive where yet classes are defensively a crapshoot. Even volus; without caution, cover and oblique fire angles the engineer an the adept will drop like a ton of bricks while the sentinel laughs at decoy getting hit and sends a drone to flank.

[...]

Unfortunately, no. You're saying a certain amount of overlap invalidates a class system in general. Bringing in other examples I. How overlap actually reinforces the classes instead of invalidating them is perfectly fine, since it points out that a defining trooper or battlemaster characteristic is that they operate almost like a decent backup for a sentinel, and can "play like a sentinel". The fact that it further ensconced that playstyle as the sentinel playstyle is proof that the concept holds. Sure, the Krogan can only play sentinel at vanguard ranges (cqc) an the trooper can only play sentinel at soldier levels (easy access to cover and control of eny firing vectors) but that's intentional. There's a lot o wiggle room without getting into actual venndiagrams."

In which case, what separates the Sentinel classes from their counterparts is nothing but the arbitrary decision of the designers to stick them under that category rather than one of the others they could have been put into. Is this not accurate? Because it certainly seems to be to me, and I see it as a substantial problem.

How is it a problem? Not as admittance, but as a tangent.

Quite the contrary, removing specific builds from the equation is the only way this discussion has any merit.

I'm not discussing specific builds. I'm discussing tendencies which work with the class role. If a class had every skill at 6, with both evolutions at each rank 4–6, there would still be an optimal range of actions they could take. This range generally falls under the class' stated directive. In fact, looking at this might be the first chance I have to coherently express hat makes a soldier a soldier.

Regardless, every class has a finite number of resources, and we are discussing the application of those resources. Saying you can't apply them and then discussin their application is easy! Congratulations, every class is soldier. The krogans do best at it.

For a meaningful discussion about what those combinations achieve, and how that lumps them together, you need allocation, time and toolset. Certain allocations predispose any one character to certain toolsets because of the correlation between weapon weight/cool down, weapon weight/power, weapon power/power power. The number of permutations of a class which are playable (as opposed to terribly unplayable, as in unable to achieve success with any speed or efficiency worth noting) which fall under the class' prime descriptor will exceed the number of permutations for which the class is playable but does not fall under that umbrella. Yes, there are outliers — krogans, the race of nigh-immortal warriors who have a culture which reveres violence and martial prowess will weigh towards the warrior end I the spectrum even for their caster. The vorcha, who are resilient as cockroaches and a hundred times as durable, will be that durable no matter how much that's not part of their class. the volus, who die instantly if their suit is ruptured due to rapid decompression causing them to explode, will all have shield restoration and ablative escape powers.

Again, I don't see how a character's race being as important as their class messes up classes existing at all?

Otherwise we're not examining the inherent differences of the characters, just our own personal use of them, or how they could theoretically be made to work more or less alike.

This is contradictory. If we cannot discuss a hypothetical use, and we cannot discuss an actual use, we cannot discuss.

I'm seeing the assertion there, but not explanation (save for the Volus, which I acknowledge is fair enough, though importantly there it is because it actually has more defensively-oriented abilities than its counterparts). How can that be, when their abilities defensively are identical, as in the case of the Batarians and Vorcha? Again, when dealing with the most defensively-oriented build of the characters, so that we're actually examining the inherent difference between the characters in this respect.

In defensive play. That was the point was it not? And how a class plays is based on a number of factors, including how level affects powers, how powers affect weapons, how weapons affect powers, how powers affect powers, how racial proclivities affect powers, how racial proclivities affect weapons.

The two "equal" defense batarians will play differently because one ha powers which specifically require forward offense as opposed to defensive play where the other rewards an ablative use of cover and shields in conjunction with its natural defenses from armor. An yes, this is just assume general access to the powers and not specific power chains.

Cryo Blast and Incinerate are extremely different skills - one is a debuff and status effect, the other an attack. They're nothing alike.

They both can weaken armor and bestow prolonged status effects with the immediate effect of making organic enemies stay still. One also does damage.

