267 réponses à ce sujet

[kraidy1117]

But Crimson does have a point. I do prefer heat clips but it should be closer to how it's written in lore. Hell even that modding idea someone just wrote would be perfect.

[asaiasai]

If the clips worked as the codex says as in they are universal i would not have as much of a problem with the whole "heat sink" nonsense. If i could say take the clips supposedly mounted on the shotgun and use them in the sniper rifle hence "universal" that would be fine. Then i would go into combat with a pool of heat sinks from which to draw from and refil as necessary until the entire pool was empty.



None of these two points are really the issue. What the issue is, is that the combat encounters are poorly designed. What Bioware had to do then is figure out a way to add difficulty to poorly designed combat encounters hence we get ammo clips. Arguing about ammo, bullets or whaterver is semantics when in effect the clips act just like bullets for a gun. You can argue all you want but you are wrong, with out a bullet a gun is useless, without a heat clip a ME2 gun is useless. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE. It is an ammo device to try and boost the difficulty of the poorly designed combat encounters.



The combat encounters in ME2 are SO POORLY DESIGNED that the developers had to decide on which way was easiest to pump up the difficulty either by reprogramming the AI, and redesigning the levels, or redesign the combat mechanics by changing a few lines in the coalesced.ini, which is exactly what i have undone by rewriting my coalesced ini.



What was done to try to keep combat interesting was force the player to rely on weapons that contradict how they would like to fight the enemy. Tactically if i have an enemy get close enough to me that the shotgun is an effective weapon i screwed up. But Bioware forces me into this position by the fact that my ammo for my ranged weapons is limited by ignoring the codex entry that says the clips are universal when in fact they are not. The weapons are less effective then the ME versions which requires me to use more ammo to do the same work, a head shot is no more effective than a center mass shot, where in ME a head shot turned off all but the toughest enemies.



I would rather have my SPECTRE gear from ME because if you hit what you aim at, where you intend it would be dead, requiring less ammo, or heat generation, in ME2 it is pray and spray all the way. If i as a player have the skill to shoot a moving YIMR mech in the eye circles two shots and it should be dead, this is just ****ing nonsence throwing 50 to 100 rounds at a target because it really makes no difference where you hit it it is just an attrition kill.



So yea i use a hacked Coalesced ini because Bioware and anybody else who thinks this "new" ammo system is the **** can shove it right up thier asses. If your going to limit my ammo carrying capacity, limit the effectivness of that ammo, not even follow your own codex entry (clips are universal) and try and dictate my tactics to me because of POOR COMBAT ENCOUNTER DESIGN all trying to make the game a challange. Then how about a friken bone here where skill can be the counter to all the tricks necessary to create some challange in poorly designed combat mechanics.



Asai

[kraidy1117]

asaiasai wrote...

If the clips worked as the codex says as in they are universal i would not have as much of a problem with the whole "heat sink" nonsense. If i could say take the clips supposedly mounted on the shotgun and use them in the sniper rifle hence "universal" that would be fine. Then i would go into combat with a pool of heat sinks from which to draw from and refil as necessary until the entire pool was empty.

None of these two points are really the issue. What the issue is, is that the combat encounters are poorly designed. What Bioware had to do then is figure out a way to add difficulty to poorly designed combat encounters hence we get ammo clips. Arguing about ammo, bullets or whaterver is semantics when in effect the clips act just like bullets for a gun. You can argue all you want but you are wrong, with out a bullet a gun is useless, without a heat clip a ME2 gun is useless. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE. It is an ammo device to try and boost the difficulty of the poorly designed combat encounters.

The combat encounters in ME2 are SO POORLY DESIGNED that the developers had to decide on which way was easiest to pump up the difficulty either by reprogramming the AI, and redesigning the levels, or redesign the combat mechanics by changing a few lines in the coalesced.ini, which is exactly what i have undone by rewriting my coalesced ini.

What was done to try to keep combat interesting was force the player to rely on weapons that contradict how they would like to fight the enemy. Tactically if i have an enemy get close enough to me that the shotgun is an effective weapon i screwed up. But Bioware forces me into this position by the fact that my ammo for my ranged weapons is limited by ignoring the codex entry that says the clips are universal when in fact they are not. The weapons are less effective then the ME versions which requires me to use more ammo to do the same work, a head shot is no more effective than a center mass shot, where in ME a head shot turned off all but the toughest enemies.

