355 réponses à ce sujet

[Sgt Stryker]

P38 ace wrote...

and what is the deal with these migic Black boxes on guns that Magically Change the type of ammo mine and all of my Squades guns shoot, an i lone can only use 3 max at one time
what is keeping me from pressing the botton on the magic box that lets me shoot Armor-peirsing, Shredder, Incendiary and, magic warp ammo. what is stooping me.

Yeah, I'm not a fan of ammo powers either. I never understood why you needed specialized training to use a non-standard ammo block. Oh well.

[The Spamming Troll]

Sgt Stryker wrote...

It may not be cold air, but it's also not hot enough to damage a machine, evidently. Also, if you take ME1 into account, I think it's safe to conclude that geth are more resilient to temperature extremes than most organics. I am of course thinking of the mission on Metgos.

i wouldnt be so quick to rely on ME2s sense of being logicaly sound, whether in cutscenes or in gameplay. i dont even care either way, but im bored. but if thats what we have to rely on, so be it. i know TCs are burning red hot when popped out of your weapon and i know one TC can instantly start a fire, thanks to zaeeds badassery. im not sure the of your internal parts, but i can only assume the heat dissipated from using your weapons would be CRAZY hot. it cant just be lukewarm.

i wouldnt compare hazard level 2 to the inside of the sun(if TCs are actually that hot).

somebody has to be right about this tho. does anyone know exactly what materials are used in making a geth? or how hot weapons get?

[Sgt Stryker]

Unless we get some official data on what material the heat sinks are made of (so we can infer their temperature based on their color), or some numbers on how much kinetic energy a typical fired round has (so we can estimate the waste heat generated from that), I'm afraid your guess is as good as mine.

We know with good certainty that they reach temperatures high enough to ignite whatever that fuel is on Zorya. However, I'm pretty sure that saying they reach temperatures of the sun is a bit of an exaggeration. If that were true, that little firefight in the jungles of Zorya would have turned into a forest fire.

Modifié par Sgt Stryker, 21 octobre 2011 - 11:38 .

[Someone With Mass]

Sgt Stryker wrote...

Unless we get some official data on what material the heat sinks are made of (so we can infer their temperature based on their color), or some numbers on how much kinetic energy a typical fired round has (so we can estimate the waste heat generated from that), I'm afraid your guess is as good as mine.

We know with good certainty that they reach temperatures high enough to ignite whatever that fuel is on Zorya. However, I'm pretty sure that saying they reach temperatures of the sun is a bit of an exaggeration. If that were true, that little firefight in the jungles of Zorya would have turned into a forest fire.

They would melt your face off the second you popped them out of the gun too.

Nor would you ever be able to contain them in a gun. They would melt right through that. 

[Crimzoneyed]

 I have no idea if this was posted already but here we go.

Modern infantry weapons are micro-scaled mass accelerators, using mass-reducing fields and magnetic force to propel miniature slugs to lethal speeds. Nearly every gun on the battlefield is laden with features, from targeting auto-assists to projectile shavers that can generate thousands of rounds of ammunition from a small, internal block of metal.It was long thought that personal weapons had plateaued in performance, but the geth proved all theories wrong. Mathematically reviewing their combat logs, the geth found that in an age of kinetic barriers, most firefights were won by the side who could put the most rounds down-range the fastest. But combatants were forced to deliberately shoot slower to manage waste heat, or pause as their weapons vented.
To eliminate this inefficiency, the geth adopted detachable heat sinks known as thermal clips. While organic arms manufacturers were initially doubtful this would produce a net gain, a well-trained soldier can eject and swap thermal clips in under a second. Faced with superior enemy firepower, organic armies soon followed the geth's lead, and today's battlefields are littered with these thermal clips.

Make's sense to me.

[voteDC]

I don't buy the thermal clip system as an in universe improvement. You've gone from weapons that will fire 'forever' to a chance that you will run out of ammunition.

The old system seems far less likely to jam, whereas the thermal clip system has a lot more that could go wrong.

With the thermal clips you have more equipment that you must carry and seriously would any soldier pick up random stuff from the battlefield and put it into their own weapon?

Then you have the issue of ejecting clips that are hot enough to ignite fuel. Imagine ejecting a clip and burning the person next to you, or setting fire to other equipment.

However as a game reason I fully understand. It slows you down a little and prevents you from spraying and praying, wasting ammunition.

