550 réponses à ce sujet

[Brettic]

Dead_Meat357 wrote...

Brettic wrote...

Update: Valiant was perfect on Insanity until the end when you go to earth, then it wasn't one and two shotting mooks anymore, switch to BW after that point and all is well.

both at level X, Valiant performs best until earth, then BW overtakes it, on Insanity.

Only things the Valiant has over the Black Widow are reduced recoil and less weight. But as I said, the penetration power of the Black Widow through cover far surpasses that of the Valiant. You'd need the sniper rifle AP mod or AP ammunition to do what the Widow does anyway.

The Valiant wins over the Black Widow until that point in the game because there is a longer delay between when you fire your first shot and your second shot if you use the Black Widow. the Valiant drops mobs quicker, the only mobs the Black Widow drops quicker are the really big ones like atlas's and primes, and there aren't enough of those in SP for that advantage to matter at all.

Because the delay is shorter on the Valiant, you will kill shielded mooks faster.

Mods I recommend are Concentration mod, and Extended Barrel. Penetration never mattered in SP.

[BellPeppers&Beef023]

going off topic here, but since we're in the discussion of weapons...

I am a little surprised that no one has mentioned certain oddities with the weapon mods. it is great that BW reimplemented weapon modifications, but stuff like weapon scopes and extended barrels just seem so...out of place. I mean, modern-day looking scopes and extended barrels on futuristic mass accelerator weapons is just weird.

it is particularly aggravating that they butchered the default models of some of the older assault rifles like the avenger and mattock simply to implement the scope addition.

[capn233]

Well in the original Mass Effect you had weapon mods for the "barrel" that ranged from "High Caliber Barrels" to "Rail Extensions," and finally "Scram Rails." The latter two were essentially supposed to be upgraded rails for the mass accelerator (which implies they are rail guns).

The mod itself makes some sense, although it would be nicer if they could do something different with the model rather than tack something on to the end. If I want a longer barrel for a weapon, you replace the whole thing not tack something on to the end (exception is of course a fake suppressor or long flash hider to get around barrel length laws).

[JaegerBane]

ithurtz wrote...
I am a little surprised that no one has mentioned certain oddities with the weapon mods. it is great that BW reimplemented weapon modifications, but stuff like weapon scopes and extended barrels just seem so...out of place. I mean, modern-day looking scopes and extended barrels on futuristic mass accelerator weapons is just weird.
 

Conversely, assuming that things as simple as barrels and scopes have to look 'futuristic' (presumably with LEDs or something?) just because their depicted in the future is no less weird. Personally I kinda like things like the SR Barrel V mod.

The only mod that does look genuinely out of place is the Pistol Barrel V Mod, and that is more to do with the fact that it looks like it has been made specifically to look like an 1800s-era revolver barrel, complete with pointless iron sights. Unfortunately, its the *only* Pistol Barrel upgrade that looks out of place.

Modifié par JaegerBane, 27 avril 2012 - 04:30 .

[BellPeppers&Beef023]

JaegerBane wrote...

ithurtz wrote...
I am a little surprised that no one has mentioned certain oddities with the weapon mods. it is great that BW reimplemented weapon modifications, but stuff like weapon scopes and extended barrels just seem so...out of place. I mean, modern-day looking scopes and extended barrels on futuristic mass accelerator weapons is just weird.
 

Conversely, assuming that things as simple as barrels and scopes have to look 'futuristic' (presumably with LEDs or something?) just because their depicted in the future is no less weird. Personally I kinda like things like the SR Barrel V mod.

The only mod that does look genuinely out of place is the Pistol Barrel V Mod, and that is more to do with the fact that it looks like it has been made specifically to look like an 1800s-era revolver barrel, complete with pointless iron sights. Unfortunately, its the *only* Pistol Barrel upgrade that looks out of place.

Just a little bit of schizotech in the end, i guess. Doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things.

[SaturnRing]

capn233 wrote...

Well in the original Mass Effect you had weapon mods for the "barrel" that ranged from "High Caliber Barrels" to "Rail Extensions," and finally "Scram Rails." The latter two were essentially supposed to be upgraded rails for the mass accelerator (which implies they are rail guns).

The mod itself makes some sense, although it would be nicer if they could do something different with the model rather than tack something on to the end. If I want a longer barrel for a weapon, you replace the whole thing not tack something on to the end (exception is of course a fake suppressor or long flash hider to get around barrel length laws).

