132 réponses à ce sujet

[sinosleep]

Why oh why does the MYTH that enemies just fall on their faces once you get rid of defenses PERSIST on these damned forums?  Here are the FACTS on the matter....

most enemies have close to (slightly MORE health in fact) 1:1 health:defenses (here's the video melee info is included in description) 

health regenerating enemies have MORE health than defenses (verren, kilxen, vorcha, krogan)

VERY FEW have more defenses than health (dual layer enemies and enemies with NO health like harby, scions)

you combine those facts with these facts

weapons get damage modifiers against DEFENSES not health (weapon modifiers in THIS thread)

ammo powers tend to do more damage (or do it quicker since DOTS are instant on defenses) to DEFENSES not health

[EDIT HERE] This is a post from page two where I replied to a post about ammo powers and why I felt the way I did about how many powers result in a direct damage boost to the player when enemies are on health...

I guess my mistake on the ammo powers section was I only really considering powers that do direct damage to all targets.

AP does it's damage on health regardless of enemy class, warp ammo works the same way and so I was only really counting those with regards to ammos that do straight damage to enemies since they don't have any of the issues the other types have with regards to how and when they will provide any extra damage for the player.

Incendiary only does additional damage to organics, does it in DOT form, and is more useful for the CC.

Cryo provides a damage boost but you have to wait on the animation and unless you are going out of your way to take advantage of the boost enemies are often dead before you can do much with it. Not only that, but enemies tend to fall down, which if you are playing from range and they are near cover results in more issues since they can fall down behind it. It's also more useful for the CC.

Disruptor as you mentioned is only does direct damage to synthetics and the overheating aspect of it is extremely flaky. It's no where near as reliable as an overload and depends largely on the type of weapon you are using (most ammo types proc far more often with shotguns than other weapons) which is why I only ever use it on synthetics on on infiltrators trying to get OHOK on everything using the widow. On other classes the overheating isn't reliable enough and is why I dismissed it in the OP.

[END OF EDIT]

EVERY defense has an instant strip counter, health DOESN'T

So the reality of the situation is that what most people on these forums are saying, is in fact, the OPPOSITE of what actually happens in game.

Nearly everything in the game is more effective against defenses than health. The only things that aren't are physics based powers and cryo-blast which have their own uses (CC/insta-kills via map ejection) any way.

Modifié par sinosleep, 05 janvier 2011 - 08:41 .

[Dominus]

On the next episode of Massbusters, Sinosleep tests out the myth that an asari-hanar porn game is available if certain actions are done in Omega. Stay Tuned!



In all seriousness, that's a pretty good summation. Perhaps they have that idea because in many cases after wearing down an enemy's Shields and Armor, it just seems like a shorter amount of work after that, don't know for sure.

[Random Thoughts]

Shedder ammo does more damage to health.

Other than that, I agree.

[sinosleep]

I see it coming most from the "adepts suck in ME 2" crowd when they claim once defenses are gone it's pointless to use biotics on them when that is the furthest thing from the truth. It conserves ammo, provides CC, and if you're using warp bombs provides AOE damage that often times results in you not have to waste a CD or squadmate CD stripping the defenses of the next guy and just chain right into another warp explosion.

randompersonontheweb wrote...

Shedder ammo does more damage to health.
Other than that, I agree.

That's why I said tend to. That and well, shredder ammo kinda sucks.

Modifié par sinosleep, 05 janvier 2011 - 02:27 .

[adam_grif]

The extremely popular AP ammo damages health also. Warp ammo too.

Actually posting statistics from the game about health of certain enemies vs protection strength would go a long way to making your point, Sinosleep.

Modifié par adam_grif, 05 janvier 2011 - 02:34 .

[kelsjet]

While an obvious offshoot from your comment in the other thread, I do handily enjoy the fact that the very third poster in the thread mythbusts your operating premise which you brush off with "oh but that sucks anyway".

Sadly, declarations of "this is fact and I say so" rarely hold weight in the mind of any intelligent, scientific-savvy reader. Usually, a declaration of fact needs to actually be backed up with a lot more than "it's fact, since I say so". Something along the lines of a declaration of intent, methods of investigation, publication of results, interpolation and analysis (usually by multiple soucres), final conclusions and consideration, and only then can you really say "yes, we can consider statement X and Y as factually correct". This is especially true when the statement hinges on numerical data, i.e. the value of X is Y and A is B.


Given this idea, you will excuse me if I do not accept the conclusions you are deriving from inductive arguments based of a tenuous base of assumptions. Especially since those very same assumptions are being shown to be demonstrably false.

[adam_grif]

kelsjet, you posting videos demonstrating your problems or statistics backing up your point would also help. Although we aren't just going to take Sinosleep's word for it, we're not going to take yours either.

[sinosleep]

kelsjet wrote...

While an obvious offshoot from your comment in the other thread, I do handily enjoy the fact that the very third poster in the thread mythbusts your operating premise which you brush off with "oh but that sucks anyway".