I actually put less rounds down field than in the first game because I have less rounds available to me.

Modifié par voteDC, 22 octobre 2011 - 01:15 .

[The Spamming Troll]

Sgt Stryker wrote...

Unless we get some official data on what material the heat sinks are made of (so we can infer their temperature based on their color), or some numbers on how much kinetic energy a typical fired round has (so we can estimate the waste heat generated from that), I'm afraid your guess is as good as mine.

We know with good certainty that they reach temperatures high enough to ignite whatever that fuel is on Zorya. However, I'm pretty sure that saying they reach temperatures of the sun is a bit of an exaggeration. If that were true, that little firefight in the jungles of Zorya would have turned into a forest fire.

well untill ME3 comes out and the geth made another form of ammo that do exactly that.

cant wait.

[Whizz83]

well personally i believe they did it simply to bring the game to a more realistic standpoint as they dumbed down the rpg elements and made me2 more of a shooter and streamlined the game in general. i still prefer the gunplay and powers in the first one. deeper. the armor was a passive benefit, rather than something to break through. anyway. the lore was a very poor attempt to explain what they did. now don't get me wrong, i have played the hell outta me2, only lack the insanity achievements for main story & shadowbroker (i do have all for me1), but still. they took away a lot of the things that made ME1 a unique combat experience, that and you needed those maxed out super weapons on insanity in me1, the enemies took next to no damage

[Bluko]

Shepard the Leper wrote...
I dunno what you're doing, but I'm not reloading all day long for the lulz. Besides, reloading (+clipsize) is basically the same thing as waiting for your weapon to cool down. The only difference between the two systems is, you can potentially burn your own guns making them useless for the rest of the mission.

I also think it's funny to hear people who celebrate the "traditional" RPGs complain about picking up a clip or two every couple of minutes. But they somehow think it's awesome to have a crapload of useless junk to loot.

You see that underlined part of your statement? Thermal Clips didn't really change much if anything except the need to look for ammo every so often. Which honestly I do not find all that interesting in shooters generally speaking. (Unless it's a survival type game.) Picking up new weapons is one thing, but walking over dead bodies to refill your guns ammo has always struck me as a rather poor if not outright silly feature in most shooters.

And this is exactly why I'm so against TCs. They did not improve or make the gameplay anymore enjoyable, exciting, or challenging IMO. I see it as a largely pointless addition made to accomodate those who are only familiar with modern shooters. Maybe I'm just crazy, but I like to play different games to play different games. Mass Effect offered something different to other games and I enjoyed that despite its flaws. It annoys me that some insist every game must play exactly like *insert popular game here* otherwise it's no good.


Also as for the relevance to "looting". In ME1 you never needed to loot bodies and I liked that. And you still loot crates in ME2. Only difference is instead of tangible items you get an upgrade which generally requires you mine some planets to activate it. Also looking for items is generally something that's done after combat in most RPG games. I do not find it appealing to expose my avatar to pick up some random clip/magazine that's lying on the ground simply so I can continue using said weapon(s).

With a weapon or an actual item it's a bit different. Maybe I'm using a pistol, but because I'm stuck in close quarters I want to pick up an enemy's shotgun because it's ultimately more effective. Thankfully ME3 does now actually allow you to do this and I'm grateful.

But getting your butt shot off just because the game imposes an ammo limitation and requires you to look for ammo is not fun. Now don't get the wrong impression that I died a lot in ME2 and as a result I'm crying about TCs for that reason. What generally happened was my shields got shot up and then I was forced to wait in cover before I could resume attacking as I was waiting for the health regeneration to kick in. Which basically resulted in me spending more time hiding behind cover do nothing then I probably did in ME1 honestly.

And this is exactly why I do not find such games that fun especially on higher difficulties as basically you take a few shots kill an enemy or two and then wait for the veins bursting through your eyes to go away, rinse and repeat.

Shepard the Leper wrote...
Sure, but you always end up with less guns.

Can you explain why an Overheat Mechanic would limit the number of available weapons?

Shepard the Leper wrote...
We won't have stuff like the Avalanche - for example.

What do TCs have to with Heavy Weapons? I'm not going to object that a rocket launcher use rockets. It's a totally different type of weapon from the conventional firearms. I have no objections that Heavy Weapons use their own form of ammunition as they are meant to be powerful limited use weapons. (Heavy Weapons do not use Thermals Clips, they use Power Cells, not much better lorewise but I don't really care in this instance.)

