Tony Gunslinger wrote...
tjzsf wrote...
Point 1: Apparently I also missed the part where you reverted back to the overheat system when you ran out of thermal clips. Maybe that's because you don't revert to the overheat system. Your gun, instead of being able to vent off that heat and shoot again, is now a stick.
Source?
Because according to the codex and the hybrid system left disabled in the final version of the game, evidence heavily suggests the heatsink used in ME1 operates the same in ME2, the only difference being ejectable, which is purely mechanical.
The reason Shepard can’t shoot with ‘zero’ clips in ME2 is the same reason Shepard can’t empty the entire ammo block in ME1: they’re game mechanics.
In-verse rebuttal - the fact that you can't shoot with "zero" clips means that you don't have the overheat/cooldown system.
Meta rebuttal - then it was a lazy game mechanic that should have been something like "ammo in the current clip regenerates if you don't shoot for a while".
And you also seem to have dropped the part about how TCs give a slight tactical advantage, but overheat is a far bigger strategic advantage - unless we're dealing with snipers, in which case the low rate of fire of SRs in both games (other than the Viper) makes ME1 sniper rifles superior in every way.
Overheating weapons will produce less DPS than reloading versions of the same spec because you’re managing the battlefield instead of managing heat. My examples have proven this, which was to answer your original question:
“From an in-verse perspective, explain to me how it makes any sense that "ammo" is presented as being an advancement of technology when someone with a smattering of elemental strategy could see that reintroducing an element of logistics that was previously eliminated is a stupid idea. “
And as I’ve explained before, in the real world, overheating weapons is bad design. Adding a limiter and adjustable firing rates makes these guns more reliable, allowing the combatant to focus more on the fight. However, this gun doesn’t exist in the game, because overheat was put in as a game mechanic to gimp you, not because it's superior design.
Overheating weapons + infinite ammo is better than regular weapons and limited ammo. That's basic strategy. Your troops are going to be more limited by what you can supply them with than how much DPS they can put out. Why do you think logistics is such an important part of actual wars? If overheat was put in to gimp you, then TCs gimp you even worse - at least with overheat your gun is still a gun, but with TCs your gun becomes a stick
Point 2: No, I am not being "challenged" as you define it, mainly because I do not actually get to be a specialist. If I am a sniper, I don't get to specialize in sniping because I run out of sniper shots in mid-large scale battles unless I'm packing the Viper, if I am a CQCer, I don't get to specialize in that because the same thing happens unless I get the shotgun rounds upgrade. The same problem does not exist in ME1, with the only tradeoff being a miniscule decrease in rate of fire. It is true that some battles are not suitable for some playstyles - but unless you are a Soldier who has a gun for every situation, that's what powers and squadmates are for. And even then, you are rewarded more for charging out into combat than for more reserved styles, simply because thermal clips force you to run out and grab more ammo even if your class is relatively squishy and needs to hide and take potshots.
Infiltrators are one of the most powerful classes in the game. If you can't 'be a sniper', that's on you and not the ammo.
Bull. Infiltrators are indeed one of the most powerful classes. It is still quite possible to run out of Widow or Mantis ammo during parts of the game because less clips are dropped/encountered than the number of shots you have to take, reducing you to 0 ammo and making you unable to snipe. That's not me, that's the game.
And for all the talk about how ammo leads to more varied gun design, let's look at the relevant stats that Gunslinger listed
...Also, ME1 guns were made in a ladder system and not for balance, so there's even less consideration to gun design.
And of course, the kicker - for all the supposed "varying gun design" that ammo would give you, we have a whopping total of 2 guns per gun type plus a special AR/SR/Shotty unless you have DLC. Totally, totally varied.
ME2’s vanilla set contains 11 different weapon designs, not including heavy weapons and DLC. ME1 has 4 weapon designs.
Take out elements of weapon design that aren't related to ammo (such as recoil) or things that are flat-out false (all weapons do not fire at the same rate in ME1) and the numbers are a lot closer. Also, ME3 has 12 designs - 4 types of weapon, 3 different stats per weapon you can choose to prioritize (shots/overheat, damage, accuracy).
Bozorgmehr wrote...
tjzsf wrote...
Because
"taking away" can mean "simplifying" instead of "dumbing down". Also,
stop avoiding the main point. Your point basically goes
"Removal of ammo leads to dumbing down"
"ME1 removed ammo"
"Therefore, ME1 is dumbed down"
../../../images/forum/emoticons/andy.png Have
you read even one of my post? Guess not, because - unlike everyone else
here - my point has NOTHING to do with Mass Effect, every single point
you mentioned (which I didn't quoted) could just as well be about the
weather or your next holiday. It has NOTHING to do with ammo
limitations. You're comparing apples with oranges.
But because it
seems some people can't see the difference or even understand something
so incredibly simple as LIMITATIONS I'll try again.
-snip.
Ah, yes. Because assuming the opposition to be retarded lends so much credibility, and can in no way be applied to you as well. But because some people can't understand the basic concept of CONSISTENCY, I'll try again. In-verse, there's no good reason why any armed force would go from older guns to TCs. Meta-wise, forcing you to look for ammo so you'll be sure not to run out for the next firefight isn't fun or challenging any more than planetscanning is fun or challenging. Also, BS that ME1 system doesn't prevent me from shooting forever. That only happens if I strap two frictionless mods on to a single gun. For every single other build (one doesn't come across such mods all the time; I only came across it come virmire-ish once), overheat prevents you from taping down the fire button, so that point is moot.
There's no need to apply ammo limitations to ME1's system, because that's making it harder for no good reason other than a subset of players like things to be harder (could always just turn up the difficulty). There is a way to apply TCs to ME1's system, for example by a "Thermal Clips I-X" mod where the number is the number of times you can eject a clip to reset heat. Or you could apply overheat/cooldown to ME2's system by having your current clip slowly regen ammo. The box may be comfortable, but sometimes it is good to think outside it.
Retour en haut
Bioware I am disapoint, I am definitely less excited about ME3 after hearing that. Its all just a matter of opinion with the ammo. Because theres many things that did right and wrong in both games, but I really enjoyed the gameplay of the first game more IMO. Also the sound effects of the guns in ME1 sounded more furturestic, you gotta give me that one.
Generate magic ammo boxes that conveniently appear on the battlefield at critical points during the mission. I don't really like either solution, but as the OP pointed out those are common to most shooters.
