138 réponses à ce sujet

[LEYN0S]

Geth only need LOOK at the Hammerhead, and the damn thing explodes.
Oh, and 'cold weather' also causes it to explode. It has:

No HUD
No 3x zoom
No turret gun
No cannon
No shields
No ability to bank left or right
No manual repair
No ability to get in or out of it at will


I'd gladly take the Mako back.

Modifié par LEYN0S, 20 septembre 2011 - 07:01 .

[Thy King]

Gh0st_00 wrote...

Lunatic LK47 wrote...

Thy King wrote...

I have played with the mako on both the PC and the Xbox. On the Xbox, the controls where awfull. On the PC it was just like playing battlefield 2, and it was close to resembling tank-battle tactics of that game. I really enjoyed it. I did not on the xbox.

The other problem with the mako was the terrain. When it was more or les flat, it was ok (on the PC), but that jagged terrain was a complete ass to drive. If you fix these two points, especially the terrain, i think the mako is just fine.
Maybe throw some extra speed in for good measure. The IFV's of today can also go about 100km/h (the Stryker)

It might be interesting to have multiple gravity levels to play with your grip and such.

The Hammerhead was just boring. There was no tactic other than just plain long range foreward shooting while jumping and weaving while your cardbord tank tried to avoid gunfire. And the thing always got snagged by landscape features. It was fast, which was its only good point, but it was boring too. There was absolutely NO tactical thinking involved at all.

Bolded for emphasis.

And when exactly did the Mako require tactical thinking?
Fire cannon. Jump to avoid projectile. Fire cannon. Repeat.

In the Mako you could make a choice on how to approach a camp. You could do a long range shooting fest, or drive in close and just go ramming tactic. I usually went for long range, on a vantage point. However, some landscape settings did not really allow for that, so you had to change your favorite tactic.

I am not going to say you need a military tactics degree for the Mako, but you had the option of several approaches to deal with the same problem. Most of the time, the same approach did work, but you could just change it up for fun. You could do that, because the Mako's strengths and gameplay ability allowed you to do that. And even some times, you had to change up certain tactics because the level demanded it.
If it is a particular challenge you wanted, then the shortcomming would be the Geth enemies, not the Mako. The enemies where always slow-to-fire-at-range enemies, making it easy to dodge.There where also no homing missiles that you had to intercept or anything like that. I believe there were the ocasional lasers, but they were rare.

With the Hammerhead, you simply cannot get close to your target, or you are dead. There was only 1 tactic, since you missed the tank-like features: foreward shooting, at range, weaving while avoiding the pop-up turrets. When damaged, stay out of range or out of sight, and when 'repaired', rinse and repeat. There was NO choice in approaching the problem, NO choice in where to shoot from, NO choice in what weapon to use, or how to use the weapon.


It is my oppinion that most people barfed on the Mako because of the bad console controls, which also ruined pretty much all the fun for me, AND the terrain being a rinse and repeat job. Procedural terrain, or something close to it, is ok, but it was quite uninspiring when you had 15 minutes of jagged terrain to run over. Also, next to the surface texture of the terrain, there was almost never something to look at.
There was this one level where meteorites flew over. I was dissapointed that none of them actually hit the playing field, that would have been cool.

[Inquisitor Recon]

I'd prefer the Mako but a long time ago there was an excellent topic about how the Hammerhead could be fixed and all sorts of features that could be added to it.

[Darkphalanax]

How about this?? A new vehicle combining the specs of the Mako and the Hammerhead??

Fast and with a high jump like the Hammerhead, with the machinegun and cannon gun at the top, with shields and armor like the Mako. Put the hud on and allow the player to exit the vehicle anytime the player want, and last and important thing... Let the player decide where to land!!!!!!!

Shep: Joker, I want to land there!!
Joker: No
Shep: (Pokerface)

With that features, I'm sure the vehicle exploration will be awesome. No matter how irregular the land will be, how far is our target, the mobility of the Hammerhead combining the firepower and resistance of the Mako will make the exploration one of the most fun parts of the game.

The Mako mobility is awfull.. God!! Every time I was in the need to reach a place I was.. "oh lord, I need to reach there, no.. well.." (press "w", and try stay awake before I reach the target). Specially the mountains part. It was a pain in the ass!!!

[wizardryforever]

Let me repost my pros and cons of the Hammerhead vs the Mako that it seems like I have to post every time someone makes a thread like this.

Pros
1. It's much much faster.  This is one that can't really be overstated.  Even the baseline, non-boost speed is faster than the Mako, meaning less monotonous driving time, and easier dodging.

2. The boost function.  This is just amazing.  The boost at least doubles your speed and lets you outrun anything or reach a better position very  quickly.  Makes dodging a snap, and can be used to ram enemies as well.

3. It's omni-directional.  It can move in any direction at the base speed  without having to turn, letting you strafe in it.  It can turn in place  effortlessly, doing in less than a second what it would take several  seconds for the Mako to achieve.

4. The missiles are homing.  This is huge.  It means that you don't have to be very precise with your shots, no more just barely missing someone and dying.  As a result, this lets you focus more on driving an dodging.  Because they home, you avoid all the tiresome issues that the Mako had when trying to shoot at/from elevation. 