Shepard the Leper wrote...
You are saying that having unlimited ammo makes things harder than a system where you can run out of ammo. I dunno what you have been smoking, but it must be pretty powerful stuff.

You have pretty darn near unlimited ammo in ME2 anyways. The difference between ME1 and ME2 in this regard?

In ME1 you wait a few seconds for the weapon to cool.
In ME2 you reload or go pick up another clip.

I'm not saying unlimited ammo makes the game harder. I'm saying having to wait for a cooldown and or manage your heat build-up does.

ME1's penalty is harsher then ME2's in this regard as it actually does require you switch weapons. But it also rewards those who can control their fire-rate.

Also please for the love of _ do not bring Frictionless Material/Spectre Weapons. Those items are broken and render the Overheat Mechanic useless. I know that. I'm not asking for such things to return were an Overheat System re-implemented.

Shepard the Leper wrote.
I'm also surprised by your explanation about "knowing how to properly use your weapons". I never met an instructor telling me to focus on a cooldown meter instead of the battlefield.

I also believe most weapons (yet) don't have an ammunition counter on clear display for the operator. I never watched my Cooldown Meter anymore then I did my Bulletcount Meter. How is it any worse to memorize the heat build-up rate of your weapon to the number of shots your weapon has? I mean FFS the inventory even told you how many Shots Before Overheat in ME1.

Shepard the Leper wrote.
Seriously, grow up and learn something about design before posting such nonsense. Re-designing the wheel isn't the best way forward you know.

Design of what? Weapons? Video Games? Where exactly is your argument of authority coming from here?

I fail to see how weapons in video games using something other then ammunition is wrong, especially in a Sci-Fi game of all things. Do lasers need X number of shots in order to be shootable? Also overheating mechanics/forms of unlimited ammunition has worked for other games. I believe it can and has worked Mass Effect. Yes ME1 had some serious flaws, but that's not reason enough to just up and abandon the whole design. Good Designers/Inventors/Engineers figure out how to make things work with what they have.

And also even though I don't like TCs I have offered some ways I believe they could be improved. So I'm not just here "hating". My concerns are legitimate.

Modifié par Bluko, 22 octobre 2011 - 03:16 .

[Homebound]

thermal clips give u more bullets when u run out...............

[Crawlingkingsnake]

Jesus Christ! END THIS NOW

[Tony Gunslinger]

Bluko wrote...

Tony Gunslinger wrote...
- Yes, you should be challenged by enemies, and enemies do flank you in ME2, and they flank you all the time. I don't know where you get the exaggerated idea that you win every fight by staying in one place.

Oh really?

The A.I. in almost all the levels is heavily scripted to follow certain paths and take cover at certain objects. A few enemies will try to advance/flank (you can't flank someone in a corridor though...) and after you kill those most of the rest will simply shoot you from their prescribed camping spot.

You’re talking to spawn points, not scripted behavior. Yes, they initially spawn at fixed locations, but afterwards the enemies react to whatever you do and where you are.

I mean yes you have your LOKI/Husk zombies, Varren/Dog Mechs, and the occasional crazy Krogan. But most enemies in ME2 do not advance past certain points. And these enemies are usually easy to kill since they simply Charge! In the end it makes the A.I. very exploitable and why ME2 isn't that hard even on Insanity since there is little or no variability to the A.I.'s tactics/spawns.

You also have pyros, Geth Primes and Destroyers, shotgunner mercs and vanguards who specialize in getting up close. I don’t know what you mean by getting past certain points, are you saying most enemies should get out of their cover to expose themselves and run out in the open, hoping that whoever survives get to you? They do that when the layout and the type of battles make sense (ie, defending the mainframe on the Heretic station, the king of the hill battle on Horizon, Object Rho, Garrus’ recruitment, SB’s ship, etc) But when you're supposed to be on the offense while they’re defending their territory (ie infiltrating Korlus, Eclipse base on Samara’s recruitment, Dantius towers, etc) the roles are reversed. Are there fights when nobody is flanking you never pass a certain point? Yes. Are there fights when they are indeed flanking and charging you from all sorts of angles? Yes. Are there fights where they do a little bit of everything? Yes. You're overlooking a lot of instances that doesn't match up your claims.

There's no reason you couldn't have different guns with an Overheat Mechanic.