But it doesn't reinforce them

How does getting a battlemaster or trooper and saying "This loa out lets me play like a sentinel" not reinforce the notion that said playstyle is being defined as the sentinel play style in public consciousness? Because that's what I said.

Getting barrier, we think it's a "tech armor-like power" despite it existing in canon before tech armor. We think it lends to a "sentinel" style of play. That is very explicitly giving priority of these abilities to the sentinel, reaffirming the sentinel as the Ur-example.

Hm, unlocked the Asari Valkyrie, Volus Adept, and Cerberus Adept from Spectre packs, and pulled an N7 Valkyrie level from the event pack.*

Not a bad night, to be honest.*

However, Biotic Orbs are strange.

They are. My best use of the adept was as a stasis slinging, shotgun toting invisible assassin. Orbs as an stack only works at all, I'd you're willing to use them for the team and not yourself.

[Dhavaer]

Whee! Just did my first game with a Geth Trooper: Silver/Reapers/Giant solo. Great fun, freeze with acolyte, then burn burn burn. Only had to use one gel when I screwed up in the upper room, and three missiles on wave 10 when I got lazy on the assassination mission. I think I'll try it on Gold tomorrow.

[CreganTur]

Tried out a new build on my Geth Infiltrator after seeing someone else use it. Spec'd him for straight damage gains in everything but skipped prox mine completely. Loaded him up with the Pirahna X and used cloak to get in close to targets to unleash the pain with the 80% damage boost.

He was a monster of a character! Both games were against Reapers and it was easy to handle all of the heavies. Ravagers only require a single clip to kill when using cloak and watching your aim. Brutes on average took 1-1/2 to 2 clips. Banshees still take the most work, especially if you are still trying to stop them from jumping.

This was a really hard hitting build that was a lot of fun on Gold. Our first match was on Firebase London and I spent all my time running around the battlefield destroying anything that got in my way. My main (self-appointed) job in the later waves was Ravager annihilation and Brute management.

[Luzahn]

Lucky bastard .

Yeah, Biotic Orbs are a weird power, to be sure. Honestly, I gave up on playing the Volus Adept largely because of them. They're his only offensive power, but the heavy cooldown on them when you re-summon a new batch makes them prohibitive to use offensively, since the Volus are so dependent on Shield Boost. Just wasn't working out for me.

Zevox

Ah, I actually skipped on Shield boost, put it down to three ranks and took full fitness to compensate, so I could cast freely. I can spam the orbs with cooldown finishing at the same time that my current batch of orbs runs out.

[Psyren]

I do not see how the Krogan Sentinel in any way is better at defensive play than the Krogan Soldier. Tech Armor and Fortification are essentially identical.

Incorrect - tech armor has slightly stronger DR (+15% I believe) whereas fortification passively adds melee damage instead. In addition, tech armor's detonate is more useful defensively (area stun) than fortification's (boxing gloves.)

Same deal for the other such characters: how is the Vorcha Sentinel better at defense than either of its counterparts? Or the Batarian? When they all have the same defensive powers at their disposal, the same Fitness or fitness-analogue, and their other abilities aren't defensive, how can that be?

Zevox

The Vorcha Soldier is more of a caster (especially now that it can detonate its own fire explosions.) It benefits more from lower cooldowns than the Sentinel, so it will want high passive as well, and a light layout - this will push it away from either the regen ability or fitness. The Sentinel meanwhile, with its grenades, can dump its only cooldown (Flamer) and perform better with a high-fitness build and heavy layout, becoming a highly mobile and durable skirmisher - akin to a Krogan that can dodge.

For the Batarians, this is even easier - Submission Net is defensive because it locks down unarmored foes, allowing you to e.g. freeze a phantom and revive the ally it was camping. Ballistic Blades meanwhile are purely offensive. Both get Blade Armor, but the Soldier will find the melee evolutions slightly more attractive since Ballistic Blades will want it to be up close anyway.

[Zorg]

Omega trailer is up - it looks sooooo good.

