109 réponses à ce sujet

[Unato]

didn't a krogan use a knife in revelation? it's not like it doesn't exist.



it will prob be in ME3 after all they did put a toilet into Normandy this time round...

[Schneidend]

A fair point. Still, it could be upgraded in the first game, but the scaling of enemies made it pointless. I just want melee to not suck, in general. I figure, the easiest way to credibly do that is to give me a knife or an axe, rather than make a riflebutt capable of murdering dudes.

[Keltoris]

Why melee weapons?

[DocLasty]

Unato wrote...

didn't a krogan use a knife in revelation? it's not like it doesn't exist.

it will prob be in ME3 after all they did put a toilet into Normandy this time round...

Well, I don't think anyone's arguing that knives don't exist in the future. Heck, Wrex even mentions using one.

It's just putting them in the gameplay that's up for debate.

[Verenti]

KainrycKarr wrote...

Verenti wrote...

Grumpiergoat wrote...

Verenti wrote...

Shepard currently runs around with five guns strapped to his back. Why is it so unreasonable to swap one of those out for a knife? I never said that one should fight with only a sword or a knife, I asked why no one uses a knife on the unarmoured people.

And like I said, strapping a bayonet on some of the guns wouldn't be completely out of line. But for the most part, no. It'd be pointless. You can already sock someone with your gun. There's really not much need to add more than that.

Particularly based on the comment in a book. That seemed to concentrate on patting someone on the shoulder, rather than rapidly thrusting or slashing at someone with a weapon, that still might be blocked by shields.

In the book, someone gets stabbed in the neck.

Page 12 of Ascension:

He held the weapon poised to strike, took a deep breath, then stabbed forward with the blade, slashing at an upward angle toward the soft spot in the skull just behind Keo's ear. It should have been a quick, clean kill. But his momentary hesitation cost him; it gave Keo a chance to sense the attack before it came. Reacting with a survival instinct honed over countless missions, she leaped from her seat, spinning to face her attacker even as the blade plunged home. Her incredible reflexes saved her from instantaneous death; instead of sliding smoothly up into her brain the knife buried itself deep in the flesh of her neck, where it stuck fast.

And do you know the relative damage of hitting someone in the face with a butt but compared to a knife? I'm totally in favour of only a bayonet, I suggested it earlier, actually.

How many times did you end up in Graysons position in ME1? Point rests. Your a foot soldier, the only melee you need is rifle-butting and pistol-whipping if your that close. An assassin uses a knife because its quiet and effective when you need to surprise, not when your charging a battlefield.

None, but then again, my enemies all wore armour, and I didn't have an ability to fly across the battlefield and smash into someone knocking them over. At that point, I'm actually in a better posistion than Grayson to put a knife in someone because I'm standing, and they just got hit by a 100kg+ biotic projectile.

Besides everyone who said "Charging at an enemy with an axe would make me silly" or something to that effect, Yeah, charging is generally a dumb move, even with guns. Heroics = Dumb move generally. However to manuever yourself into close range where your weapon has the advantage, or have your two Squadmates lay down surpressive fire while you advance close enough to get them, that's called smarter tactics.

To everyone who said "Soldiers don't use their knives and Bayonets", that's not what the infantry men I consulted said, they said, if someone is running at you, Primary Small Arm, Pistol, Knife. As in, you use your assault rifle first, when it runs out of ammo, you don't reload. Instead you pull out you pistol and fire it until it's empty, and you don't reload that either, you pull out your knife.

[Haasth]

I would imagine there are some melee weaponry in the universe.

Like the dagger Wrex killed his father with for example. I wouldn't be surprised if there are some more high-tech knives and the likes used for assassination.



I always liked the Tabula Rasa swords...

And no, no Warhammer 40.000 stuff please. I love Warhammer 40.000 but I would rather not see the two universes so much alike.

[Yojimboo]

I am pretty sure that the armor you are wearing is strong against slashing attack, pretty much like Kevlar today.
Sure you could argue for better sword forging techniques (increase the cutting ability's) but please don't give me "Laser swordz, luls". Because that would be.... lame.

The other option would be blunt weapons, with the use of exoskeleton in the armor your blunting force would be pretty deadly.

