267 réponses à ce sujet

[Saremei]

ExtremeOne is doing nothing but useless trolling. Heatsinks are indefensible in my opinion. As used, it is a less fun system than ME1. The weapon cooldowns of ME1 were refreshingly different than the same tired ammo systems of every other game out there. Never once in all my playthroughs of ME1 did I complain about that system being somehow boring. It was great. ME2 comes along and introduces some nice weaponry, but the ammo system makes many of the weapons a drag to use.



All weapons should cool off like ME1. Keep the heatsinks for when the weapon overheats. That would be the ultimate system and would also be perfectly in line with the original story's technology and indeed be an improvement for sustained fire.

[Zulu_DFA]

Moiaussi wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

ExtremeOne wrote...

unlimited ammo is not better 

Lol.

You figure an infinite number of pebbles tossed one at a time by hand is better than a once per battle spinal mount from a starship?

I figure an infinite number quantity of pebbles is better than a limited number of pebbles.

Unlimited ammo is only better if there is no trade off or cost.

So what's the trade off of the "Avenger" AR with thermal clips against the "Avenger" AR without thermal clips?

That isn't saying that I particularly like the new system... just that unlimited ammo is not always better.

So your point is... just to dispute something for the sake of it with a flawed analogy?

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 23 août 2010 - 09:03 .

[ShadoX_LV]

Saremei wrote...

ExtremeOne is doing nothing but useless trolling. Heatsinks are indefensible in my opinion. As used, it is a less fun system than ME1. The weapon cooldowns of ME1 were refreshingly different than the same tired ammo systems of every other game out there. Never once in all my playthroughs of ME1 did I complain about that system being somehow boring. It was great. ME2 comes along and introduces some nice weaponry, but the ammo system makes many of the weapons a drag to use.

All weapons should cool off like ME1. Keep the heatsinks for when the weapon overheats. That would be the ultimate system and would also be perfectly in line with the original story's technology and indeed be an improvement for sustained fire.

Yeah, thats kinda the problem with devs and gamers. Most of the time people don't like something and complain about it.. The devs change it and ****** off the rest of the gamers who were perfectly fine with it. Goes that each time you actually like something you should also let the devs know or else they think that people didn't like it.. (o.0)

Zulu_DFA wrote...
So what's the trade off of the "Avenger" AR with thermal clips against the "Avenger" SR without thermal clips?

There is none.. you got infinite ammo vs limited ammo.. how obvious can the choice be? [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/angry.png[/smilie]

Modifié par ShadoX_LV, 23 août 2010 - 07:52 .

[Killjoy Cutter]

Moiaussi wrote...

What I want to know is why thermal clips aren't reusable. I mean so they absorb heat and need to be replaced, so? Sit them on the outside of the armour and let them cool. 

Maybe part of the heat absorbtion is a chemical process that doesn't reverse just by cooling.


Hmmm... side thought... perhaps there is a lucrative industry in battlefield salvage, gathering up the used sinks for recycling or refurbishing.

[ShadoX_LV]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Moiaussi wrote...

What I want to know is why thermal clips aren't reusable. I mean so they absorb heat and need to be replaced, so? Sit them on the outside of the armour and let them cool. 

Maybe part of the heat absorbtion is a chemical process that doesn't reverse just by cooling.


Hmmm... side thought... perhaps there is a lucrative industry in battlefield salvage, gathering up the used sinks for recycling or refurbishing.

I actually never saw any empty thermal clips lying around.. Goes that they disintegrate as soon as their empty just so that they don't harm mother nature after those fire fights..

[Moiaussi]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

I figure an infinite number quantity of pebbles is better than a limited number of pebbles.

But that is the trick to it.. the assumption that everything would be precisely the same if the ammo wasn't limited.

So what's the trade off of the "Avenger" AR with thermal clips against the "Avenger" SR without thermal clips?

There is an unlimited ammo Avenger AR that you can take against precisely the same opponents without hacking a file to make it unlimited? If you are talking about a comparasion between how the rifle handled in ME1 vs ME2 you have the issue of not being against the same opponents. Their armor and/or shields is 2 years better.

So your point is... just to dispute something for the sake of it with a flawed analogy?