[SiuiS]

Tried out a new build on my Geth Infiltrator after seeing someone else use it. Spec'd him for straight damage gains in everything but skipped prox mine completely. Loaded him up with the Pirahna X and used cloak to get in close to targets to unleash the pain with the 80% damage boost.

He was a monster of a character! Both games were against Reapers and it was easy to handle all of the heavies. Ravagers only require a single clip to kill when using cloak and watching your aim. Brutes on average took 1-1/2 to 2 clips. Banshees still take the most work, especially if you are still trying to stop them from jumping.

This was a really hard hitting build that was a lot of fun on Gold. Our first match was on Firebase London and I spent all my time running around the battlefield destroying anything that got in my way. My main (self-appointed) job in the later waves was Ravager annihilation and Brute management.

What did you gain from giving up proximity mine?

I use the same basic build for tac cloak (damage, recharge, power), hunter mode for accuracy, rate of fire and vision (the damage bonus was ultimately less useful than seeing the two primes behind the prime, for example). Most o fitness is taken up by Stronghold gear V, cloaking, and not leaving things alive Lon enough to shoot me. The proximity mine extends your basic fundamental range; not only is it pretty accurate once you learn it's quirks, but the damage boost means that even though fewer pellets land home you do the same damage – functionally, dropping that ravager with a clip at +50% distance.

Recently though I've been experimenting with the AT12 Raider. All the piranha has over the claymore is ability to compensate for a bad shot, and the raider is a beautiful compromise.

What build did you use prior to this? For comparison?

Ah, I actually skipped on Shield boost, put it down to three ranks and took full fitness to compensate, so I could cast freely. I can spam the orbs with cooldown finishing at the same time that my current batch of orbs runs out.

Did that actually work? I mean, seven times out of ten I use Shield Boost for the passive regeneration. pop shield boost, get shot, lose shields, shields come back slowly. I've considered fitness but their health is so low it never seemed worth it. The end result is what, 385 health? That still falls into the range of a single best of fire from most enemies once your shield breaks.

What evolutions did you grab for biotic orbs? I haven't done the math. I'm pretty sure there are two viable builds for damage, with four orbs and debuff orbs, based on prior choices.

[Luzahn]

What did you gain from giving up proximity mine?

I use the same basic build for tac cloak (damage, recharge, power), hunter mode for accuracy, rate of fire and vision (the damage bonus was ultimately less useful than seeing the two primes behind the prime, for example). Most o fitness is taken up by Stronghold gear V, cloaking, and not leaving things alive Lon enough to shoot me. The proximity mine extends your basic fundamental range; not only is it pretty accurate once you learn it's quirks, but the damage boost means that even though fewer pellets land home you do the same damage – functionally, dropping that ravager with a clip at +50% distance.

Recently though I've been experimenting with the AT12 Raider. All the piranha has over the claymore is ability to compensate for a bad shot, and the raider is a beautiful compromise.

What build did you use prior to this? For comparison?



Did that actually work? I mean, seven times out of ten I use Shield Boost for the passive regeneration. pop shield boost, get shot, lose shields, shields come back slowly. I've considered fitness but their health is so low it never seemed worth it. The end result is what, 385 health? That still falls into the range of a single best of fire from most enemies once your shield breaks.

What evolutions did you grab for biotic orbs? I haven't done the math. I'm pretty sure there are two viable builds for damage, with four orbs and debuff orbs, based on prior choices.

I messed up the orbs based on a flawed understanding of Stasis. Once I get a respec I have some work to do on the Volus, I took area and four, need to shift to damage.

The one silver match I played to try him out survivability seemed good, but I'll need to play more to really see how it turns out.

[SiuiS]

Alright. I'm guessing that this is the listed damage to flesh, armor, shield's and barriers? Hard to tell. I'm sticking with the first number set.




So damage, damage, exposure here. Actually, this has expose listed as just +50% damage, huh? So the damage is 125 less. So 587 a shot, with incremental increases. First orb does 587, second does 675, third does 776, for a total of 1988 damage to a single target, plus 45% more for about three seconds from all other sources (possibly worthwhile).