As I remember the Assault Rifle, Pistol, Shotgun, and Sniper Rifle in ME1 were all unique even though they shared the same Overheat Mechanic. Do you honestly believe that an Overheat Mechanic would make it impossible to have the Vindicator as weapon in ME2?

Er, no. All the ME1 guns in their respective classes had exactly the same fire rate, and their different accuracy/recoil stats mattered very little in practice.

Assault Rifles in ME2 are not balanced, so it’s pointless to use the Vindicator an example, so I’ll do it to pistols:

Predator – 37.2 dmg @ 12 rounds, 300 RPM
Carnifex – 85.4 damg @ 6 rounds, 145 RPM

The Carnifex shoots half as fast as the Predator but deals more than 2x the damage. It’s got the highest DPS of all the pistols, and the 145 RPM is still pretty fast. If you convert them into unlimited ammo, the Predator becomes obsolete.

More Fluid? Fluid to me implies seamless transitions or a steady pace. Combat in ME2 is notoriously interrupted by the need to reload and or look for ammo...

Okay I don't know about you, but I didn't really watch my overheat meter anymore then my ammo count meter. I guess some folks had to watch their overheat meter all the time rather then bother to learn the rate they can fire at. Personally I find it about as easy to memorize the rate of heat build up as I do keep tracking of every single individual bullet fired.

If your gun builds up x-amount of heat and cools at y-rate, that is not a pattern you can memorize, especially for ME2 guns in which the length of shooting time and fire rates varies a lot more than ME1 guns. If your AR overheats at 50 rounds, and you shoot 22 then stop for 2.12323 seconds, do you really know how many rounds you can shoot at that given instant? How many shots afer 2.327 secs? 2.451? There is no way for you to know unless you're a human stopwatch/calculator. If there ever was a real test with equipment tracking eye movements, I guarantee you that it will show that you take your eyes off of the battlefield exponentially more with overheating weapons than with a conventional ammo count, which you only need to look just once or twice during an entire fight. Running out of ammo happens once in a fight, overheating can happen every time you shoot.

Also, I know for a fact that shooting an entire clip of the Predator + a reload is exactly the time for most of my powers to cool down. Therefore I can constantly apply max damage without ever keeping my eyes off the battlefield (power>shoot>power>shoot). That combination of a consistent cooldown time + a consistent shooting time puts me in a rhythm so that I can plan ahead attacks. Fluid gameplay. You can't do this as effectively with overheating guns that may cool down .5 secs or 1.5 secs, depending on how much you've shot before.

Again, put duct tape on your screen and test it out for yourself if you don't believe it. Get a recording equipment set-up and prove your points if you really believe them. I’ve done it, and I’ve recorded them.

And here's a fact: all the full-time designated naysayers here on BSN for 2+ years (you know who you are) who have been constantly saying biotics are pointless because of defense, that the game is dumbed down, that thermal clips suck, that weapon-x suck, etc etc etc haven’t produced a single shred of evidence to back up their claims. Well gee, I wonder why.

But thanks for pointing out that ammo does indeed make the game less challenging. As you said you don't really need to ever look at your ammo count in order to play as you can pretty much blindly reload whenever you need to without a second thought or concern. I'll give you credit for being honest though, as most folks can't admit to liking something that makes games easier for them to play.

Yes, this is exactly what I’m saying -- for all the reasons I've stated not only in this thread but also the 500 other similar threads out there that you and a few others conveniently choose to ignore and have failed to respond -- reloading mechanic is easier to manage, therefore it benefits your combat performance. Overheating mechanic is harder to manage, therefore it interferes with your performance. If a technology that’s supposed to help you ends up hurting you, then it’s a CRAPPY TECHNOLOGY.

And let me be clear: unlimited ammo is a great technology, deliberately making the gun to overheat is NOT. But apparently, some people are so fixated on the novelty of unlimited ammo that they're overlooking the downsides of the overheating that comes with it.

Modifié par Tony Gunslinger, 22 octobre 2011 - 05:56 .

[Sajuro]

voteDC wrote...

I don't buy the thermal clip system as an in universe improvement. You've gone from weapons that will fire 'forever' to a chance that you will run out of ammunition.

The old system seems far less likely to jam, whereas the thermal clip system has a lot more that could go wrong.

With the thermal clips you have more equipment that you must carry and seriously would any soldier pick up random stuff from the battlefield and put it into their own weapon?