Sadly, declarations of "this is fact and I say so" rarely hold weight in the mind of any intelligent, scientific-savvy reader. Usually, a declaration of fact needs to actually be backed up with a lot more than "it's fact, since I say so". Something along the lines of a declaration of intent, methods of investigation, publication of results, interpolation and analysis (usually by multiple soucres), final conclusions and consideration, and only then can you really say "yes, we can consider statement X and Y as factually correct". This is especially true when the statement hinges on numerical data, i.e. the value of X is Y and A is B.


Given this idea, you will excuse me if I do not accept the conclusions you are deriving from inductive arguments based of a tenuous base of assumptions. Especially since those very same assumptions are being shown to be demonstrably false.

Shredder ammo has, in fact, been deemed a pretty garbage ammo power by pretty much everyone on these forums.

And since the way I worded that particular part of the post actually made room for precisely what he was talking about there's absolutely nothing wrong with it.

Especially when it's ONE aspect of the a post making many other points, none of which can be debated.

The weapon stats are freely available
Everyone knows the game doesn't spawn as many dual layer or non-health mobs as standard enemies
Every defense DOES have an instant counter

Modifié par sinosleep, 05 janvier 2011 - 02:54 .

[kelsjet]

adam_grif wrote...

kelsjet, you posting videos demonstrating your problems or statistics backing up your point would also help. Although we aren't just going to take Sinosleep's word for it, we're not going to take yours either.

I would not expect you to in the slightest. In fact, I would probably take it as a personal insult if you just took my word for it...if I was making such a point.

Curios note, take a quick look at my last post again. The point I was making in fact had nothing to do with the game at all, but instead, had to do with an observation I made of the OP. Hence, in this case, my "point" was that it is hard for me to believe what someone is saying when they come in and just state "facts" without giving any backup. Do you need some form of video demonstrating or statistical evidence backing up this "point" I made?

[cachx]

I have nothing but respect for sinosleep's addition to the forums (no, I'm not being sarcastic).

However, sorry man, but to me health always drop lighting fast compared to armors and barriers, and thus, I tend to ignore shredder ammo, cryo-based skills/ammo and most biotics.

The only exception being cryo ammo on vanguards, just in case the finishing shotgun blast doesn't quite make it. Oh and I occasionally use biotics to make "stylish but not effective" deaths.

Numbers may be identical, but it doesn't feel that way.

[sinosleep]

There's video for the 1:1 to health:defenses argument as well but I can't seem to find it and will have to make another. The easy way to show it is melee damage. Melee damage is the same regardless of defenses and I've tested it on various enemies. Standard mobs take the same number of melee shots to destroy health:defenses, as such, they have 1:1. The other facts you don't need video for, they are readily available.

I'll go ahead and record and upload video tonight.

Modifié par sinosleep, 05 janvier 2011 - 03:02 .

[kelsjet]

cachx wrote...

Oh and I occasionally use biotics to make "stylish but not effective" deaths.

Interestingly, this is exactly what I have observed, as I mentioned in some other thread. Biotics are used mainly for "flashy deaths", for actual effective killing, they are pretty pointless.

Like you, (and it seems, a few others) I am not convinced by the OPs assertion of what the "numerical facts" of the topic are.

[Praetor Knight]

Regarding Biotics the main point is to control the enemy, IMHO.

If I'm not mistaken, there are more direct damage Tech powers than Biotic (Warp really), but all powers do some damage.

So what would you like to see Biotics do?

If I recall lore-wise, since ME, there have been upgrades made to defenses by the time ME2 comes along. So having Biotics not affect enemies with shields or barrier is fine with me.

Foes with armor, maybe Biotics could be able to manipulate them in ME3? But I have no problem with them in ME2.

Modifié par Praetor Shepard, 05 janvier 2011 - 03:13 .

[kstarler]

I've bookmarked this thread in the case that Sinosleep doesn't beat me to posting it in the next "Adepts are suxxors in ME2" thread. [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/wink.png[/smilie]

Kelsjet, everything regarding his statement about weapon and ammo damage can be verified by the game developers in this thread.  As he posted, he will verify the 1:1 ratio with gameplay video.

I eagerly await Sinosleep's video evidence.

EDIT: Editted for wonky cut-paste forum formatting.

Modifié par kstarler, 05 janvier 2011 - 03:15 .

[sinosleep]

Done filming, about to upload. Geth trooper shields go down in 3 melees, health takes 4. Eclipse trooper shields go down in 3 melees, health takes 4. So it's actually even more in favor of my arguement than 1:1, they have slightly MORE health than defenses.

[Malanek]

Do Geth have more health than shields? That directly contradicts the tips that pop up in game. Is it possible melee has a damage bonus against shields or is there some overspill? I'm not sure about the 1:1 ratio across the game. However what Sinosleep said about weapons is accurate, check the gameplay thread for the bonuses for weapons and powers vs resistances. Overall defences do go down easier than health however the question is whether this is pronounced enough.

I like the stripping before CC gameplay in ME2. I'm not convinced that the balance is exactly right though, particularly for the Adept which is why I think a new passive upgradeable ability that lets the Adepts powers penetrate small amounts of protection is a good idea. I'm fine with the balance for other classes the way it is.