On the other end, four orbs does 2350. No bonus from additional sources though, which makes it better for lower ranks but worse on gold+ (as about 375 damage isn't worth the loss of tremendously boosting your team). Let's see. Dropping the first damage evolution Reduces you to 412 an orb, Which doesn't make any mathematical sense.

Crap. Before we can actually evaluate the differences, we need to know what kind of math it runs off of. Evolution four boosts 30%, but I don't know I'd that is 30% of the original 250 or if it's 30% o the total up to that point. I'll need to check later.

If someone with a respec card and a volus adept is willing to blow it (or any power user, though the adept would be most pertinent) could you respec and check the exact numbers at every rank AI we can plug it in and reverse engineer the equation?

[Psyren]

@ Biotic God: The orbs packed a decent punch from my PoV. Certainly I was able to kill things much more easily with the adept than with the engineer, even with the latter's scan indirectly buffing his guns. He was no Asari but he seemed able to hold is own. (I forget the spec I used though.)

[SiuiS]

Any news on the weekend challenge?

[Zevox]

In which case, what separates the Sentinel classes from their counterparts is nothing but the arbitrary decision of the designers to stick them under that category rather than one of the others they could have been put into. Is this not accurate? Because it certainly seems to be to me, and I see it as a substantial problem.

How is it a problem? Not as admittance, but as a tangent.

I'm going to focus on this point, since I feel it gives me the best opportunity here to try and communicate where I'm coming from with this, which seems to be needed as I'm increasingly coming to think we're each missing what the other is seeing here.

That is a problem to me because the basic purpose of a class system, to me, is to differentiate characters using each class from each other substantially. This is done by each class having substantially different abilities, in turn giving them different options in battle, in turn giving them different play styles. If, therefore, you cannot look at a character's abilities and determine from those what class they fit into - as is the case if, as I said above, the only thing separating the Sentinel classes from their counterparts with similar or the same abilities is the arbitrary decision to call them "Sentinels" - then the class system has failed in that purpose. The classes are then too similar to each other.

Let me just walk you through my thought process that leads to my criticism here, eh? Please do tell me where in this you think I'm going wrong, because I'm honestly lost as to where our disconnect is on this.

1) You tell me that the defining attribute of the Sentinel class is now supposed to be defensive play. Okay, so where does that come from? What makes them better at defensive play than other classes? Obvious answer: abilities like Tech Armor, Blade Armor, Bloodlust, etc. So then, under this definition, having those abilities is why our Sentinels are considered Sentinels.

2) However, these abilities are not unique to the Sentinel class. A fair few other classes have abilities that are basically Tech Armor knock-offs (Fortification, Barrier), all Batarians (save the unreleased Slasher) have Blade Armor, all Vorcha have Bloodlust, and all Volus have Shield Boost. So, if those abilities are what makes Sentinels Sentinels, then why aren't the other characters with them considered Sentinels?

3) Well, for the Vanguards, one could argue that having Charge so substantially changes the character's combat options and thus play style that having that power in and of itself makes them Vanguards. That would be fair enough. You have also argued well enough about the Volus Mercenary - having Decoy to act as another defensive power, as well as potentially having the Drone act as a decoy if it can draw enemy attention, does give that particular Sentinel more defensive abilities than its other-classed counterparts. Though in that case that answers the question only if we assume that the other Volus aren't treated as Sentinels because the Mercenary is, but since they were created at the same time that may actually be the explanation. Bit weak if you ask me, but let's move on.

4) However, for the other characters, the Soldiers, Vorcha Hunter, and Krogan Shaman, there really isn't such an explanation. At most you can point to Fortification and Barrier giving 10% less defense boost than Tech Armor, but that's just a matter of a small degree of difference, not a substantial one at all - and both can give a boost to shield recharge speed that Tech Armor does not offer. And there is literally no such difference for the Batarians and Vorcha, who share the same defensive ability. Nor is there an explanation similar to the Volus', since in each case the other Sentinel classes have only the one defensive power, and their other two are offensive.