 There is a clear intent to give guns a more generic look and  visual modularity. I personally think that those mods don't look space age enough - if it means something.  But they make sense in the game context. I can attribute their basic* or unpolished* shape to the fact that Reapers invasion put a stop - or slowed down - mods developement; as a result they were fielded in their roughest form. We also have to consider the fact that those mods have to be designed to be be easily replaced on the field. 
I wish they didn't change the Avenger look tho.


*Up for debate. Just my opinion.

[Rudy Lis]

JaegerBane wrote...

The problem with such an assumption is that its made perfectly clear that kinetic barriers create a situation where single-shot weapons are inherently disadvantaged.

 
Well, that's why I think AMR should be able to dispose mostly anything in one shot, regardless whether their is barrier or not. Otherwise, I fail to see why they add them in game at all.
With existing system I don't understand whole meaning having very heavy rifle (W/BW) with performance slightly better than Mantis (minus penetration). Plus BW power drop comparing it with W, IIRC it's about 40%. I mean BW shot inflicting 60% of damage of W. Not sure of losing 40% of energy fits "without losing stopping power" description.

JaegerBane wrote...

They're performing precisely in situations where they're sub-optimal - the equivalent of attempting to use an AMR on something like a UAV today.

If we had ME1 projectiles velocity (a.k.a. instahit) - why not? You have no lead, windage or elevation, just catch target in crosshair and pull the trigger - avatar of point and click interface. But they took those projectiles and gave us airguns instead.

JaegerBane wrote...

Hence, I can't honestly agree that an AMR should shoot through multiple enemies or one-shot everything. 

But they already shoot through multiple enemies and one shot most things.
 

JaegerBane wrote...

Were it realistic to design a rifle that could do this and still be man-portable, things like kinetic barriers and barrier circumventing techniques would never have been developed. There's an internal logic to the universe that is in conflict with the suggestion.

ME2 desription:

"Weighing in at 39 kilograms, the Widow Anti-Material Rifle is primarily used by sniper teams in assault missions against armored vehicles or krogan. While kinetic barriers offer effective protection on vehicles, the kind generated by conventional military field generators are far too weak against the Widow.
The Widow was never designed to be carried and fired by a human. Although this modified model can be carried, no ordinary human could fire it without shattering an arm."

There are many conflicts with logic, by my opinion, starting with "sniper teams" yet "never designed for humans" (for who then, asari?). I don't remember Geth sniper teams with it.

JaegerBane wrote...

I think its really straining the boundaries of plausibility to suggest that the only reason why things like muskets and whatnot were retired were down to range. The fact that their reliability, practicality and capability were all rubbish in comparison to cartridges played far more part than range.

There were many reasons why muzzleloaders slowly faded away. Somewhat situation with them resembled situation with bows - amount of training required for proper and efficient usage was greater than averege recruit (and most importantly - ruler of than recruit) were willing to spare.

JaegerBane wrote...

I could accept it if there was some kind of reasoning to explain why firearm progression had not moved on, like the fact that they were still extremely effective in their role. The point is that, in Halo's case, they aren't - often needing the best part of a 60 round 7.62mm clip to down a single shield. There are vastly more effective weapons lying all over the place in the form of plasma weapons, and yet the UNSC still sticks with ancient stuff? No way.

If main weapon of certain army is fleet, missiles and some "MAC", why waste money in attempt to give infanrtymen more effective weapon, if existing is adequate? Russians still keep their 7.62x54R, it's more than century old. Hard to say whether AR-15 performance is "morally adequate" these days, but it still used, and according to recent news, even Remington got awarded with small contract (about 24K of rifles, IIRC). If high command consider infantry firearms "shootas", why would they spent millions of currency to re-arm them? Same Remington contract is worthy of $16000000 or so. Now reasses that on Halo military.

JaegerBane wrote...

This was one of the reasons why I like ME's take on weapons. They were technologies that were clearly the result of conventional firearm design being applied to a radical and newly developed scientific phenomenom (in this case Mass Effect fields, but in other fiction could be electronic ballistic pulses from Aliens or Gauss weaponry from Starcraft). But they are nonetheless based around totally different fictional technologies, so on that basis, the idea that should pose any more than a passing resemblance to modern day weapons doesn't really make sense, and certainly not something the developers should seek to achieve.

Several questions, if you don't mind.
- Why some weapon have not only muzzle blast, but sort of smoke erupting from muzzle? IIRC Raptor has it. Mass effect is combustible propellant?
- How come those "grains of sand", chipped from internal blocks of metal and sped up to lightspeed not melting or overheating? Wrapped in MEF?
- If weapon shoots "grains of sand", why barrel diameter is that great? To allow MEF wrapping? I'm not asking about polygonal rifling, obviously it's just 3d modelling, but what a pun!
- AP mod/Barrel extension issue. Why increasing barrel's length increases velocity, but not penetration and how penetration increase happens, if it doesn't increase "flat" damage?
- Why SMG light materials has no effect on recoil?