You are saying that as long as we come to the same conclusions I should agree with everything you say? Or treat any arguement you make as valid? If you think my analogy is flawed, point out the flaws. Don't simply speak a tautolgy such as 'if everything else was identical and this aspect was better, it would be a better weapon'

"Realism" aside, if they were aiming for a certain play balance, then the ammo limits are presumably part of that balance.  To get the same difficulty with unlimited ammo, the guns would have had to have been at least a little less effective. Or you can cheat and hack the file...

[Moiaussi]

ShadoX_LV wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...
So what's the trade off of the "Avenger" AR with thermal clips against the "Avenger" SR without thermal clips?

There is none.. you got infinite ammo vs limited ammo.. how obvious can the choice be? ../../../images/forum/emoticons/angry.png

I repeats... where is this unlimited ammo version within the game that I can use without hacking the ammo rules?

[Moiaussi]

ShadoX_LV wrote...

I actually never saw any empty thermal clips lying around.. Goes that they disintegrate as soon as their empty just so that they don't harm mother nature after those fire fights..

You mean you never saw any full thermal clips lying around. Whose to say that the ones dropped by enemy aren't clips that have cooled enough to use?

Their weapons and indeed their corpses disintigrate too.... hmmmm....

[ExtremeOne]

Saremei wrote...

ExtremeOne is doing nothing but useless trolling. Heatsinks are indefensible in my opinion. As used, it is a less fun system than ME1. The weapon cooldowns of ME1 were refreshingly different than the same tired ammo systems of every other game out there. Never once in all my playthroughs of ME1 did I complain about that system being somehow boring. It was great. ME2 comes along and introduces some nice weaponry, but the ammo system makes many of the weapons a drag to use.

All weapons should cool off like ME1. Keep the heatsinks for when the weapon overheats. That would be the ultimate system and would also be perfectly in line with the original story's technology and indeed be an improvement for sustained fire.

  


wow the stupid video game forum crap of calling people trolls. Oh I am sorry you can not handle logic and the understanding that guns fire bullets and eject the bullet casing and Bioware corrected the mistake from Mass Effect 1 in Mass Effect 2. The weapon system in Mass Effect 1 was a joke and some of the most un logical bull sh*t in games ever. i see whats wrong you do not like that i am not a Mass Effect 1 **** kisser 

[jojon2se]

Well, the idea with the heatsinks is that they do contain the heat - they insta-cool your weapon and stores all that absorbed heat in a very small disposeable volume. You'd need time and a large conventional heatsink and/or heatpump to dissipate all that thermal energy, which would bring us right back to square one. One point that is rarely mentioned, is that cooling time, without this newly introduced medium, is dependant on atmospheric conditions; in a vacuum you are left entirely dependant on heat radiation, since there's no air that the heat could be transferred to.

One might argue that it would be much more efficient to expel the superheated material immediately, rather than storing it, either right out of the side of the weapon, severely burning an organic user, or using it as ammunition, firing it at the target, Thanix cannon style.

At the end of the day, though, we all know it's simply a gameplay balancing mechanic.

[wulf3n]

Moiaussi wrote...
Their armor and/or shields is 2 years better.

edit: misinformed post <_<

Modifié par wulf3n, 23 août 2010 - 09:30 .

[didymos1120]

jojon2se wrote...
One might argue that it would be much more efficient to expel the superheated material immediately, rather than storing it, either right out of the side of the weapon, severely burning an organic user, or using it as ammunition, firing it at the target, Thanix cannon style.

The Codex talks about starship cooling systems that operate on basically the same principle.

[Moiaussi]

ExtremeOne wrote...

wow the stupid video game forum crap of calling people trolls. Oh I am sorry you can not handle logic and the understanding that guns fire bullets and eject the bullet casing and Bioware corrected the mistake from Mass Effect 1 in Mass Effect 2. The weapon system in Mass Effect 1 was a joke and some of the most un logical bull sh*t in games ever. i see whats wrong you do not like that i am not a Mass Effect 1 **** kisser 

Except that these particular guns are mass driver based projectile weapons, and thus caseless.

If they were energy weapons (such as lasers or particle beams) would you also expect to load individual rounds rather than fill a power supply?