As a class the Adept is still OK even if it is the weakest. I can't believe anyone could play through insanity as the adept without using a biotic power. You would run out of ammo for a start never mind lacking the penetration.

Modifié par Malanek999, 05 janvier 2011 - 03:32 .

[kstarler]

Malanek999 wrote...

As a class the Adept is still OK even if it is the weakest. I can't believe anyone could play through insanity as the adept without using a biotic power. You would run out of ammo for a start never mind lacking the penetration.

I had also thought this. Not to mention, assuming the player is ducked behind cover a majority of the time, and taking into account that at Insanity difficulty without all weapon upgrades, it can take 2-3 magazines of ammo to drop a flanking vanguard/krogan, there would be a lot of death inspired game reloads involved. Or some very lucky displacements.

EDIT: Editted for clarity and snipped the quote to the relevant part.

Modifié par kstarler, 05 janvier 2011 - 03:35 .

[sinosleep]

Melee receives no modifiers, and does 125 base damage. +25% with cybernetic upgrades so it's a very good way of testing how much health:defenses enemies have.



btw, video is up.

[Atmosfear3]

Health only appears to drain faster because of the biotic vulnerabilities they are now exposed to. Anybody who consistently plays on insanity would notice these things as well and that sinosleep is right.

[Malanek]

sinosleep wrote...
btw, video is up.

Interesting.

[kstarler]

sinosleep wrote...

Melee receives no modifiers, and does 125 base damage. +25% with cybernetic upgrades so it's a very good way of testing how much health:defenses enemies have.

btw, video is up.

At first I thought it was possible that the additional damage required to health was due to the enemy shields not dropping entirely, but it is quite visible on the geth that the shield drops and it still takes 4 hits to drop health. Very good video evidence Sinosleep.

[sinosleep]

The other thing is that people who make the guns are so much easier claim completely dismiss the fact that guns have ammo. I've got another vid I'm going to upload where I clear the first room in Tali's loyalty mission as an adept using warp explosions and then clear it using nothing but weapons.



In the warp explosion vid I had ammo to spare.



In the guns only vid I ran out of gps ammo half way through the room.

[Ahglock]

I think the issue is twofold.



One people don't micro manage squadies enough so a lot of wrong weapons for the job are happening, and they end up seeing health deplete just as fast from their fire.



Two extra damage to dudes who have been CCd. You throw the pull and the guy dies almost instantly. People see the instant death part and connect it to the health part, when it is really the CCd part.

[kelsjet]

Funnily enough, what your video shows is that Health to Defenses is in fact, not a 1:1 ratio.


Defenses, at least in my interpretation of what it is on Insanity, is shields and armor (especially w.r.t. adepts, who, essentially, need a "defenseless" target).

If it took 3-4 hits to take out shields and it takes 3-4 hits to take out health, the only way health:defenses will be 1:1 is if armor takes 0-1 hit, which, I think most will agree, is not the case.

Yet again, it seems like the OP is arguing from a point of 'semantics'. I.e. by defining the assertion in a non-standard way (as far as I know, "defenses" have always been defined as shields + armor).

This is probably what is leading to most people considering "taking down Health" being a "much faster" process compared to "stripping and enemy of defenses". Since, at best, killing a defenseless target will take half the time.


That being said, that still does not, in any way, bring you any closer to establishing the OP's initial premise, that being, that it is harder to take out a defenseless enemy with guns than it is with biotics, hence, making biotics non-pointless. This is probably the most significant portion of my post, but one, I'm sure, will be drowned out by the countless "ZOMG LOOK A MOOVIE" posts.

From what I have read of a few of the responses here, people find it just as easily, if not more-so, to just kill an enemy with guns when they are defenseless, compared to a biotic attack.

The last point the OP brings up, imho, is a misnomer. Ammo has never been an issue for me during my countless playthroughs of the game, and there is a pretty straightforward reason for it.

The game doesn't change the amount of ammo that drops depending on class, i.e. a soldier's playthrough wont have more ammo drop.
Due to this, if a class can get through the game using just guns (soldier), then all classes can (especially in ng+ situations, where the weapon disparity is nullified). In short, there is enough ammo in the game to allow you to get through the whole game using just guns. The reason this is so, is since there exists a class that does just that.

[Tony Gunslinger]

Ahglock wrote...

I think the issue is twofold.

One people don't micro manage squadies enough so a lot of wrong weapons for the job are happening, and they end up seeing health deplete just as fast from their fire.

Two extra damage to dudes who have been CCd. You throw the pull and the guy dies almost instantly. People see the instant death part and connect it to the health part, when it is really the CCd part.

I don't even think it's common knowledge that ragdolled enemies receive 100% weapon damage.

I've tested this on merc troopers with a Widow soldier on NG+ with no upgrades and no powers, and my observations match sinosleep's test: one shot in the chest vs pure shields (Widow as no shield dmg bonus) and one shot in the chest on pure health, both bars drop exactly the same amount. 1:1 ratio.

Modifié par Tony Gunslinger, 05 janvier 2011 - 04:48 .