If you will be able to answer those questions, maybe I'll regain normal sleep.
Some humor intended.

ithurtz wrote...

going off topic here, but since we're in the discussion of weapons...

I am a little surprised that no one has mentioned certain oddities with the weapon mods. it is great that BW reimplemented weapon modifications, but stuff like weapon scopes and extended barrels just seem so...out of place. I mean, modern-day looking scopes and extended barrels on futuristic mass accelerator weapons is just weird.

it is particularly aggravating that they butchered the default models of some of the older assault rifles like the avenger and mattock simply to implement the scope addition.

There was thread on that. Reversed ACOG, some Belarus/Russian scope (mod V, I think), Red Dot sights, cage style or Barrett flash-hider as barrel extention (and something looking like suppressor) and my "favorite" - AR-15 style handguard and front-sight post as barrel mod V for AR. Brilliant, yo. Ventilated rib revolver barrel looks just as funny.
I guess that's byproduct of cooperation with DICE.
+1 on Avenger and Mattock, plus Avenger and Vindicator "since ME2" barrel location. Gah.

SaturnRing wrote...

There is a clear intent to give guns a more generic look and visual modularity. I personally think that those mods don't look space age enough - if it means something. But they make sense in the game context. I can attribute their basic* or unpolished* shape to the fact that Reapers invasion put a stop - or slowed down - mods developement; as a result they were fielded in their roughest form. We also have to consider the fact that those mods have to be designed to be be easily replaced on the field.
I wish they didn't change the Avenger look tho.


*Up for debate. Just my opinion.

I think they could imply "lights" variant for scopes or just write "Mk II scope" for weapons like Mattock, Vindicator or Avenger. Or adjust exsiting "scope" model.
Plus I don't get the idea of "visualizing" those changes. Paladin doesn't have few of those changes, as well as BW and Wraith. Does it makes them worse? Not for me. There is no time to look on new receiver colour, really.

Modifié par Rudy Lis, 27 avril 2012 - 07:55 .

[BellPeppers&Beef023]

@Rudy Lis

lol, they aren't just modern looking, but are actual models used today? bet you can find some of those exact stuff in CoD/Battlefield too.

Once again, not a huge issue, but it does nothing to dispel the accusations of BW making ME3 appeal to the shooter market.

[Rudy Lis]

ithurtz wrote...

lol, they aren't just modern looking, but are actual models used today? bet you can find some of those exact stuff in CoD/Battlefield too.

Yes. And already did.
Have some problems with identifying some of them, though. But I'm not Miranda.

ithurtz wrote...

Once again, not a huge issue, but it does nothing to dispel the accusations of BW making ME3 appeal to the shooter market.

It is an issue. Another sign of laziness and premature release.
Plus, by my opinion, there is not so much "appealing" in shooter market - all my "acquaintances" I recommended ME3 for multiplayer left for CoD or BF3. And personally I think BF3 is better. In all aspects. Yes, no asari/krogan/quarians, no biotic/tech combo, yes spawnrape, yes, glitches, but it's just better. Require better PC to run, of course, but it quite better looking.

[DnVill]

I use the Valiant.

Decent damage + fast reload + less recoil = more devastating shots downrange.

Besides the fast reload comes in handy everytime that sneaky enemy pops right beside you.

[Leon Zweihander]

Much as I'm a fan of sniper rifles I'm surprised this thread is still active.

Brettic wrote...

The Valiant wins over the Black Widow until that point in the game because there is a longer delay between when you fire your first shot and your second shot if you use the Black Widow. the Valiant drops mobs quicker, the only mobs the Black Widow drops quicker are the really big ones like atlas's and primes, and there aren't enough of those in SP for that advantage to matter at all.

Because the delay is shorter on the Valiant, you will kill shielded mooks faster.

Mods I recommend are Concentration mod, and Extended Barrel. Penetration never mattered in SP.

And I'm still surprised people still believe Valiant outdamages the BW on grunts.  As an easy test on Insanity do 3 quick bodyshots with BW on troopers.  Now try to improve on that time using 3 headshots on Valiant (the only way to oneshot grunts on Insanity).  Valiant may have the edge in firing rate and reload, but when it needs headshots to achieve a kill then no, BW outpaces it by far.  As for defenses, that point becomes moot with Energy Drain.  The only true advantage Valiant has is the improvement on power recharge, although it's worth the tradeoff imo.

[Brettic]

Leon Zweihander wrote...

Much as I'm a fan of sniper rifles I'm surprised this thread is still active.

