397 réponses à ce sujet

[Juha81FIN]

mauro2222 wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

mauro2222 wrote...

I see your point. But uhm a modern weapon would do **** to a cinetic barrier xD and today we have EMP to disable weapons so its practically the same

Kinetic is what todays old weapons does, they attack is kinetic energy, but so does Mass Effect weapons.
EMP how ever has no affect chemical reactions only eletronicals. So, EMP doesn't affect old fashion weapons at all.

People havent notice that Mass Effect weapons are also kinetic?

Of course they are, ME weapons are railguns that accelerate the tiny metal particle to an incredible speed.

Mass Accelerator weapons ar not rail guns, not even close.

[Lumikki]

mauro2222 wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

People havent notice that Mass Effect weapons are also kinetic?

Of course they are, ME weapons are guns that accelerate the tiny metal particle to an incredible speed.

Exactly, the principle is same just size of metal particle and speed is different. What gives Mass Effect particle better peneration, but here comes the second **** up in Mass Effect weapon lore. Increase speed and smaller side, reduse damage done, because the high peneration and targets soft biological material.

Wanna continue, there is a lot of more **** ups comming..

Modifié par Lumikki, 21 juin 2011 - 09:45 .

[The Baconer]

Lumikki wrote...
Kinetic is what todays old weapons does, they attack is kinetic energy, but so does Mass Effect weapons.
EMP how ever has no affect to chemical reactions, only eletronicals. So, EMP doesn't affect old fashion weapons at all.

People haven't notice that Mass Effect weapons are also kinetic?

The point is modern firearms can't fire projectiles at a fast enough velocity to penetrate, let alone put a dent in, a kinetic barrier.

[Lumikki]

The Baconer wrote...

Lumikki wrote...
Kinetic is what todays old weapons does, they attack is kinetic energy, but so does Mass Effect weapons.
EMP how ever has no affect to chemical reactions, only eletronicals. So, EMP doesn't affect old fashion weapons at all.

People haven't notice that Mass Effect weapons are also kinetic?

The point is modern firearms can't fire projectiles at a fast enough velocity to penetrate, let alone put a dent in, a kinetic barrier.

True, but why you need to penerate it at all?

Modifié par Lumikki, 21 juin 2011 - 09:49 .

[The Baconer]

Lumikki wrote...
True, but why you need to penerate it at all?

So you can, you know, actually hurt stuff with your weapon?

[Lumikki]

The Baconer wrote...

Lumikki wrote...
True, but why you need to penerate it at all?

So you can, you know, actually hurt stuff with your weapon?

Every time You hit the kinetic barrier it lowers it's energy. It has to counter act the energy.
Same happens with mass Effect guns..

Modifié par Lumikki, 21 juin 2011 - 09:52 .

[The Baconer]

Lumikki wrote...
Every time You hit the kinetic barrier it lowers it energy. It has to counter act the energy.

Yes, but you need the projectile to have enough energy behind it to lower he energy of the kinectic barrier in the first place. Look at how many shots it takes with an ME assault rifle to de-power a shield. Do you think you'd have a better chance plinking away at them with what amounts to BBs in comparison?

[Lumikki]

The Baconer wrote...

Lumikki wrote...
Every time You hit the kinetic barrier it lowers it energy. It has to counter act the energy.

Yes, but you need the projectile to have enough energy behind it to lower he energy of the kinectic barrier in the first place. Look at how many shots it takes with an ME assault rifle to de-power a shield. Do you think you'd have a better chance plinking away at them with what amounts to BBs in comparison?

Yes you are right, you need the energy. How ever, you make assumption that Mass Effect guns kinetic energy is bigger, is it really? Think about weapons, like recoil. Where is recoil comming and how can it be prevented. Kinetic energy is related mass and speed. Mass Effect guns has speed, but what about mass? Recoil is answer to this.

Modifié par Lumikki, 21 juin 2011 - 10:00 .

[mauro2222]

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.

This is the lore.

Modifié par mauro2222, 21 juin 2011 - 10:00 .

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

I liked the original overheating idea, it felt more unique than the standard shoot/reload mechanic of the thermal clips in ME 2. Part of the reason I also loved ME 1's firearms was because of all the barrel, ammo and other mods you could pick up for each type of firearm to really tweak the overheating system. Guns just seem so simple in ME 2, though I do like the addition of heavy weapons.