The real joke is that if the weapon has enough power to fire an unlimited number of rounds of any sort, given the weapon is the propellant system, there are probably alternative ways to use that kind of energy source that are better. Any such firearm would make one heck of a grenade if overloaded....

[PsyrenY]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

If you want to shut out your brain and focus on the game's combat, go for it. Enjoy it. Some of us rather liked ME for being a consistent, well thought out world, which it really no longer is.

So it's got a few extra handwaves. I'll take that hit for better gameplay, and you should too.

How many people started the series with ME2 that would never have considered ME1 because of its lackluster combat? If thermal clips are the sacrifice I have to make for a pitched battle, for agonizing whether I should run out of cover with Harbinger bearing down (or out of the biotic bubble) for those two sinks off to my right, then so freaking be it.

[JGDD]

Caseless: Glad games take liberties about cooling.

[didymos1120]

justgimmedudedammit wrote...

Caseless: Glad games take liberties about cooling.

Chemical propellant, dude.  Not applicable.

[Dr. Peter Venkman]

Zulu_DFA wrote...
So your point is... just to dispute something for the sake of it with a flawed analogy?

Made me lol

[JGDD]

didymos1120 wrote...

justgimmedudedammit wrote...

Caseless: Glad games take liberties about cooling.

Chemical propellant, dude.  Not applicable.

Not chemical propellant. Applicable.

[TheVH]

People arguing how fictional space guns work, very entertaining.



So anyway my thoughts about heat sinks and stuff is maybe a combination of the two? You could use heat sinks till you run out, then your gun has to go into classic overheat-style mode which reduces gun power and the amount of bullets you could fire til cooldown.

And maybe have an option in there for oldies to go through the game using only overheat-style mode...

[Sapienti]

People are still griping about heat sinks? I thought the community agreed to disagree and just gave up lol.



-My thoughts: Heat sinks aren't really a retcon. Look up the definition.

-The codex =/= game mechanics. Jack took out two heavy mechs and tore down walls all by herself. That's story stuff, not game stuff there is a difference between the two. Technologically, Heatsinks make plenty sense. They absorb heat so a gun does not have a limited amount of shots before over heating. Now there were guns in ME1 that could shoot for extended periods without overheating if you controlled the bursts. I think a good compromise to shut up both camps of overthinking nerds is to mix both. Have all guns over heat if you're using them without heatsinks but with them they'd act same as they do in ME2. It would allow the people who QQ about the change to go and waste "ammo" as much as they want and people who've learned "ammo" conservation to feel like they're doing something.



Because that is really the only downside there can be with heatsinks, running out of them. Which doesn't really make sense, it would imply that each gun over heats if shot less than once. If you had an unlimited amount, I doubt the people crying really would have anything to cry about. As for people talking about the "the guns have infinite ammo" thing, they obviously don't understand what the heat sinks even do. I'm predicting that ME3 will fine tune the heat sink system, they wont listen to people crying over it and just remove it, they'll likely make it clearer that they aren't ammo and actually prevent over heating.

[ExtremeOne]

Moiaussi wrote...

ExtremeOne wrote...

wow the stupid video game forum crap of calling people trolls. Oh I am sorry you can not handle logic and the understanding that guns fire bullets and eject the bullet casing and Bioware corrected the mistake from Mass Effect 1 in Mass Effect 2. The weapon system in Mass Effect 1 was a joke and some of the most un logical bull sh*t in games ever. i see whats wrong you do not like that i am not a Mass Effect 1 **** kisser 

Except that these particular guns are mass driver based projectile weapons, and thus caseless.

If they were energy weapons (such as lasers or particle beams) would you also expect to load individual rounds rather than fill a power supply?

The real joke is that if the weapon has enough power to fire an unlimited number of rounds of any sort, given the weapon is the propellant system, there are probably alternative ways to use that kind of energy source that are better. Any such firearm would make one heck of a grenade if overloaded....

   




lasers are totally different than guns. guns do not have the power to fire rounds unlimited they have to eject the bullet casing. 

[crimzontearz]

bullet [ˈbʊlɪt]

n

1. (Military / Firearms, Gunnery, Ordnance & Artillery)

a. a small metallic missile enclosed in a cartridge, used as the projectile of a gun, rifle, etc.

b. the entire cartridge





now.....mass effect Ammo as per codex



All modern infantry weapons from pistols to assault rifles use micro-scaled mass accelerator technology. Projectiles consist of tiny metal slugs suspended within a mass-reducing field, accelerated by magnetic force to speeds that inflict kinetic damage.