Brettic wrote...

The Valiant wins over the Black Widow until that point in the game because there is a longer delay between when you fire your first shot and your second shot if you use the Black Widow. the Valiant drops mobs quicker, the only mobs the Black Widow drops quicker are the really big ones like atlas's and primes, and there aren't enough of those in SP for that advantage to matter at all.

Because the delay is shorter on the Valiant, you will kill shielded mooks faster.

Mods I recommend are Concentration mod, and Extended Barrel. Penetration never mattered in SP.

And I'm still surprised people still believe Valiant outdamages the BW on grunts.  As an easy test on Insanity do 3 quick bodyshots with BW on troopers.  Now try to improve on that time using 3 headshots on Valiant (the only way to oneshot grunts on Insanity).  Valiant may have the edge in firing rate and reload, but when it needs headshots to achieve a kill then no, BW outpaces it by far.  As for defenses, that point becomes moot with Energy Drain.  The only true advantage Valiant has is the improvement on power recharge, although it's worth the tradeoff imo.

Well, IDK why you would be body shotting grunts in the first place.

[Leon Zweihander]

Because damage on BW is high enough where bodyshot results in a kill, unlike the Valiant.

[Dark Penitant]

It's singleplayer; you really should be trying to avoid bodyshots in any event, and with time dilation, that's easy enough.
On every difficulty other than insanity, the BW wins due to the fact it can kill through shieldgating. On Insanity, it still wins in fights with bosses, atlases, brutes, banshees, et cetera. However, it doesn't win against the rest of the foot soldiers, where the valient's ROF, damage high enough for one headshot (without shields) or two (with them) to result in a kill, and incredible reload make it superior against trash mobs.
I'll freely admit that the Black Widow is better against almost anything else, however, in my opinion, it's those trash mobs that are most dangerous even when fighting the big enemies, and when you're not, you're, well, just fighting trash mobs.

Modifié par Dark Penitant, 28 avril 2012 - 03:56 .

[Mysten]

I used the M-13 Raptor on my Adept Insanity run and loved it. It was light enough that I could carry a Raptor X, Phalanx X and Locust X (with Ultra Lightweight Materials V) and still have a 197% cooldown bonus and with Spare Ammo Capacity V it could be fired over 250 times before needing to find a thermal clip and with two back up weapons and a full set of biotic abilities to fall back on that never happened once. With Warp Ammo, it was a reliable way to quickly and easily finish off any foes who survived my biotic explosions.

[Br0th3rGr1mm]

While generally not considered an SR, I go with the Raptor. I can put 5-10 bullets on various nearby targets before Cloak wears off and then empty the clip (another 5-10 shots) before ducking back in cover. The single shot SRs just ****** me off even when I pull off flawless headshots as I have to loose target awarness to reload (guess that makes me a non-sniper).

[Stokie Stallion]

Amila wrote...

For my Insanity-Soldier i used a Black Widow all the time. I specced him to do maximum weapon damage and put all upgrades into weapondamage aswell. I used the Armorset that gave me the max Weapondamage aswell(not Headshot damage, pure weapondamage) As mods i used the Timeslow- thing and the Barrel.

With that setup the Black Widow was able to oneshot all unshielded enemies and for all others you only need 2 shots(marauder for example). It is also very easy to get Headshots with the Soldier thanks to the Timeslow when zoomed in or when using Adrenaline Rush.

For me the Widow and Javelin were pointless. Only one shot, slow reload. You cant oneshot anything with shields with them thanks to the Shieldgate. Sure they do a lot of damage but that only helps against the very few big enemies and there are only a dozen in the whole game anyways. The Valiant was nice but it has no passive Armor Piercing so i took the Black Widow instead and Insanity was very easy with it.

This alongside a reverant for peppering, if the mission doesnt have much close quaters i eve nswap it out for the sabre both long distance but higlhy powerful, kinda screwd when close but no scoping is pretty easy or ashley for back up.

Black widow all teh wayyyy

[capn233]

Well you guys have convinced me to change my vote.

So now I say Viper.

[JaegerBane]

capn233 wrote...

Well you guys have convinced me to change my vote.

So now I say Viper.

Ah, yes, 'Viper', a rifle that hits like a snowflake and kicks like a mule. We have dismissed that claim.

Modifié par JaegerBane, 29 avril 2012 - 08:00 .

[capn233]

JaegerBane wrote...

capn233 wrote...

Well you guys have convinced me to change my vote.

So now I say Viper.

Ah, yes, 'Viper', a rifle that hits like a snowflake and kicks like a mule. We have dismissed that claim.

Haha.