5) This leaves me with the above conclusion: that which classes with defense-oriented powers get categorized as Sentinels is essentially arbitrary, leaving me with the conclusion that they are not sufficiently differentiated from other classes if, as you say, the developers' intent with them is to make them the defensive class.

The two "equal" defense batarians will play differently because one ha powers which specifically require forward offense as opposed to defensive play where the other rewards an ablative use of cover and shields in conjunction with its natural defenses from armor. An yes, this is just assume general access to the powers and not specific power chains.

Close, but I'm looking for a detailed explanation here, as I don't see that in them myself. The powers in question are Ballistic Blades and Inferno Grenade on the Soldier versus Submission Net and Shockwave on the Sentinel. All four are offensive nature. Ballistic Blades and Shockwave both have substantial range limitations, so both will either be using them only when enemies approach them or moving in on enemies in order to use them. The grenades and Submission Net on the other hand are both long range. The Soldiers' powers are better at dealing damage, true, but I don't see either power set particularly encouraging or rewarding more aggressive play or more defensive play inherently.

They both can weaken armor and bestow prolonged status effects with the immediate effect of making organic enemies stay still. One also does damage.

Incinerate doesn't weaken armor. It has an evolution that increases its damage to armored targets, but that's just a damage boost. I'd also hardly compare the side-effect of Incinerate panicking unprotected enemies briefly (which, though I may be wrong, I think requires the Burning Damage evolution from rank 5) to the freezing effect of Cryo Blast, which is one of its primary purposes and completely stops an enemy in their tracks for the power's duration.

How does getting a battlemaster or trooper and saying "This loa out lets me play like a sentinel" not reinforce the notion that said playstyle is being defined as the sentinel play style in public consciousness? Because that's what I said.

Ah, but there you assume that I think of Sentinels as having such a play style. I don't - as I've said, I don't know what to think of the Sentinel class in the multiplayer anymore. I'm simply taking your assertion that this is what the developers have been going for with the class and pointing out where I think the problems with that are.

Getting barrier, we think it's a "tech armor-like power" despite it existing in canon before tech armor.

Because we come into contact with Tech Armor before Barrier in 3. In the single-player because Tech Armor is the one Shepard can get first, whereas one of her companions (Kaiden, who may not even be a companion) gets Barrier and she only unlocks the option to take it as a bonus power some time into the game, and in the multiplayer because there were no characters with Barrier until the first DLC, but all the initial Sentinels had Tech Armor. Change around that order of exposure and I may well be calling Tech Armor a Barrier knock-off instead.

Ah, I actually skipped on Shield boost, put it down to three ranks and took full fitness to compensate, so I could cast freely. I can spam the orbs with cooldown finishing at the same time that my current batch of orbs runs out.

Huh, weird. I wouldn't think that would work well, given the Volus frailty and inability to take cover. Plus since the Orbs do fairly little damage on their own I wouldn't think you'd be getting much out of just spamming them. I was trying to use Stasis -> Orb combos to compensate for that, but it just wasn't working well for me, since it wasn't worth using unless I had a nice cluster of enemies near each other given that every Orb fired was slower cooldowns and one step closer to needing to resummon the Orbs and put up with that extended cooldown.

Omega trailer is up - it looks sooooo good.

Huh. Anybody else find Aria giving that speech kind of... odd? I don't know exactly how to put it, but it seemed off to me.

If someone with a respec card and a volus adept is willing to blow it (or any power user, though the adept would be most pertinent) could you respec and check the exact numbers at every rank AI we can plug it in and reverse engineer the equation?

Easy enough to do - I actually never filled in my Volus Adept's stats after that promotion I did for the class a week or so ago.

Base damage: 250
With rank 3 Damage evolution (20%): 300
With rank 4 Damage evolution (30%): 375
With rank 5 Damage evolution (40%): 475

All without ranks in the class passive power.