[Lumikki]

mauro2222 wrote...

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.

This is the lore.

True, shatering does increase the damage, but the kinetic energy hasn't change, just side of the particle on impact.

[mauro2222]

Juha81FIN wrote...

mauro2222 wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

mauro2222 wrote...

I see your point. But uhm a modern weapon would do **** to a cinetic barrier xD and today we have EMP to disable weapons so its practically the same

Kinetic is what todays old weapons does, they attack is kinetic energy, but so does Mass Effect weapons.
EMP how ever has no affect chemical reactions only eletronicals. So, EMP doesn't affect old fashion weapons at all.

People havent notice that Mass Effect weapons are also kinetic?

Of course they are, ME weapons are railguns that accelerate the tiny metal particle to an incredible speed.

Mass Accelerator weapons ar not rail guns, not even close.

It's the same principle. I think , well I related to it

[mauro2222]

Lumikki wrote...

mauro2222 wrote...

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.

This is the lore.

True, shatering does increase the damage, but the kinetic energy hasn't change, just side of the particle on impact.

Sorry I lost myself

[The Baconer]

Lumikki wrote...
Yes you are right, you need the energy. How ever, you make assumption that Mass Effect guns kinetic energy is bigger, is it really? Think about weapons, like recoil. Where is recoil comming and how can it be prevented. Kinetic energy is related mass and speed. Mass Effect guns has speed, but what about mass? Recoil is answer to this.

The projectiles are accelerated at supersonic velocities, so their small size is less of a factor. Recoil is dampened by the mass effect fields, but still put a ceiling on how powerful the weapons can get. In the hands of humans, anyway.

[Juha81FIN]

mauro2222 wrote...

Juha81FIN wrote...

mauro2222 wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

mauro2222 wrote...

I see your point. But uhm a modern weapon would do **** to a cinetic barrier xD and today we have EMP to disable weapons so its practically the same

Kinetic is what todays old weapons does, they attack is kinetic energy, but so does Mass Effect weapons.
EMP how ever has no affect chemical reactions only eletronicals. So, EMP doesn't affect old fashion weapons at all.

People havent notice that Mass Effect weapons are also kinetic?

Of course they are, ME weapons are railguns that accelerate the tiny metal particle to an incredible speed.

Mass Accelerator weapons ar not rail guns, not even close.

It's the same principle. I think , well I related to it

They might look similar; in railgun there are two metallic conductors inside the barrel at opposite sides (rails) and you need metallic slug in between them (touching the rails) to complete the electricity circuite and then electricity current propels the slug through barrel. In mass accelerator weapon you don´t need metallic slugs at all, ammunition can be universal and there are no rails inside the barrel, although they use high amount of electricity aswell ammunition doesn´t touch barrel at any time.

Modifié par Juha81FIN, 21 juin 2011 - 10:19 .

[marshalleck]

Juha81FIN wrote...

mauro2222 wrote...

Juha81FIN wrote...

mauro2222 wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

mauro2222 wrote...

I see your point. But uhm a modern weapon would do **** to a cinetic barrier xD and today we have EMP to disable weapons so its practically the same

Kinetic is what todays old weapons does, they attack is kinetic energy, but so does Mass Effect weapons.
EMP how ever has no affect chemical reactions only eletronicals. So, EMP doesn't affect old fashion weapons at all.

People havent notice that Mass Effect weapons are also kinetic?

Of course they are, ME weapons are railguns that accelerate the tiny metal particle to an incredible speed.

Mass Accelerator weapons ar not rail guns, not even close.

It's the same principle. I think , well I related to it

They might look similar; in railgun there are two metallic conductors inide the barrel at opposite sides (rails) and you need metallic slug in between them (touching the rails) to complete the electricity circuite and then electricity current propels the slug through barrel. In mass accelerator weapon you don´t need metallic slugs at all, ammunition can be universal and there are no rails inside the barrel.

You're missing the forest for the trees. In general, when it comes to science fiction movies and games (specifically Quake) railguns accelerate small slugs to incredibly high speeds and that kinetic energy is their destructive power. That's why people compare ME weapons to railguns; even if the underlying technology isn't exactly the same, the end result is. Railguns and mass accelerators have much more in common with each other than either does with a conventional firearm.