I would rather have my SPECTRE gear from ME because if you hit what you aim at, where you intend it would be dead, requiring less ammo, or heat generation, in ME2 it is pray and spray all the way. If i as a player have the skill to shoot a moving YIMR mech in the eye circles two shots and it should be dead, this is just ****ing nonsence throwing 50 to 100 rounds at a target because it really makes no difference where you hit it it is just an attrition kill.

So yea i use a hacked Coalesced ini because Bioware and anybody else who thinks this "new" ammo system is the **** can shove it right up thier asses. If your going to limit my ammo carrying capacity, limit the effectivness of that ammo, not even follow your own codex entry (clips are universal) and try and dictate my tactics to me because of POOR COMBAT ENCOUNTER DESIGN all trying to make the game a challange. Then how about a friken bone here where skill can be the counter to all the tricks necessary to create some challange in poorly designed combat mechanics.

Asai

Gopd job being mature.

Also ME2 had body damage(head shot does more damage then other shots) something ME did not have and you could spary your gun like am oron in mE without using skill because you had unlimited ammo.

Modifié par kraidy1117, 24 août 2010 - 06:16 .

[PWENER]

kraidy1117 wrote...

asaiasai wrote...

If the clips worked as the codex says as in they are universal i would not have as much of a problem with the whole "heat sink" nonsense. If i could say take the clips supposedly mounted on the shotgun and use them in the sniper rifle hence "universal" that would be fine. Then i would go into combat with a pool of heat sinks from which to draw from and refil as necessary until the entire pool was empty.

None of these two points are really the issue. What the issue is, is that the combat encounters are poorly designed. What Bioware had to do then is figure out a way to add difficulty to poorly designed combat encounters hence we get ammo clips. Arguing about ammo, bullets or whaterver is semantics when in effect the clips act just like bullets for a gun. You can argue all you want but you are wrong, with out a bullet a gun is useless, without a heat clip a ME2 gun is useless. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE. It is an ammo device to try and boost the difficulty of the poorly designed combat encounters.

The combat encounters in ME2 are SO POORLY DESIGNED that the developers had to decide on which way was easiest to pump up the difficulty either by reprogramming the AI, and redesigning the levels, or redesign the combat mechanics by changing a few lines in the coalesced.ini, which is exactly what i have undone by rewriting my coalesced ini.

What was done to try to keep combat interesting was force the player to rely on weapons that contradict how they would like to fight the enemy. Tactically if i have an enemy get close enough to me that the shotgun is an effective weapon i screwed up. But Bioware forces me into this position by the fact that my ammo for my ranged weapons is limited by ignoring the codex entry that says the clips are universal when in fact they are not. The weapons are less effective then the ME versions which requires me to use more ammo to do the same work, a head shot is no more effective than a center mass shot, where in ME a head shot turned off all but the toughest enemies.

I would rather have my SPECTRE gear from ME because if you hit what you aim at, where you intend it would be dead, requiring less ammo, or heat generation, in ME2 it is pray and spray all the way. If i as a player have the skill to shoot a moving YIMR mech in the eye circles two shots and it should be dead, this is just ****ing nonsence throwing 50 to 100 rounds at a target because it really makes no difference where you hit it it is just an attrition kill.

So yea i use a hacked Coalesced ini because Bioware and anybody else who thinks this "new" ammo system is the **** can shove it right up thier asses. If your going to limit my ammo carrying capacity, limit the effectivness of that ammo, not even follow your own codex entry (clips are universal) and try and dictate my tactics to me because of POOR COMBAT ENCOUNTER DESIGN all trying to make the game a challange. Then how about a friken bone here where skill can be the counter to all the tricks necessary to create some challange in poorly designed combat mechanics.

Asai

Gopd job being mature.

I love the new ammo sistem, so...



Your the robot by the way.

[kraidy1117]

Either asaiasai is being sarcastic, trolling or does not know what he/she is talking about.By his/her post, he mixed up ME and ME2 in terms of combat and weapons.