Zevox

[SiuiS]

I'm going to focus on this point, since I feel it gives me the best opportunity here to try and communicate where I'm coming from with this, which seems to be needed as I'm increasingly coming to think we're each missing what the other is seeing here.

Fair. I only kept going Because I thought you may have misunderstood some points, and I noticed that the longer we went the closer to a unified whole I got. It was an exercise in seein how concise I could actually be. Unfortunate that I seem to require debate to slim down my thoughts though.

1) You tell me that the defining attribute of the Sentinel class is now supposed to be defensive play. Okay, so where does that come from? What makes them better at defensive play than other classes? Obvious answer: abilities like Tech Armor, Blade Armor, Bloodlust, etc. So then, under this definition, having those abilities is why our Sentinels are considered Sentinels.

This is where our biggest stopping block is. A single power cannot define a class. There are five on every character. You are right in that Tech Armor, Barrier, or Bloodlust cannot make a sentinel, since they show up elsewhere. But where we differ is that is not sufficient to make an argument, because no single power can define a class whatsoever. No class in the current system at all has definition by this rubric – even vanguards with Biotic Charge because the drell and Asari "didn't feel like vanguards".

So we have to look at the whole package. Out of all the combinations available for any one class there are emergent properties. When filtered by a minimum amount of success (such as "can survive on silver with a good team") you will find that the majority of these emergent profiles fall under that class' 'defining characteristic'. As an arbitrary and untested example; out of all, say, 40 build possibilities for the vorcha soldier and vorcha sentinel, I would find that more than 30% could successfully engage in defensive play for both classes, but where the soldier stops at or arous 30% possible defensive builds, the sentinel does not, and goes on to 70% or 80%. This is because the available options, between all "ten" power permutations (given any power above rank 3 has two definite trees) lend themselves to certain patterns.

Now, I know you understand this idea. Where I think it is sufficient to define a class by its sum, you do not (possibly seeing it as being too broad in definition; I don't mean to imply inadequacy by the terms "unable to view a class as defined by its sum"). I'm okay with that. Where you see an obvious failing point I see a half-finished equation.

5) This leaves me with the above conclusion: that which classes with defense-oriented powers get categorized as Sentinels is essentially arbitrary, leaving me with the conclusion that they are not sufficiently differentiated from other classes if, as you say, the developers' intent with them is to make them the defensive class.

This, actually, I think is a result of this very argument. Some designers said "a sentinel is a tech-biotic, we will make our sentinel's tech users and biotic users" and we got the Turian, the human, the Asari. Some designers said "that's a limited view; a carpenter isn't defined by his hammer. Sentinels are defensive characters, who just happen to have tech and biotic proficiency." and we get the volus, the paladin, the Valkyrie. As such, I don't think it can really be used as an argument for anything more than the existence Of both branches of thought. The classes are a jumbled mishmash because the left hand didn't know what the right hoof was doing.

Incinerate doesn't weaken armor. It has an evolution that increases its damage to armored targets, but that's just a damage boost. I'd also hardly compare the side-effect of Incinerate panicking unprotected enemies briefly (which, though I may be wrong, I think requires the Burning Damage evolution from rank 5) to the freezing effect of Cryo Blast, which is one of its primary purposes and completely stops an enemy in their tracks for the power's duration.

I could have sworn it did, but it's been a minute.

Also, the two seconds of panic and the sudden stand, slow freeze and fall over are identical in their use. They branch. Out from that point, but they are both two-second windows of shooting a helpless foe.

Ah, but there you assume that I think of Sentinels as having such a play style. I don't - as I've said, I don't know what to think of the Sentinel class in the multiplayer anymore. I'm simply taking your assertion that this is what the developers have been going for with the class and pointing out where I think the problems with that are.

Not you or I specifically. I refer to the... Zeitgeist I suppose. There are bound to be outliers, so I'm basing this off of the hundred or so personal responses I've heard.