Btw piercing would be another topic, but swords are mainly used for slashing attacks.

Modifié par Yojimboo, 21 janvier 2010 - 12:12 .

[RyuKazuha]

Phoenixblight wrote...

RyuKazuha wrote...

Actually Tali carries a knife with her all the time. She never uses it, though. And even silent assassin Thane relates on pistols or literal hand to hand combat.

Not sure about the Tali comment never seen a knife or looked. But the Thane comment is just a CG trailer that Burr made that's not in game.

Left picture is actual an ME1-Screenshot, the right picture is out of the Tali-Trailer. She definitively has a knife attached to her left boot.

[EJon]

This is a shooter, not a melee game. Go play DA:O or KoTOR if you want melee weapons. That would ruin the feel of mass effect anyways.

[Malastare-]

One might ask the question: "Why don't we use melee weapons today?"

We don't have shields at all.  We do have body armor, but none of that armor has been shown to protect someone from a mace/maul or even a tomahawk (a model of which is still used by some US marines as it was shown to easily penetrate helmets).  So, even without any defenses against melee weapons, we still don't use them today.  Is it just because we love the pew-pew?  Are we horribly exposed to the first army which decides to arm themselves with katanas?

No.  Not at all.

The first problem with melee weapons is range.  With firearms, multiple targets can engage an enemy with a sword without putting themselves at risk.  The more distance they put between themselves and their target, the more lopsided this advantage becomes.  See also: artillery and stand-off ordinance.  Superior range outweighs all strengths a melee weapon might have.

There is also the fact that there is a saturation effect.  You can't have six people attack the same target.   There is no such thing as suppressive action with a melee weapon.   Using melee weapons takes more strength and exhaustion in long battles becomes an issue.  Since no ranged attack is possible, enemies using melee weapons can be forced through predictable paths and subjected to enfilading fire.  The list goes on.

And even if we ignore all of that, understand that the best melee weapons will be the dull and/or boring ones.  Only an idiot or rank amateur would bring a katana to a modern battle.  After the blade was ruined on the second or third target, you're left unnarmed.  I know people like to think that katana's are magical, but they're not.  Even longswords are a bad idea against any sort of reinforced armor.  You'll want a mace, really. Something to inflict blunt force damage through armor.   

But that's not what people want, is it? They want their katanas.  They want to be able to do stupid stuff.  I'm not going to say that ME needs to simulate reality, but there would have to be a lot of explanation why something we normally think is foolish is a viable tactic in ME-world.

[Merchant2006]

I'd really like to see Shepard face off against a Reaper with a frying pan, L4D2 style. Grabbin' heat sinks.

[GnusmasTHX]

I'd rather shoot people, but I guess Malastare- has a point, too.

[Jebel Krong]

melee combat in 3rd person does not work very well because:



a. your view is partially blocked by your character

b. control issues relating to your viewpoint and point a.

c. no peripheral vision.

[RyuKazuha]

Jebel Krong wrote...

melee combat in 3rd person does not work very well because:

a. your view is partially blocked by your character
b. control issues relating to your viewpoint and point a.
c. no peripheral vision.

Erm: Assassins Creed would make you reconsider all of that points.

[GnusmasTHX]

RyuKazuha wrote...

Jebel Krong wrote...

melee combat in 3rd person does not work very well because:

a. your view is partially blocked by your character
b. control issues relating to your viewpoint and point a.
c. no peripheral vision.

Erm: Assassins Creed would make you reconsider all of that points.

Well if you played it, you'd know you don't ever aim in Assassin's Creed. 

Virtually EVERY kill is auto locked, the exceptions are throwing punches.

More so, Assassin's Creed's camera can pan, and isn't locked behind Altair or Ezio 24/7, like Mass Effect's.

Not saying third person melee wouldn't work; it would, but if it worked like Assassin's Creed it wouldn't be particularly fun or enjoyable. The only thing you do in that game is navigate.