The ammo magazine is a simple block of metal. The gun's internal computer calculates the mass needed to reach the target based on distance, gravity, and atmospheric pressure, then shears off an appropriate sized slug from the block. A single block can supply thousands of rounds, making ammo a non-issue during any engagement.



how in the name of god are projectiles in ME bullets????





also.....



A mass accelerator propels a solid metal slug using precisely-controlled electromagnetic attraction and repulsion. The slug is designed to squash or shatter on impact, increasing the energy it transfers to the target. If this were not the case, it would simply punch a hole right through, doing minimal damage.



and



To eliminate this inefficiency, the geth adopted detachable heat sinks known as thermal clips. While organic arms manufacturers were initially doubtful this would produce a net gain, a well-trained soldier can eject and swap thermal clips in under a second. Faced with superior enemy firepower, organic armies soon followed the geth's lead, and today's battlefields are littered with these thermal clips.



Thermal clips are NOT bullet cases so what in the hell are you going on about Extreme One??

[ExtremeOne]

crimzontearz wrote...

bullet [ˈbʊlɪt]
n
1. (Military / Firearms, Gunnery, Ordnance & Artillery)
a. a small metallic missile enclosed in a cartridge, used as the projectile of a gun, rifle, etc.
b. the entire cartridge


now.....mass effect Ammo as per codex

All modern infantry weapons from pistols to assault rifles use micro-scaled mass accelerator technology. Projectiles consist of tiny metal slugs suspended within a mass-reducing field, accelerated by magnetic force to speeds that inflict kinetic damage.

The ammo magazine is a simple block of metal. The gun's internal computer calculates the mass needed to reach the target based on distance, gravity, and atmospheric pressure, then shears off an appropriate sized slug from the block. A single block can supply thousands of rounds, making ammo a non-issue during any engagement.

how in the name of god are projectiles in ME bullets????


also.....

A mass accelerator propels a solid metal slug using precisely-controlled electromagnetic attraction and repulsion. The slug is designed to squash or shatter on impact, increasing the energy it transfers to the target. If this were not the case, it would simply punch a hole right through, doing minimal damage.

and

To eliminate this inefficiency, the geth adopted detachable heat sinks known as thermal clips. While organic arms manufacturers were initially doubtful this would produce a net gain, a well-trained soldier can eject and swap thermal clips in under a second. Faced with superior enemy firepower, organic armies soon followed the geth's lead, and today's battlefields are littered with these thermal clips.

Thermal clips are NOT bullet cases so what in the hell are you going on about Extreme One??

  


they may not be called bullets but they the same thing just a different name. now the idea behind is a tad different. 

[crimzontearz]

no it's freaking not!



the case of a bullet contains gunpowder that explodes after a percussion and creates enough energy to propell the bullet out of the gun



a heatsink stores the heat generated by a slug that is accelerated on a magnetic rail in a mass effect field



HOW are they the same thing??????

[Schuey19]

TheVH wrote...

People arguing how fictional space guns work, very entertaining.

So anyway my thoughts about heat sinks and stuff is maybe a combination of the two? You could use heat sinks till you run out, then your gun has to go into classic overheat-style mode which reduces gun power and the amount of bullets you could fire til cooldown.
And maybe have an option in there for oldies to go through the game using only overheat-style mode...

I'd go with something like this:

Heatsinks would be just another weapon upgrade like the ones from ME1 and how you applied them would shape how your weapon worked.

Standard cooldown spec would work just like ME1 with unlimited ammo but they'd have a lower damage output.

Heatsink/cooldown hybrid would allow a certain number of rounds per heatsink, and would do 25% more damage than standard cooldown. However, once you run out of heatsinks the gun will still fire but will overheat rapidly, eventually becoming unusable until a thermal clip is replaced.

Full heatsink works just as they do in ME2. They'd do 50% more damage than standard cooldown, and have a 25% larger clip size than a hybrid, but the trade-off is that they simply don't fire without a thermal clip.

I just want to see a return to being able to spec my weapons exactly how I'd like rather than how someone thinks I should.