5. The jump function.  Yes you can decry it as "arcady" but it makes combat so much more interesting.  You can now use the 3rd dimension as an attack or escape angle.  It recharges quickly, lets you jump very very high, and you can boost and shoot while in midair.

6.  It repairs itself automatically in only a few seconds.  You no longer have to wait several minutes for the shields to recharge, or spend resources (and make yourself vulnerable) on a repair mechanism.

7. Thus far it is not mandatory at all.  The Firewalker missions are completely optional DLC, and you don't have to  actually fight anyone in the Hammerhead in Overlord.  The Mako by contrast, was used on every mission except when you docked directly with a ship.  All the story missions, and all other UNC missions, used the Mako.  It was forced on you if you wanted to complete the game.

Cons
1. The armor is weak.  This is the one everyone fixates on.  The armor is a bit weak to machine gun fire, but that is
mitigated somewhat by how easy it is to dodge incoming fire (even on Insanity).  Also somewhat mitigated somewhat by how quickly the Hammerhead repairs itself.  Imagine if the Hammerhead had this and the Mako's repair time!

2. It has no secondary gun.  This isn't really that big of a deal, considering how quickly the missiles fire, but it would still be nice to have a minigun.

3. You can't zoom.  The homing function on the missiles makes this rather trivial, but some people like to use the
scope as a spyglass.

Cons with the engine, not the vehicle
1. You cannot save while in the Hammerhead.  I think this has something to do with the fact that it was DLC and the Hammerhead missions are structured differently from on-foot missions.  Nevertheless, this isn't a flaw with the Hammerhead itself.

2. You can't get out of the Hammerhead just anywhere.  Again, I think this was an engine restriction.  I presume that this and the above will be fixed if the Hammerhead returns in ME3.

And yet, somehow people still pine for the mess that was the Mako, despite having a perfectly good Hammerhead.  I just don't get it.

Modifié par wizardryforever, 20 septembre 2011 - 05:28 .

[wizardryforever]

More on topic, I would like to say that exploration is all well and good, as long as there is something to find.  In ME1's exploration, you roam planets looking for minerals and anomalies without anything interesting going on most of the time.  In ME2, the emphasis was on galaxy exploration, and you explored looking for minerals and anomalies.  The difference here is that the anomalies were actual missions, instead of a Pokemon style collection quest.  Sure the missions could have been better, but they were all unique.

In ME3, I would support some kind of exploration, as long as it is actually fun.  There needs to actually be something of note to be found, otherwise we're just wandering randomly.

[Flashflame58]

[Flashflame58]

Jek Romano Shavo wrote...

Flashflame58 wrote...

(Mako pun)

Even though I really enjoyed driving it on the rocky terrain and running over geth, meaning I disliked it being replaced with planet scanning, this still made me laugh out loud. xD

I loved running the Geth over, too...but the dang thing always bounced around like it was made outta rubber...it drove me nuts! XD

[Merlin 47]

Ricinator wrote...

will the mako be making a return with AMAZING HANDLING and i just want to be able to drive on the planets agin like me1 anyone withme there?

OR do you want to drive around with the hammerhead with me1 type spaces
OR mako with me2 o gawd its to hard to say spaces

any input on anything exploration go for it

None of the above, because ME 2 handled it properly in my opinion.

[capn233]

If the Mako returns, it should have a horn that plays Dixie. You could hit it whenever you make big jumps.

[Sepewrath]

Kileyan wrote...
WIthout the Mako, every encounter is just *teleport to combat range*. I do understand many dislike the downtime, they just want every second of play to be shooting, I didn't mind the driving, exploring in between the shooting, and of course the ability of the mako to allow me to shoot, charge or snipe before the boring coordor shooter aspect that was inevitiable.

There is nothing wrong with downtime, peaks and valleys are essential to a well balanced pace. But the Mako was no valley, it just brought the game to screeching halt as the Mako struggled to get over terrain it wasn't designed for; while you rolled through empty environments doing nothing, minus the sparse loot drop or enemy ambush. That was nothing more than filler, artificial expansion of the game, to make it look bigger than it really was. This was suppose to be a galactic society, what we saw was nothing but a bunch of empty rocks.

And the whole stopping to snipe thing, really overrated in ME1, it's not nearly as good as it is in say Fallout 3. I'll take a boring corridor shooting sequence, over simple time devouring driving any day of the week. I would take the Mako back, if say the landscape was actually designed not just different color rocks and it was dotted with locations with people who give fleshed out side missions. Like you saw in one of those E3 demos a planet had three locations on it for side missions, driving to those on planets that looked as good as the ME2 planets would be fine.

[Hallusinaatti]

I would like MAKO be replaced with an actual IFV.
MAKO is a horrible vehicle to fit any IFV role because:

- Slow firing main gun. IFV's main element is a rapid firing low caliber gun (IRL from 20mm to 50mm)
- Inaccurate machine gun. Again, IFV relies on rapid and accurate firing.
- High profile. A bad aspect in any AFV.
- Long. Commander will have hard time when giving directions when reverse, unless the MAKO has reverse camera in the back.
- Wheels. Tracks are superior in any way. Tracks can handle any terrain, allow the vehicle to turn around its Axis (instead of making a huge arc) and a good driver will never have the tracks jump off.
- Lack of area-covering windows. There are only two long windows in the front that serve no other purpose than let the driver admire the sky.