It doesn't actually do either, it does decent damage per shot and is accurate.  With the ROF it has you should have no problem getting all headshots.  Although the ROF is also its major weakness.

But I figured I had to say something different since we have 13 pages on this topic even though Black Widow is the best, with Valiant tied or slightly inferior... although not everyone has it.

[Dead_Meat357]

Leon Zweihander wrote...

Much as I'm a fan of sniper rifles I'm surprised this thread is still active.

Brettic wrote...

The Valiant wins over the Black Widow until that point in the game because there is a longer delay between when you fire your first shot and your second shot if you use the Black Widow. the Valiant drops mobs quicker, the only mobs the Black Widow drops quicker are the really big ones like atlas's and primes, and there aren't enough of those in SP for that advantage to matter at all.

Because the delay is shorter on the Valiant, you will kill shielded mooks faster.

Mods I recommend are Concentration mod, and Extended Barrel. Penetration never mattered in SP.

And I'm still surprised people still believe Valiant outdamages the BW on grunts.  As an easy test on Insanity do 3 quick bodyshots with BW on troopers.  Now try to improve on that time using 3 headshots on Valiant (the only way to oneshot grunts on Insanity).  Valiant may have the edge in firing rate and reload, but when it needs headshots to achieve a kill then no, BW outpaces it by far.  As for defenses, that point becomes moot with Energy Drain.  The only true advantage Valiant has is the improvement on power recharge, although it's worth the tradeoff imo.

This. I've played with both quite a bit and the Black Widow is the better choice in my opinion. It also gives you the ability to punch through light cover without a mod. The Valiant doesn't. And for those occasional Atlases and like enemies the Black Widow outshines the Valiant by far.

Modifié par Dead_Meat357, 30 avril 2012 - 03:43 .

[JaegerBane]

Leon Zweihander wrote...
And I'm still surprised people still believe Valiant outdamages the BW on grunts.  As an easy test on Insanity do 3 quick bodyshots with BW on troopers.  Now try to improve on that time using 3 headshots on Valiant (the only way to oneshot grunts on Insanity).  Valiant may have the edge in firing rate and reload, but when it needs headshots to achieve a kill then no, BW outpaces it by far.  As for defenses, that point becomes moot with Energy Drain.  The only true advantage Valiant has is the improvement on power recharge, although it's worth the tradeoff imo.

I think the only issue there is with this statement is that you're comparing the combination of Energy Drain and the Black Widow to the Valiant alone. It's pretty obvious that the Black Widow will come off better in that situation - but glossing over its shortcomings by trying to bring in powers and whatnot doesn't really help anyone decide which one to use.

Really, one-shot kills are great, but if you need to soften them up with powers beforehand it ceases to have much benefit beyond style points. I mean, you can say that of anything - you can achieve one-shots with the Phalanx if you're going to add stipulations that you've already hammered them with powers. Its a bit like saying Skoda is faster than a BMW provided you don't fuel the BMW beforehand. Comparisons only have any meaning when they're done on equal footing.

And to be honest, I'm surprised that you're arguing this, as you were arguing the opposite a few pages up.

Leon Zweihander wrote...

BW is well worth it, Valiant may do the job on low targets, but on high targets such as Brutes/Banshees/Atlas the BW outclasses Valiant. I prefer BW since the enemies more likely to kill you during the game are the high difficulty,
not the low ones.

Modifié par JaegerBane, 30 avril 2012 - 06:56 .

[Kronner]

JaegerBane wrote...
 Its a bit like saying Skoda is faster than a BMW provided you don't fuel the BMW beforehand.

LMAO

That said, even if you ignore Sheps bonus power, you HAVE TO consider your squad's powers. So you can easily strip marauder's shields and kill in one shot etc.

[JaegerBane]

Kronner wrote...

JaegerBane wrote...
 Its a bit like saying Skoda is faster than a BMW provided you don't fuel the BMW beforehand.

LMAO

That said, even if you ignore Sheps bonus power, you HAVE TO consider your squad's powers. So you can easily strip marauder's shields and kill in one shot etc.

This is true of everything, though. By the same logic you could say you can easily trigger biotic explosions and blast off so much health, the extra damage from the BW is redundant. That goes for damage-increasing stuff like Pull and Stasis.

As I say, trying to muddy the waters by bringing in extra factors just obscures the original point of the comparison in the first place.

Modifié par JaegerBane, 30 avril 2012 - 06:58 .

[Kronner]

JaegerBane wrote...
As I say, trying to muddy the waters by bringing in extra factors just obscures the original point of the comparison in the first place.

But comparisons that do not consider actual gameplay are useless.