Then you have the issue of ejecting clips that are hot enough to ignite fuel. Imagine ejecting a clip and burning the person next to you, or setting fire to other equipment.

However as a game reason I fully understand. It slows you down a little and prevents you from spraying and praying, wasting ammunition.

I actually put less rounds down field than in the first game because I have less rounds available to me.

and that is why the soldiers have to go through training to use weapons and safely eject thermal clips away from things you wouldn't put your cigarette out on, including gas, munitions, and other people.

[Chuvvy]

A way to put ammunition into the game without breaking canon. I got canon confused with continuity, it's late, give me a break.

Modifié par Slidell505, 22 octobre 2011 - 06:29 .

[Fixers0]

Tony Gunslinger wrote...

But thanks for pointing out that ammo does indeed make the game less challenging. As you said you don't really need to ever look at your ammo count in order to play as you can pretty much blindly reload whenever you need to without a second thought or concern. I'll give you credit for being honest though, as most folks can't admit to liking something that makes games easier for them to play.

Yes, this is exactly what I’m saying -- for all the reasons I've stated not only in this thread but also the 500 other similar threads out there that you and a few others conveniently choose to ignore and have failed to respond -- reloading mechanic is easier to manage, therefore it benefits your combat performance. Overheating mechanic is harder to manage, therefore it interferes with your performance. If a technology that’s supposed to help you ends up hurting you, then it’s a CRAPPY TECHNOLOGY.

And if it wasn't for the random staces of thermal clips lying around or them suddenly appearing from corpses, even on places were it's practially imposible for them to be, and the Hardly to believe universial design  then thermal clips would be crappy technology to.
If you evolved weapons to the point ammo is a none issue, but then for whatever reason  you make weapon operators depenable on a new type 'ammo' again then it's a huge step back because you're now limited to a certain amount of shots if it wasn't for gameplay.

Just anwser this question, why would a Sniper Rifle need thermal clips to operate better? the time that is needed top drop the hea sink is almost equal to the time it takes to cool down from a single shot, that and the fact that thermal clips where specifically desgined to improve one's Rate of fire (Which they don't actually do) How does this even work on a Sniper rifle? 
 

[ReshyShira]

Honestly the ME2 ammo system was kinda crappy, it's plagued by gameplay and story segregation, requires retcons and is in general kind of a step backwards. This is the future dammit, I don't want to be scavenging around for ammo clips. Especially when it requires turning the lore inside out to justify it.


I really hope they either fix the issues with the ME2 ammo system or go back to cooldown system.

The issues with the ME2 system being:


It's possible to run out of ammo, there's no infinitely respawning cache's of ammo or the sort.

Enemies (And allies) can fire all damn day, but you can't. This kind of throws me out of the experience with how jarring it is.

'Thermal Clips' don't make much sense as you can't fire a weapon without them, it's not like they make you able to fire longer or harder you NEED them. They're effectively bullets, only with more mental gymnastics.

It screws up the lore, why is the dead crew from 10 years ago having modern thermal clips even though it's a recent invention? Why don't the clips/guns recharge if they're a coolent system and not a bullet system? Why would you go from guns with infinite ammo to limited ammo and call it a step forward? It's all pretty much pulled out of the biggest and sweatiest armpit in the world.

[voteDC]

Sajuro wrote...

and that is why the soldiers have to go through training to use weapons and safely eject thermal clips away from things you wouldn't put your cigarette out on, including gas, munitions, and other people.

Again it adds unnecessary steps to the process.

In order to reload you have to 'break' the line putting rounds down field in order to eject the thermal clip safely, which also leads to a loss of line of sight on the enemy. Compare that to training for firing in short controlled bursts which would prevent your weapon from over-heating.

Then there is the issue of resupply. If you were in a place where logistics were not a problem then thermal clips may be an option but on the type of mission Shepard is on where supplies can not be guarenteed?

As I said from a gameplay stand-point I fully understand the switch. I just don't buy it as an improvement in universe.

I'd like to see a 'classic' weapon using the old system make an appearence, even if it is just for one mission. Perhaps counter the 'infinite' ammo by reducing the amount of damage the weapon does compared to those using the thermal clip system.

[slimgrin]

Slidell505 wrote...

A way to put ammunition into the game without breaking canon. I got canon confused with continuity, it's late, give me a break.

^^^ This.

And why is this topic still being discussed?

Modifié par slimgrin, 22 octobre 2011 - 08:27 .