[CiaranTully]

I think some people are posting without reading what the OP has to say, or all the comments they have made. All the OP is asking for is a knife that can be pulled out when either an enemy has gotten really close or if you have snuck up on someone around a corner. Hes not asking for a Lightsaber or 6 foot katana. Hes asking for a knife. Which upgraded could be a useful situational tool. There is already melee in the game, whacking people with your rifle butt, and if the target has exposed fleshy necks because they aren't wearing proper armor, why wouldn't it make sense to use one.



I lost track of the times that I charged people successfully in ME1 on Insanity difficulty. I would normally do it when I found myself in a really, really bad position after entering a room, and when rockets kill you off the bat, your going to want to charge an enemy hiding behind a crate so you can use it as cover to take out his friends.



I would be all in favor of implementing some kind of small melee weapon system, it doesn't have to be particularly fancy or any stronger than current melee weapons to start off with, but upgradeable so it can be have pros and cons against certain enemies - that is if you choose to specialise into melee weapons.

[Verenti]

Yojimboo wrote...

I am pretty sure that the armor you are wearing is strong against slashing attack, pretty much like Kevlar today.
Sure you could argue for better sword forging techniques (increase the cutting ability's) but please don't give me "Laser swordz, luls". Because that would be.... lame.

The other option would be blunt weapons, with the use of exoskeleton in the armor your blunting force would be pretty deadly.

Btw piercing would be another topic, but swords are mainly used for slashing attacks.

You haven't read any of my arguments thus far. They're pretty much hinging on the idea that people, like Miranda, SuZu, Samara or basically anyone with ******, isn't wearing armour. I'm not argueing that armour wouldn't stop it, I've said a number of times the exact opposite. You could even interpret this entire thread as a passive-agressive way of saying it makes no sense they're wearing no armour. Also, with the exception of cavalry weaponry, swords have been designed to pierce effectively since the 17th century. Infact in the 19th century, some swords lost the ability to be use effectively as a slashing weapon all together.

EJon wrote...

This is a shooter, not a melee game. Go
play DA:O or KoTOR if you want melee weapons. That would ruin the feel
of mass effect anyways.

Which one can throw someone across the room with his mind. Why don't I see someone say "If you want to play a physics game, go play World of Goo"? I never suggested turning the game into Bushido Blade.

Malastare- wrote...

One might ask the question: "Why don't we use melee weapons today?"

We
don't have shields at all.  We do have body armor, but none of that
armor has been shown to protect someone from a mace/maul or even a
tomahawk (a model of which is still used by some US marines as it was
shown to easily penetrate helmets).  So, even without any defenses
against melee weapons, we still don't use them today.  Is it just
because we love the pew-pew?  Are we horribly exposed to the first army
which decides to arm themselves with katanas?

No.  Not at all.

The
first problem with melee weapons is range.  With firearms, multiple
targets can engage an enemy with a sword without putting themselves at
risk.  The more distance they put between themselves and their target,
the more lopsided this advantage becomes.  See also: artillery and
stand-off ordinance.  Superior range outweighs all strengths a melee
weapon might have.

There is also the fact that there is a
saturation effect.  You can't have six people attack the same target.  
There is no such thing as suppressive action with a melee weapon.  
Using melee weapons takes more strength and exhaustion in long battles
becomes an issue.  Since no ranged attack is possible, enemies using
melee weapons can be forced through predictable paths and subjected to
enfilading fire.  The list goes on.

And even if we ignore all of
that, understand that the best melee weapons will be the dull and/or
boring ones.  Only an idiot or rank amateur would bring a katana to a
modern battle.  After the blade was ruined on the second or third
target, you're left unnarmed.  I know people like to think that
katana's are magical, but they're not.  Even longswords are a bad idea
against any sort of reinforced armor.  You'll want a mace, really.
Something to inflict blunt force damage through armor.   

But
that's not what people want, is it? They want their katanas.  They want
to be able to do stupid stuff.  I'm not going to say that ME needs to
simulate reality, but there would have to be a lot of explanation why something we normally think is foolish is a viable tactic in ME-world.

For the record, hypothetical people are not grounds for arguement, I never said the word Katana once in this entire thread, baring the usage here.