Few good aspects of the MAKO
+ Good gun stabilizer.
+ Good drive in the unmanned turred.
+ Very good suspension.
+ Fast acceleration.

I know this as I'm a RL infantry fighting vehicle crewmember... And I think the MAKO sucks in every way.. It more resembles an armed APC and APCs are not intended for direct combat.
But maybe I'm just thinking too much. Haven't tried Hammerhead.

Modifié par Hallusinaatti, 22 septembre 2011 - 05:53 .

[capn233]

It's hard to disagree with someone that operates a real life one, but then again ME isn't real life... so have a few observations.

Space tires are probably better than tracks for speed and ultimately mobility. Wouldn't a decent comparison be something like the Stryker or LAV compared to the Bradley? Maybe the alliance had a requirement that it not tear up their roads... who knows. I do know that the Mako didn't actually get stuck in the mud anywhere

As for the main gun, there isn't any requirement for rapid fire necessarily, it's just that the ones that have rapid fire are armed with smallish cannons. The BMP3 had a 100mm gun on it. I don't disagree that more rate of fire is a good thing, but rate of fire from the main gain requiring less power isn't necessarily any good. We also haven't seen any Alliance tanks... so maybe they wanted to use the Mako in something of an anti-armor role for which a smaller gun wouldn't have been appropriate.

The machine gun could stand to be more accurate, but the point was not to make it so the Mako broke the game.

I was personally more disappointed with the Hammerhead missile launcher that looked like it was really the Mako's main gun.

Modifié par capn233, 22 septembre 2011 - 06:06 .

[Landline]

I preferred the Mako.

I used the advanced tactic of "Parking on top of the geth tank, getting out and shooting it to death for more XP"

You can't do that with the Hammerhead.

[CottonBALL]

Mako >> HH. Oh I miss my clumsy and superior Mako... HH does not live up to Mako in my mind.

[Hallusinaatti]

capn233 wrote...

It's hard to disagree with someone that operates a real life one, but then again ME isn't real life... so have a few observations.

Space tires are probably better than tracks for speed and ultimately mobility. Wouldn't a decent comparison be something like the Stryker or LAV compared to the Bradley? Maybe the alliance had a requirement that it not tear up their roads... who knows. I do know that the Mako didn't actually get stuck in the mud anywhere

As for the main gun, there isn't any requirement for rapid fire necessarily, it's just that the ones that have rapid fire are armed with smallish cannons. The BMP3 had a 100mm gun on it. I don't disagree that more rate of fire is a good thing, but rate of fire from the main gain requiring less power isn't necessarily any good. We also haven't seen any Alliance tanks... so maybe they wanted to use the Mako in something of an anti-armor role for which a smaller gun wouldn't have been appropriate.

The machine gun could stand to be more accurate, but the point was not to make it so the Mako broke the game.

I was personally more disappointed with the Hammerhead missile launcher that looked like it was really the Mako's main gun.

Very good points and right but pointing out a few things:

The larger cannon, as in BMP-3, are heavy ordinance and put a lot pressure on suspension. When you give it a bigger gun you need to cut elsewhere - that's why your average tank doesn't have a 480mm naval gun in it For BMP-3 this meant cutting armor and the vehicle I'm running could easily steamroll several BMP-3 as it has a rapid fire 30mm cannon that can easily penetrate that armor. The point in rapid fire guns is that if can penetrate armor it does it with a blaze, it it's infantry you can cut down them in hordes and if there is no penetration you can still cause enough shake to disorient the enemy and with luck damage their gun and with a good shot even bust out their targeting systems.

But yes I must remind myself that this is just a game  Perhaps MAKO was just produced alongside Normandy itself and meant for low importance recon but used by Shepard for combat. The MAKO's combat prowess would just come out of the "just a game" aspect.

[Landline]

It seems that about half of the peoples gripes with the Mako was the open world side planets being to big and empty. That's a problem with the level design, not the Mako it self.

[JeffZero]

Everyone's a big Mako reactor.

I like them both but I prefer the Hammerhead. Despite its paper-thin defenses I'm just too in love with speed to care.

[Hallusinaatti]

I personally liked the MAKO's controls but my main beef was that as a wheeled vehicle its mobility suffers from the long arc it does when turning. The turning controls were a bit too sensitive too. I personally love to drive with gun zoom on, as an IFV gunner that reminds me most of what I did in RL, but turning turns to real hell then so it's a possibility only in open areas.

[Landline]

Wait- What if vehicle levels were designed so that they could be completed by either vheicle, and you could choose which one you want?

[JediMaster_Murph]

Landline wrote...

Wait- What if vehicle levels were designed so that they could be completed by either vheicle, and you could choose which one you want?

this would be sick as f***, to bad the hammerhead would be collecting space dust the whole game tho