Modifié par kraidy1117, 24 août 2010 - 06:21 .

[PWENER]

kraidy1117 wrote...

Either asaiasai is being sarcastic, trolling or does not know what he/she is talking about.By his/her post, he mixed up ME and ME2 in terms of combat and weapons.

I think the one trolling is you. He/she is stating the fact that in ME1 you shoot like a sociopath, while in ME2 bullets count as you can hit enemies in vulnerable areas.

I.E. In ME1 you do the same amount of damage if you shoot them in the feet or the head (stupid), in ME2 it's the opposite.

[Moiaussi]

I can understand them doing things the way they did, but I really dislike ammunition type being a 'superpower' rather than actual ammunition types.

In ME1,  I could choose antipersonel rounds, anti mech/geth, or fit my rifle for a rocket grenade (HE) as the situation warranted. It isn't a separate skill to be able to use, say, armour piercing rounds and it especially isn't a skill to equip your entire squad with them.

Heat sinks should be interchangable between weapons, meaning that I should just have one central stockpile rather than each weapon loaded up with X thermal cells. If the weapons really are loaded up with X thermal cells, why should they act like they have magazines? Why wouldn't the heat be disbursed between the multiple cells?

It is like they wrote lore around the game mechanics with a sledge hammer.... why not simply change to the mass drivers in the weapons now being more powerful, allowing for larger projectiles, meaning conventional style ammunition clips instead of the 'shaving ammo off the block' garbage from ME1?

[Palathas]

All I want to know is what is generating the heat? I'm no physicist but the slugs are magnetically propelled, so it's not friction, and if there's a power source in such a small space as the weapon that can output enough current to generate that sort of heat then shouldn't we also be replacing batteries?

Meh, it's not such a drama really, I just wish there was a central pool of heat sinks so that you could just use one weapon if you wished instead of having to juggle weapons you may not want to use to manage, for all intents and purposes, ammo levels.

Edit: Hmm, maybe I've just answered my own question. It says they're propelled, not suppended in a magnetic field such as gauss technology. So they'd still slide down a barrel and possibly rifling. *shrug* Maybe I'm just starting to over think the whole situation.

Modifié par Palathas, 24 août 2010 - 07:36 .

[RiouHotaru]

Moiaussi wrote...

I can understand them doing things the way they did, but I really dislike ammunition type being a 'superpower' rather than actual ammunition types.

In ME1,  I could choose antipersonel rounds, anti mech/geth, or fit my rifle for a rocket grenade (HE) as the situation warranted. It isn't a separate skill to be able to use, say, armour piercing rounds and it especially isn't a skill to equip your entire squad with them.

Heat sinks should be interchangable between weapons, meaning that I should just have one central stockpile rather than each weapon loaded up with X thermal cells. If the weapons really are loaded up with X thermal cells, why should they act like they have magazines? Why wouldn't the heat be disbursed between the multiple cells?

It is like they wrote lore around the game mechanics with a sledge hammer.... why not simply change to the mass drivers in the weapons now being more powerful, allowing for larger projectiles, meaning conventional style ammunition clips instead of the 'shaving ammo off the block' garbage from ME1?

This is a clear case of Story Versus Gameplay Segregation.  To program in the option for the ability to change heatsinks between weapons or the keep track of your "pool" of ammo would've been a pain to create, not to mention there'd be complaints about ammo useage.  Using a Sniper-Rifle under your system would be a waste of time because each shot (at least on the Mantis and Widow) equals an entire clip for one of your other guns.

Ammo powers kept the flow of combat steady so you're not constantly going into your inventory screen in the middle of a firefight and switching up your ammo mods every couple of minutes, which destroys the immersion.

I don't know why everyone has issues with the lore.  The lore concerns the backstory, which is mutually exclusive with game mechanics.  The two don't always match up.  Plus I'm sure with someone compare RoF of a gun in ME1 that isn't broken (aka Frictionless Materials X) to a gun from ME2 the ME2 gun DOES produce a better RoF.  To me, the lore makes perfect sense.

[didymos1120]

Palathas wrote...

All I want to know is what is generating the heat?