Because we come into contact with Tech Armor before Barrier in 3. In the single-player because Tech Armor is the one Shepard can get first, whereas one of her companions (Kaiden, who may not even be a companion) gets Barrier and she only unlocks the option to take it as a bonus power some time into the game, and in the multiplayer because there were no characters with Barrier until the first DLC, but all the initial Sentinels had Tech Armor. Change around that order of exposure and I may well be calling Tech Armor a Barrier knock-off instead.

Actually, fortification is the very first power we have access to from a crew mate, whereas Shepard has access to tech armor from the get-go if you're a sentinel. The fact that fortification is primary and we all still say tech armor-like power is sufficient proof for me.

Easy enough to do - I actually never filled in my Volus Adept's stats after that promotion I did for the class a week or so ago.

Base damage: 250
With rank 3 Damage evolution (20%): 300
With rank 4 Damage evolution (30%): 375
With rank 5 Damage evolution (40%): 475

All without ranks in the class passive power.

Zevox

Okay. So percentage damage increases are based off the original power damage, such that 20+30+40=90, and 250*1.9=475. So the formula for any percentage is actually n+.Xn, where n is the damage and X is the related decimal to that percentage.

Which means, the listed numbers I was working with we're wrong. Assuming the program at least got the amount each level of volus training gives you correct, passive 6 can net you +45%. That's +125%, and 250*2.35 does indeed come out to 587.5, and removing the first damage boost drops it to... 512.5, which is much more logical.

4 orbs at 512 hit a relatively wide area for 2050 total.
Because "target takes a cumulative 15% extra damage" is a top-down effect it is actually stronger than a passive boost of equivalent level, and three orbs with increasing damage yield... 2026.5 damage, which is easily made up at that point by two or three shots from a predator X, really.

So damage damage extra orb yields 2350
Radius damage orb yields 2050
Radius damage exposé yields 2026

And... I'm still on the fence about which is preferable honestly. I'd suggest getting the orbs the additional recharge boost, grabbing 4, and using it predominantly to let you use a heavier weapon myself.

Unfortunately though this means that Narida site is incorrect in its listing of some of the bonuses.

[Dhavaer]

Got my Gold solo, after two failed attempts (banshee grabs on wave 5 both times). Got assassination, escort and hack, fortunately not in the open up the top. Now to dream of Platinum...

Okay. So percentage damage increases are based off the original power damage, such that 20+30+40=90, and 250*1.9=475.

There are exceptions to this, most notably tactical cloak and headshots.

[Psyren]

With a bit a lot of luck, and some powerful weapons/combos, you may be able to solo Platinum on Rio by hiding in the crate at the back. I'm going to have to try that in case they decide to nerf it.

Unlocked the Volus Sentinel last night, was too tired to spec him at that point though.

[Calemyr]

Actually, Casey is still Executive Producer. With the new Project Director under him, he's probably going to have less hands-on with the game, but I have no doubt that big story decisions will still get his sign-off.

Sign off? That I don't mind. He also signed off on Tuchanka and Rannoch, which were awesome. I'm pretty sure he makes a fine producer - 99% of the game was great, after all. As long as he never tries writing again, I don't have a problem with his work. Assuming you take Leviathan as their original concept for the Starkid ending, they had a very promising idea that was presented extremely poorly in the initial release.

By the way, Take Back Omega hits the nets today, right? I'm curious what people's first impressions will be about it.

[CreganTur]

Played "get in the box" on Rio last night on Platinum using my GI with the Pirahna. It worked very well except for the terrible lag issues I've been suffering.

Over this past weekend I've started having lag in almost every game, so it's either me or the servers and it seems like it's me b/c the other guys didn't experience half the problems I did.

I opened the ports for MP last night on my router, but that didn't seem to help at all. Not sure what else I can do at this point.

I've also been having issues where XBLA won't let me connect to people's parties or I continually get kicked and re-added to parties. This is in connection with ME3 issues where if I try to join a session in progress I get a loading screen in multiplayer that never lets me into the game.