Modifié par marshalleck, 21 juin 2011 - 10:25 .

[Praetor Knight]

Juha81FIN wrote...

They might look similar; in railgun there are two metallic conductors inside the barrel at opposite sides (rails) and you need metallic slug in between them (touching the rails) to complete the electricity circuite and then electricity current propels the slug through barrel. In mass accelerator weapon you don´t need metallic slugs at all, ammunition can be universal and there are no rails inside the barrel, although they use high amount of electricity aswell ammunition doesn´t touch barrel at any time.

So how do you account for the codex entries?

The difference I understand is the sophistication of ME universe mass accelerators compared to contemporary prototypes.

http://masseffect.wi...ss_Accelerators

[Sgt Stryker]

Exactly. Modern railgun prototypes are analogous to the Wright Flyer, while ME weapons are analogous to an F-22 or a Boeing 767.

[Juha81FIN]

marshalleck wrote...

Juha81FIN wrote...

mauro2222 wrote...

Juha81FIN wrote...

mauro2222 wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

mauro2222 wrote...

I see your point. But uhm a modern weapon would do **** to a cinetic barrier xD and today we have EMP to disable weapons so its practically the same

Kinetic is what todays old weapons does, they attack is kinetic energy, but so does Mass Effect weapons.
EMP how ever has no affect chemical reactions only eletronicals. So, EMP doesn't affect old fashion weapons at all.

People havent notice that Mass Effect weapons are also kinetic?

Of course they are, ME weapons are railguns that accelerate the tiny metal particle to an incredible speed.

Mass Accelerator weapons ar not rail guns, not even close.

It's the same principle. I think , well I related to it

They might look similar; in railgun there are two metallic conductors inide the barrel at opposite sides (rails) and you need metallic slug in between them (touching the rails) to complete the electricity circuite and then electricity current propels the slug through barrel. In mass accelerator weapon you don´t need metallic slugs at all, ammunition can be universal and there are no rails inside the barrel.

You're missing the forest for the trees. In general, when it comes to science fiction movies and games (specifically Quake) railguns accelerate small slugs to incredibly high speeds and that kinetic energy is their destructive power. That's why people compare ME weapons to railguns; even if the underlying technology isn't exactly the same, the end result is. Railguns and mass accelerators have much more in common with each other than either does with a conventional firearm.

Also true, but I need get shut eye to clear my head for tomorrow .

[Juha81FIN]

Praetor Shepard wrote...

Juha81FIN wrote...

They might look similar; in railgun there are two metallic conductors inside the barrel at opposite sides (rails) and you need metallic slug in between them (touching the rails) to complete the electricity circuite and then electricity current propels the slug through barrel. In mass accelerator weapon you don´t need metallic slugs at all, ammunition can be universal and there are no rails inside the barrel, although they use high amount of electricity aswell ammunition doesn´t touch barrel at any time.

So how do you account for the codex entries?

The difference I understand is the sophistication of ME universe mass accelerators compared to contemporary prototypes.

http://masseffect.wi...ss_Accelerators

I´ll check that some other time, as I am too tired to do it rightnow.

[Bluko]

 To clarify this is how I would implement an Overheat System:

-Weapon can fire a set number of shots before overheat
-Weapon will regenerate shot(s) slowly*, but only when not being fired (No unlimited "spraying")
-When weapon reaches heat limit it must be vented ("reloaded" same amount of downtime as Thermal Clips)
-Player and squadmate weapons cannot be "Sabotaged" or forced to overheat via Enemy Tech**

*Shots regenerate at slower rate then venting, but negates the need to constantly "reload". Which is silly since you should only really reload when a clip is near empty or out, otherwise you're being wasteful.

Thus weapons are constrained by "clip capacity" (most important), "venting a.k.a reloading", and "general cooling". Ammo capacity of guns is usually the most irrelevant aspect of guns as in reality there isn't such a thing. It's a completely made-up constraint in most games. It's also one that nearly every single shooter I have ever played screws up. Why? Because the guns with the most ammo capacity almost always get used the most. Even if some weapons do more damage the capacity to kill/shoot more will always win. (Hint: It's why machine guns and automatic assault rifles exist, it's also why Revolvers used to be very popular.)