Pretty much everything.   Do all those fancy targeting calculations with the in-weapon computers, you get heat.  Push current through eezo to generate mass effect fields, you get heat.  Generate magnetic fields to accelerate the rounds, you get heat.  Shear off little bits of metal to make those rounds, you get heat.  Hell, even pulling the trigger generates a little heat.  Negligible, but still there.

[didymos1120]

RiouHotaru wrote...

Ammo powers kept the flow of combat steady so you're not constantly going into your inventory screen in the middle of a firefight and switching up your ammo mods every couple of minutes, which destroys the immersion.

They could have easily made it so once you added a particular type of ammo to your inventory, it would then appear on the Power Wheel/HUD for all squadmates, thus still behaving exactly like a power in combat without having to actually be one.  Quite like how the actual guns just appear as options in the loadout screen as soon as you collect them.

If they wanted to restrict things a bit, then they could have even made it so you had to choose your ammo types on the loadout screen too.  Another option would have been to still retain the mod slot concept, and different weapons would be able to have differing numbers of ammo options (could have made this a research category too, if they wanted). 

So an un-upgraded or early-game AR, say, would have only one ammo slot, but the Revenant would have three or whatever.     'Cause if you watch, when you change ammo types, all you do is punch a few keys on the side of the weapon, not physically insert a different ammo block.  The impression given is that the weapon computer simply dumps some extra, pre-loaded stuff into the mix when it shaves off the round from the block. 

[asaiasai]

I am not trolling, i am saying that in ME that where you hit mattered. In ME2 it is more about how many times you hit. I have seen no difference in a head shot versus a center mass shot in ME2 the only thing that seems to matter is using up the ammo. Sure in ME when you got later in the game with some of the upgrades avalable yea you could shoot a geth in the leg and kill it. Early on in ME when you could not afford the better weapons the weaker weapons required better skill. Tactics set up skill, skill was the equalizer, you could shoot an enemy in the face once and kill it, it seems in ME2 that all you do is waste ammo and ****** it off. Even with the Widomaker from the Collector ship i have seen Vorcha get popped in the face and get up and run off, that is BS.



So as i said if you limit my ammo, limit the effectivness of that ammo, force me to use assinine tactics, all to keep the poor design of the combat encounters from being so apparent, that is not progress. I never had to use a shot gun in ME, i could carry what ever weapons i wanted, well could afford or find. So no the ME2 system sucks totally, poor execution to cover up poor combat encounter design, the only tactic in ME2 is to rush the room break that invisible line stopping the enemies from spawning, clean up what is left, or actually try and have fun and have a shoot out only to have that even limited by ammo.



So yea i use a hacked coalesced ini because it is the only way the game is any fun, other than that it is boring BS, especially hunting for clips after every poorly designed combat encounter. Especially considering that even the game would not follow it own codexes (Jacob's loyalty mission where the mechs drop clips, the hunters drop clips,the planets surface is littered with clips, and not a 10 year old weapon to be found) because i can tell you if i could have picked up an ME weapon i would have dropped the new trash in a heartbeat. MAJOR PLOT HOLE.



Asai

[Mister Mida]

I have to say that of all the changes that were made for ME2, I would have never thought of changing the overheating system. When I first saw the pre-E3 09 footage of the game and I saw the ammo indicator, I was like ... 'Ammo? I thought that was all figured out in the previous game.'

Modifié par Mister Mida, 24 août 2010 - 08:17 .

[Icinix]

I hate the ammo system.



Fortunately there are edits to bring it back to ME1 style, with unlimited ammo but an overheat system.



I thought it was great, particurlarly when you were getting charged by Krogran. Created some awesome, heart racing moments between watching these krogan get closer and your shotgun slowly cooling down. I LOVED IT. Speaking of Krogan, they really didn't leave up to the ones you faced in ME1.

But Meh.

To each their own. As long as editing remains viable, I can live with it.

[asaiasai]

Look you do not need rate of fire if you shoot accuratly. Rate of fire is for people who can not shoot straight, and think rate of fire is somehow better than accuracy. The ME2 clip system is a prime example of this, pray and spray. I would rather have a lower rate of fire, better accuracy and punch than a wall of BBs. ME2 is the BB principle where ME was the accuracy matters principle. I would rather have a .50 cal Barrett with it lower rate of fire instead of an m16 type BB gun, sure i loose out on rate of fire, but if if can pick the ground, force you to fight MY way i will win, superior rate of fire be damned.