And the lack of shields is not a bonus against the melee weapons in the modern age, It puts melee fighters at quite a disadvantage. Especially ones dumb enough not to carry any other weapon into battle. Today, If I get shot, event under optimal protection against bullets, the impact force is likely going to knock me over. If I'm wearing shields, not so much. It's not that in ME they have no defence against melee weapons, its that melee weapons have a great defence against bullets. Plus in modern times, distances are much greater than, ironically, in space. Look at where the action takes pace in ME2, lots of cover, lots of enclosed places and lots of sudden bends.

As I said, Range isn't a problem if your using a Vanguard now, so first one down.

Second point, Fair enough, but I never suggested A) a squad comprised exclusively of melee fighters, or a person dedicated exclusively to melee fighting, hell, I never even suggested a person using a melee weapon as a primary weapon. I asked, why aren't there melee weapons. You just filled in the blanks. But not too long ago, I suggested using squadmates to lay down supressing fire to allow you to close the gap, so clearly a melee deathsquad wasn't on my mind.

Boring? I'm just looking for a weapon to stab someone with, only people coming in this topic to say "Melee weapons? Lol, you can't use a chainsaw-sickle-whip n00b"  are the people to suggest exotic melee weaponry, I'm talking about a combat knife, or a smallsword or something. Why you would sugget a mace is beyond me. Why would you try to use a weapon for defeating armoured opponents, when your opponents no longer wear armour? In almost the first sentence of the topic, it reads "Shield tech has apparently gotten so good that people like Miranda don't have to wear real armour anymore." This is a point I reiterate in almost every post I've made in here, So, yes, ofcourse, if you ignore the centre of my arguement, it makes no sense to use melee weapons. But why bother posting in a topic if you aren't going to read the arguements your arguing against?

[Abuseyourdna]

Nothing wrong with a combat knife instead of a rifle smack, but really if its just a "melee" button it could be a hammer for all I care.



If anything I would like to see each class get a different combat knife or maybe each char have there own flavor of it...perhaps have the krogan have some cool knife or something.



I don't want customizable knifes, nor do i want to see Viroblade + 1 drop from something. Its a 3rd person shooter RPG, not a starwars game.

[Malastare-]

aang001 wrote...

I'd bring out a katana every once in a while to slice thru Geth .

How many katanas you got strapped to your back?  It's gonna take at least a dozen to get through a geth, even if you aim for some narrow spot like their neck.  I can't really picture Shepard standing over a geth, a pile of broken sword blades littering the area, and snapping yet another katana as he tries to hack through the thing.

aang001 wrote...

heck a sword with a blade of energy forge thru Biotics would be cool too.

Dude.  Wrong game.

[RogueAI]

It is a shooter first, second, and third. And an RPG last.

[DocLasty]

RogueAI wrote...

It is a shooter first, second, and third. And an RPG last.

Not true, and not the topic at hand. Make another topic for that crap.

[Malastare-]

Verenti wrote...

For the record, hypothetical people are not grounds for arguement, I never said the word Katana once in this entire thread, baring the usage here.

I wasn't aiming that comment at you in particular.  Of the crowd, you seem to be one of the more reasonable voices.

Verenti wrote...

Today, If I get shot, event under optimal protection against bullets, the impact force is likely going to knock me over.

Unrelated, but no.  The impact would feel rather like the recoil of the gun used to shoot you.  You're likely to fall over from the shock and pain, since the shooter had the force distributed over the butt of the gun, and the force you felt was just the size of the area the armor managed to spread the force over.

Sorry.  Just a pet peeve.

Verenti wrote...

Plus in modern times, distances are much greater than, ironically, in space. Look at where the action takes pace in ME2, lots of cover, lots of enclosed places and lots of sudden bends.

A decent argument, but lore and practice don't do much to support it.  Most of the fighting is still handled via firearm, and point-blank engagements are usually avoided by everyone except heavily armored, tank-like fighters (Krogan, Destroyers, Juggernauts).  You may be attempting to say that this is because everyone works to get into firearm range ("To a hammer, all problems are nails"), but I still don't think it invalidates the range problem.  Using a knife for a opportunistic kill on a surprised enemy is a rarity.  Persuing this as a long term strategy is foolish.

Verenti wrote...

As I said, Range isn't a problem if your using a Vanguard now, so first one down.