[Sharn01]

slimgrin wrote...

Slidell505 wrote...

A way to put ammunition into the game without breaking canon. I got canon confused with continuity, it's late, give me a break.

^^^ This.

And why is this topic still being discussed?

Why not?  Its something for people to talk about, and they are divided pretty evenly on which system people prefer.

[Tony Gunslinger]

Fixers0 wrote...
And if it wasn't for the random staces of thermal clips lying around or them suddenly appearing from corpses, even on places were it's practially imposible for them to be, and the Hardly to believe universial design  then thermal clips would be crappy technology to.
If you evolved weapons to the point ammo is a none issue, but then for whatever reason  you make weapon operators depenable on a new type 'ammo' again then it's a huge step back because you're now limited to a certain amount of shots if it wasn't for gameplay.

As I've said before, unlimited ammo is superior tech, no doubt about that. But overheating is not. They're two different things. Just as there's no reason why the thermal clips in my SMG can't be used for my SR, there is no reason why gun makers can't put in an automatic lockup when it reaches a certain threshold such that its coolsdown time is equal to or faster than the time to reload a conventional mag. Overheat is just another game mechanic, not superior tech.

I don't mind if there's a couple of  "prototype"  beam/laser weapons that uses the overheat system. It could actually be fun to use here and there, but it'll never be as effecient as a gun that does not overheat.

Just anwser this question, why would a Sniper Rifle need thermal clips to operate better? the time that is needed top drop the hea sink is almost equal to the time it takes to cool down from a single shot, that and the fact that thermal clips where specifically desgined to improve one's Rate of fire (Which they don't actually do) How does this even work on a Sniper rifle?

It's not rate of fire, it's rate of damage. Thermal clips remove the delay in overheating/cooldown as well as the fear of it.

AFAIK you can't OSOK a mercenary in ME1 on insanity when you're a level 60 infiltrator using a Spectre X SR with double scram rails and shredder ammo, and its RoF is like 40-50 RPM or something. I've tried that before (or someone else do it to confirm) and I think it took like 3-4 hits to kill, not including factors like enemy immunity and the assasination power.

Compare that with the Viper, which has a 12 round clip @ 240 RPM, way faster than any SRs in ME1 and capable of killing a level 30 merc on insanity in 5-6 headshots (approx 3 secs). So the idea that ME1 single-shot SRs are comparable to ME2 single-shot SRs is kind of moot. If anything, it implies that ME2 single-shot SRs are much more powerful, and if you put in ME1 style heatsinks, they'll instantly overheat if you don't reduce their damage output back to ME1 SR range. But, that's a lot of supposition on my part since the two games handle damage bonuses, health and defense so differently.

[ReshyShira]

Tony Gunslinger wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...
And if it wasn't for the random staces of thermal clips lying around or them suddenly appearing from corpses, even on places were it's practially imposible for them to be, and the Hardly to believe universial design  then thermal clips would be crappy technology to.
If you evolved weapons to the point ammo is a none issue, but then for whatever reason  you make weapon operators depenable on a new type 'ammo' again then it's a huge step back because you're now limited to a certain amount of shots if it wasn't for gameplay.

As I've said before, unlimited ammo is superior tech, no doubt about that. But overheating is not. They're two different things. Just as there's no reason why the thermal clips in my SMG can't be used for my SR, there is no reason why gun makers can't put in an automatic lockup when it reaches a certain threshold such that its coolsdown time is equal to or faster than the time to reload a conventional mag. Overheat is just another game mechanic, not superior tech.

I don't mind if there's a couple of  "prototype"  beam/laser weapons that uses the overheat system. It could actually be fun to use here and there, but it'll never be as effecient as a gun that does not overheat.

Just anwser this question, why would a Sniper Rifle need thermal clips to operate better? the time that is needed top drop the hea sink is almost equal to the time it takes to cool down from a single shot, that and the fact that thermal clips where specifically desgined to improve one's Rate of fire (Which they don't actually do) How does this even work on a Sniper rifle?

It's not rate of fire, it's rate of damage. Thermal clips remove the delay in overheating/cooldown as well as the fear of it.

AFAIK you can't OSOK a mercenary in ME1 on insanity when you're a level 60 infiltrator using a Spectre X SR with double scram rails and shredder ammo, and its RoF is like 40-50 RPM or something. I've tried that before (or someone else do it to confirm) and I think it took like 3-4 hits to kill, not including factors like enemy immunity and the assasination power.