I think the easiest way to settle the debate is to allow the player a setting in the options menu before the game starts allowing the player a choice of ME or ME2 style ammo systems. It is a single player game so how anyone else plays is of little consequence to how you may decide to play. It cannot be that hard to do as they have already made the 2 systems anyway, so just let the player pick and turn them loose. It is the same argument in the DAO forums as some folks are saying the combat there is too easy. I shut them up by saying if your running around in tier 7 warden commanders plate waving starfang you are not trying hard enough, the same can be said here, try insanity and only use a Lancer then tell me it is too easy will need video for proof.

Asai

Modifié par asaiasai, 24 août 2010 - 08:53 .

[BlackbirdSR-71C]

What, everyone complains about heatsinks while there is still no topic about powers not working through protection anymore? Is that ever explained? Does it make sense? I don't think so.

[Mister Mida]

BlackbirdSR-71C wrote...

What, everyone complains about heatsinks while there is still no topic about powers not working through protection anymore? Is that ever explained? Does it make sense? I don't think so.

Well, by all means. Start your own thread on the subject. My take on it is that it's just another one of those things where ME2 puts gameplay before the lore. Why bother to write that stuff anyway, I wonder then.

[ShadoX_LV]

PWENER wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Either asaiasai is being sarcastic, trolling or does not know what he/she is talking about.By his/her post, he mixed up ME and ME2 in terms of combat and weapons.

I think the one trolling is you. He/she is stating the fact that in ME1 you shoot like a sociopath, while in ME2 bullets count as you can hit enemies in vulnerable areas.

I.E. In ME1 you do the same amount of damage if you shoot them in the feet or the head (stupid), in ME2 it's the opposite.

Thats actually a totally different topic which has nothing to do with the ammo/heatsinks/overheating..

The sole reason for being able to get headshots and hit other body parts of your enemies is because BW wanted to make it more shooter like. BW simply didn't thought of that when making the first game and after getting some feedback from the players they ended up chaging the system to a more shooter like one for the second game..

It doesn't matter if you would shoot a enemy with a heatsink weapon or a overheating weapon in ME2. The result would be the same because the game has now hitboxes on those characters that detect where your actualyl shooting them. If we had heatsink weapons in the first game then it wouldn't matter where you are shooting the enemy because they only got one hitbox for the whole chatacter..

Note: I don't know for sure how many hitboxes the characters have, but that would be the easiest way of explaining it..

I actually support the idea of bringing back the old system, while having those heatsinks as upgrades.. BW really screwed up by removing pretty much everything that was good about the first game... upgradable weapons/armor.. and being actually able to find armor.. Its pretty obvious why BW removed the armors from the game.. (so that they could make more money via DLC outfits..)

But thats a different topic..

Modifié par ShadoX_LV, 24 août 2010 - 11:14 .

[A.N.A.N]

I believe Bioware originally used the hybrid system in early builds of the game (source eludes me, so yeah). Basically testers would be agressive and shoot the gun empty then hide in cover and play more defensively. This is not how they wanted the game played and removed the cooldown.

[PsyrenY]

PWENER wrote...

BW saved the franchise.

[END of THREAD]

Fixed

[Thesuperdevil]

The hybrid system, I believe, is the way to go for ME3.



Shepard starts out with a limited number of thermal clips (say, 5). Through the purchase of upgrades, not unlike increasing medigel and grenade capacity in ME1, the maximum number of thermal clips that can be carried can be increased. Guns behave the same way they did in ME1, but at any time you can 100% dissipate any heat buildup on any gun by using a fresh thermal clip. Severely reduce the drop rates of thermal clips and the number of clips on the battlefield, and congratulations! You have a system that uses the best of the ME1 and ME2 systems! To my understanding, this is pretty much the exact same thing that PC players use with their modified coalesced.ini files; I wouldn't know, being a 360 user.



By using this system, it doesn't feel like yet another retcon because thermal clips still exist, and it at least somewhat alleviates the plotholes created by the introduction of the thermal clips.