I'd say its worse for the Vanguard.  Sure, they can get into melee range easily, but the other side of the range problem is that your firearm-weilding enemies don't have to be in melee range to engage you.  This is the very real danger of using Vanguard Charge.  It will get you to one enemy, and for that target, it puts you in lethal range.  However, for a third party enemy, the situation has not changed, except that you are probably more likely to be in a position exposed to multiple shooters.

Verenti wrote...

Second point, Fair enough, but I never suggested A) a squad comprised exclusively of melee fighters, or a person dedicated exclusively to melee fighting, hell, I never even suggested a person using a melee weapon as a primary weapon. I asked, why aren't there melee weapons. You just filled in the blanks. But not too long ago, I suggested using squadmates to lay down supressing fire to allow you to close the gap, so clearly a melee deathsquad wasn't on my mind.

And I understand that.  I do not have a problem with point-blank auto-melee.  I don't see why a knife is better than a rifle-butt/pistol-whip, though.  Why would anyone waste time pulling out a knife in such a situation?  The only way that would make sense is if you pulled the knife beforehand, and that is what I object to.  While there is nothing unbelieveable about combat knives, there is something foolish about a marine putting away a functioning rifle/shotgun/pistol to pull a knife and try to get close to a gun-weilding enemy.  The only people I could see ever doing that would be the people who do want to turn their Shepard into some sort of knife ninja.

I know you're saying that's not your intention, but outside of that usage, I just don't see the difference between using a knife and a rifle butt.  Melee attacks in current warfare are attacks of absolute-last-resort.  I don't see anything about the ME universe that changes that, and therefore, I don't see why it should be implemented as a game mechanic.

[Akiada]

Schneidend wrote...



Yes. I was keenly aware of this talent and the Combat Exoskeleton, as the only class I ever beat the game with was Soldier. It's an awesome talent and the CE's are awesome mods. In Normal difficulty and at lower levels. Unfortunately, with the way enemy HP scales as you go up in level and difficulty, melee quickly became pointless in ME1. The shotgun more reliably knocked enemies down, and did exponentially greater damage.

Really? I never noticed - but then I never invested much in the Shotgun. The pistol was more or less my main weapon and I used biotics for most times I needed to get someone on the ground.

All I'm asking is that melee be able to compete. I don't want a buster sword. I just want a melee attack that can kill a krogan or geth destroyer when it gets in my face. Or, alternatively, if I get in ITS face with a Charge.

Given how Charge works, I'd imagine you'd have to find a pretty hardcore Krogran or Geth to survive it. Sends people flying pretty far, hah.



But yeah, I wouldn't be adverse to ME2 having a good punching/rifle butt attack. It'd certainly be handy for Vanguards and Soldiers who favor close combat. MAybe not one that would be lethal, as that would be ridiculous unless the requirement for that level of lethality was some exoskeletal armor upgrade ala the ones in ME1.

Verenti wrote...



Besides everyone who said "Charging at an enemy with an axe would make me silly" or something to that effect, Yeah, charging is generally a dumb move, even with guns. Heroics = Dumb move generally. However to manuever yourself into close range where your weapon has the advantage, or have your two Squadmates lay down surpressive fire while you advance close enough to get them, that's called smarter tactics.

Seems exceptionally ineffectual compared to just shooting your foe's shields down and putting a bullet in their (seemingly) unarmored body. I'm sure that could be achieved in short time than storming from cover-to-cover trying to get close enough to stab someone. Melee really should remain a "You're too close, GTFO" thing like it was in ME1.

[jomonoe]

While I think that full on swords is a bit too much, a small combat knife would fit imo. I think that the thing to keep in mind is that even though melee weapons can bypass the shields, will they be able to penetrate the armor?



From what we have seen, there is no vibro knife technology in Mass Effect. Also,their armor is future armor so i doubt any type of non powered, bladed weapon would penetrate.

[Lucazius]

There's no point for melee weapons... sure, you could carry a hidden knife or blade for some emergency situations, like Tali or the Krogan is ME: Revelation.



Think about it: If you are a normal guy, why would you choose a sword istead of an Assault Riffle? Or a Heavy Weapon? If you are biotic, why would you need a melee weapon when you can simply throw things away like trash?