Compare that with the Viper, which has a 12 round clip @ 240 RPM, way faster than any SRs in ME1 and capable of killing a level 30 merc on insanity in 5-6 headshots (approx 3 secs). So the idea that ME1 single-shot SRs are comparable to ME2 single-shot SRs is kind of moot. If anything, it implies that ME2 single-shot SRs are much more powerful, and if you put in ME1 style heatsinks, they'll instantly overheat if you don't reduce their damage output back to ME1 SR range. But, that's a lot of supposition on my part since the two games handle damage bonuses, health and defense so differently.

There is effectively no difference between cooldown and ammo in terms of rapid fire.  Both act as a way to limit how many rounds you may fire off, however the one main difference is one is finite and the other is not.  Any differences between the two are purely balance issues.  If your complaint is that ME1 weapons were not powerful enough, then buff the damage, if they fired for too long then increase the overheat rate.  There, solved.  There's no reason to use an ammo system over it if done correctly and it avoids several possible issues like say running out of ammo.

[Fixers0]

Tony Gunslinger wrote...

As I've said before, unlimited ammo is superior tech, no doubt about that. But overheating is not. They're two different things. Just as there's no reason why the thermal clips in my SMG can't be used for my SR, there is no reason why gun makers can't put in an automatic lockup when it reaches a certain threshold such that its coolsdown time is equal to or faster than the time to reload a conventional mag. Overheat is just another game mechanic, not superior tech.

 Your missing the point here , With overheating weapons you aren't dependant on scavenging the area fo deposits of thermal clips thus making it a superior technology.

Tony Gunslinger wrote...
I don't mind if there's a couple of  "prototype"  beam/laser weapons that uses the overheat system. It could actually be fun to use here and there, but it'll never be as effecient as a gun that does not overheat.

Same goes for guns with "ammo"

Tony Gunslinger wrote...
It's not rate of fire, it's rate of damage. Thermal clips remove the delay in overheating/cooldown as well as the fear of it.

And Since is a sniper desgined for High rates of DPS?, and as said the delay from cooling down a weapon is compensated by having to search for clips that randomly seem to apear anywere, and the fact you have to eject the clip (but strangly never put in a new one)

Tony Gunslinger wrote...

AFAIK you can't OSOK a mercenary in ME1 on insanity when you're a level 60 infiltrator using a Spectre X SR with double scram rails and shredder ammo, and its RoF is like 40-50 RPM or something. I've tried that before (or someone else do it to confirm) and I think it took like 3-4 hits to kill, not including factors like enemy immunity and the assasination power.

Compare that with the Viper, which has a 12 round clip @ 240 RPM, way faster than any SRs in ME1 and capable of killing a level 30 merc on insanity in 5-6 headshots (approx 3 secs). So the idea that ME1 single-shot SRs are comparable to ME2 single-shot SRs is kind of moot. If anything, it implies that ME2 single-shot SRs are much more powerful, and if you put in ME1 style heatsinks, they'll instantly overheat if you don't reduce their damage output back to ME1 SR range. But, that's a lot of supposition on my part since the two games handle damage bonuses, health and defense so differently.

You're totally right speculation isn't getting us anywere.

Modifié par Fixers0, 22 octobre 2011 - 10:18 .

[PPR223]

Hellbound555 wrote...

thermal clips give u more bullets when u run out...............

The ammo number does not represent the amount of bullets you have, but the amount of bullets you can fire with the current number of thermal clips.

Modifié par PPR223, 22 octobre 2011 - 11:04 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Zakatak757 wrote...

I would prefer a minor change to the system though.

The current system, technically speaking, makes no sense. If I pick up a thermal clip, I do not recieve X amount of SMG bullets, Y amount of sniper bullets, and Z amount of pistol bullets. No, I recieve a thermal clip.

Well, the thing here is that not all guns generate the same amount of heat. So a thermal clip does not last for hte same number of "shots". Makes sense.
It also makes sense to have different sized-thermal clips for different weapons. After all, a gun is small, a sniper rifle is large. Trying to use one universal clip means you have to make tradoffs in power and weight.

[Someone With Mass]

Yeah, let's have different kinds of thermal clips, even though they're all doing the exact same thing, so the people in the universe must carry more of them in more pockets if they happen to have different guns and can't pick some up from dead enemies or enemy armories.

That sounds like such a great tactical choice.