[PsyrenY]

Thesuperdevil wrote...

The hybrid system, I believe, is the way to go for ME3.

Shepard starts out with a limited number of thermal clips (say, 5). Through the purchase of upgrades, not unlike increasing medigel and grenade capacity in ME1, the maximum number of thermal clips that can be carried can be increased. Guns behave the same way they did in ME1, but at any time you can 100% dissipate any heat buildup on any gun by using a fresh thermal clip. Severely reduce the drop rates of thermal clips and the number of clips on the battlefield, and congratulations! You have a system that uses the best of the ME1 and ME2 systems! To my understanding, this is pretty much the exact same thing that PC players use with their modified coalesced.ini files; I wouldn't know, being a 360 user.

By using this system, it doesn't feel like yet another retcon because thermal clips still exist, and it at least somewhat alleviates the plotholes created by the introduction of the thermal clips.

This is what I have been advocating from the beginning.  Furthermore, it patches a lot of plot holes - thermal clips on Jacob's mission, the abundance of thermal clips on the Collector vessel/Derelict reaper, heavy weapon enemies (e.g. Pyros) dropping clips etc.

[tonnactus]

Zulu_DFA wrote...
 In ME1 enemy techs and biotics were a serious problem and had to be watched for. In ME2 they're just a joke.

Thats right.Now they are just warp and incinerate spammers.Nothing to worry about.

[Moiaussi]

Palathas wrote...

All I want to know is what is generating the heat? I'm no physicist but the slugs are magnetically propelled, so it's not friction, and if there's a power source in such a small space as the weapon that can output enough current to generate that sort of heat then shouldn't we also be replacing batteries?

Meh, it's not such a drama really, I just wish there was a central pool of heat sinks so that you could just use one weapon if you wished instead of having to juggle weapons you may not want to use to manage, for all intents and purposes, ammo levels.

Edit: Hmm, maybe I've just answered my own question. It says they're propelled, not suppended in a magnetic field such as gauss technology. So they'd still slide down a barrel and possibly rifling. *shrug* Maybe I'm just starting to over think the whole situation.

You don't need barrel friction to cause heat. The mass effect generator used to accelerate the projectiles could easily need cooling. If it was a conventional electomagnetic rail gun it certainly would.

There might also be a secondary heat issue for the high rate of fire weapons if they are sticking with the 'shave the ammo off a block' explaination from ME1. Shaving bits off anything, especially rapidly, does involve friction and heat.

[Moiaussi]

RiouHotaru wrote...

This is a clear case of Story Versus Gameplay Segregation.  To program in the option for the ability to change heatsinks between weapons or the keep track of your "pool" of ammo would've been a pain to create, not to mention there'd be complaints about ammo useage.  Using a Sniper-Rifle under your system would be a waste of time because each shot (at least on the Mantis and Widow) equals an entire clip for one of your other guns.

Ammo powers kept the flow of combat steady so you're not constantly going into your inventory screen in the middle of a firefight and switching up your ammo mods every couple of minutes, which destroys the immersion.

I don't know why everyone has issues with the lore.  The lore concerns the backstory, which is mutually exclusive with game mechanics.  The two don't always match up.  Plus I'm sure with someone compare RoF of a gun in ME1 that isn't broken (aka Frictionless Materials X) to a gun from ME2 the ME2 gun DOES produce a better RoF.  To me, the lore makes perfect sense.

Regarding heat sinks, just keep a central pool, it is not that difficult and actually fewer numbers to track, since you only need one communal ammo pool rather than one per weapon. Sniper rifles would be no more nor less a waste of time than they already are. I really like sniper rifles in ME2. They are a lot more useful than they were in ME1, mostly by virtue of their power being upped, especially as an infiltrator. 1 to 2 hit kills, and making use of cover, you can use one the entire battle most battles.

Ammo, the same. You shouldn't have to change constantly in combat, and there is nothing wrong with decisions on whether to take the time to change ammo being real time tactical decisions. It increases immersion, rather than diminishing it.

I agree the lore is less of an issue than it is made out to be... in addition to what you said, we are not up against the same enemies. Their armor is a couple years better too.