Are you going to use the Viper or the Mantis? Sure the Mantis does more damage but the Viper's superior capacity almost always make it a better choice. Thing is if you give the Mantis too many shots then it out-does the Viper. Ammo capacity is extremely difficult to balance, and I have yet to play a game where all the weapons are properly balanced in such a regard. You are wasting your time trying to balance ammo capacity when really you should be focused on:

DPS (Damage Per Second)
Reload Speed
Clip Capacity

Those are the aspects that truly matter. Ammo capacity simply limits how many enemies you can kill with a weapon or how often you must scrounge ammo.


**Also a question here I feel needs asking:

Some players did not like that enemies could overheat/jam your weapon with Sabotage. However then why is running out of "Thermal Clips" a better solution? Both prevent you from firing your gun. The overheat is temporary and goes away after a couple seconds or so. With Thermal Clips you must find another Thermal Clip to resume firing, which may take longer or simply not be feasible. In this case Thermal Clips force you to switch weapons should you ever run out of ammunition. So why is the fact that ME1 forced you to do the same thing worse? (Other then that some classes only had one weapon to use, which isn't really relevant to overheating itself as it was poor design on ME1's part.)


Other compromises I feel would be acceptable:
1) Hybrid System (clips universally shared, cool off over time, difficult to balance however...) 
2) Clips regenerate or "cool off" out of combat situations (may be difficult to balance again)

Though this would make a lot of sense as it's rather silly you are limited in supply, when stuff like this should be re-usable in the future. MG operators that do make use of barrel swaps for cooling, do not throw away the barrels. Also leaving magazines, casings, etc. behind is generally considered "sloppy" by Special Forces. Your suppose to leave as little evidence behind as possible of you being there.

[Praetor Knight]

Bluko wrote...

Other compromises I feel would be acceptable:

2) Clips regenerate or "cool off" out of combat situations (may be difficult to balance again)

But this sort of tweak seems like it would be able to keep the balance ME2 had with how weapons feel, without affecting combat.

And Bioware would be able to control when such events trigger, if no other possibility could be considered acceptable. Also I figure that such a tweak would actually be no different than what ME2 had in finding Armories, Power Cells and permanent Thermal Clip spots as we had in ME2 between combat engagements like on Purgatory and the Collector engagements.

Plus, lore-wise, there can simply be a codex entry that could state how simple Thermal Clips are, and how they could be carried in the armor and made by the Omni-Tool, so with a break in combat, there should be time to restock weapons, as health and shields already are able to do.

[Bluko]

Praetor Shepard wrote...

Bluko wrote...

Other compromises I feel would be acceptable:

2) Clips regenerate or "cool off" out of combat situations (may be difficult to balance again)

But this sort of tweak seems like it would be able to keep the balance ME2 had with how weapons feel, without affecting combat.

And Bioware would be able to control when such events trigger, if no other possibility could be considered acceptable. Also I figure that such a tweak would actually be no different than what ME2 had in finding Armories, Power Cells and permanent Thermal Clip spots as we had in ME2 between combat engagements like on Purgatory and the Collector engagements.

Plus, lore-wise, there can simply be a codex entry that could state how simple Thermal Clips are, and how they could be carried in the armor and made by the Omni-Tool, so with a break in combat, there should be time to restock weapons, as health and shields already are able to do.

I'm not against it. Heck I'd be thrilled if they actually did something like this, cause then it really would add tension to fights to know that my ammo actually was finite. And on the upside I wouldn't have to worry about throwing an enemy off a cliff or turning them into dust so I can simply pick-up a clip.

I mean if Health can regenerate why can't ammo?

Sadly I don't have much hope for Bioware trying to do things "different". As I'm pretty sure this biggest factor for including Thermal Clips in the first place was to make the game more accessible.

(Odd thing is most people here don't want Multiplayer, but at the same time fail to realize that a conventional ammo system just makes it that much more likely that they will do such a thing to gain that bigger "audience". Not that it couldn't be done with a different system, it's just we're heading down a clear path. The more the gameplay resembles other conventional shooter the more likely it is to feature the same "modes" too.)

[slimgrin]

Overheating -----> clips. It's the future, man. We don't need no stinking clips.

[xxSgt_Reed_24xx]

B/c standing there, holding down the trigger forever with 2 heat reducing upgrades and murdering everything in sight took so much more thinking. LOL ... riiiight.