76 réponses à ce sujet

[capn233]

Is this with the 5/5 biotic upgrade? Or the 6/6?

 

It should be either.  The issue is Samara does not have any power damage or importantly duration bonuses available to her in her passive.  So when insanity drops the 0.8x duration penalty on Area Reave, mook armor is left with a fraction of a point (and it will look like it is stripped because the armor left is less than 1pt).  If you edit the game to change the duration penalty to 0.81 she can strip armor at Level 30.

 

Actually I don't remember all the numbers off hand, so I would have to go back and look and make sure for certain that Reave actually even gets damage bonuses rather than just duration bonuses.  It is a DOT power and the Heavy Evo does more damage because it scales duration.  Incinerate works completely differently in that it does not scale with duration, it scales damage and always applies it over 3 seconds, IIRC.

 

edit: read the link above and the poster seems to indicate it does get damage bonuses.  I might screw around in the game later to make sure.  It definitely gets duration bonuses (and penalties), which is the main problem.

 

edit2: Yeah it is all about the duration penalty, so extra 10% power damage doesn't help from gettting 6 biotic upgrades since it essentially gets multiplied by the duration penalty.  This doesn't affect Shepard typically since he can spec for duration bonus (or even more power damage).

 

Since it is relevant, does anyone know of any reference for enemy HP values for ME2?

[a_mouse]

Since it is relevant, does anyone know of any reference for enemy HP values for ME2?

I've looked many times and never found anything.

[a_mouse]

If I recall, Area Reave has a 3 meter radius, same as Area Overload, (Area) Incineration Blast, Full (Area) Cryo Blast, Wide Singularity, Area Energy Drain, and pretty much any power with a radius evolution with a few exceptions.

 

I ran my own Reave tests a few years ago, and I thought Area Reave was better.

 

If you are comparing it on the Disabled Collector Ship, then the enemies tend not to bunch up there unlike other missions.

Sure.  If you are using it mainly for defense stripping (not protection or melting heavy targets), then the radius evolution is going to better.  Even if enemies only bunch up once in a while, it's basically free damage (provided the single target damage is over your desired threshold).  But if you are CQ'ing with Claymore, I'd think you'd want the extra protection.  

 

I saw your test, but I'm not sure it was really a fair comparison.  When testing the Area evolution, you were spamming Reave more frequently, which means you were constantly re-upping the health restoration (which is shorter in duration than the damage reduction benefit).  I think if you spam Heavy on single targets at the same rate (without gaps in the colored mist animation) you'll be similarly invincible under fire.  

[capn233]

You are going to get more CC with Area.  At minimum you get the same CC, but in reality it is not too difficult to get at least 2 enemies on most mainline missions.  And since Reave oddly CC's geth, Area is better there (since you get 0 protection against them).

[Arkalezth]

Does the extra health have a set duration, or does it just last until you've taken enough damage to go down to your base health?

[capn233]

It does have a duration, but it is longer than Reave's duration.  At least if you aren't taking damage.

 

IIRC, if you buff health with Reave and end an encounter then you stay at the higher health for a while, unless you get shot then I don't think it fills past your normal max unless you Reave health again.

 

edit:

 

To narrow down Husk armor, what rank and upgrades are needed on Mordin's incinerate to strip Husk armor at Level 30?

[a_mouse]

@Arkalexth: As I understand it, the health boost it does not add "hidden" extra health above the red bar (I wish it did, actually, since then you could take health damage without occluded senses and blood vessel animation!). The health boost increases max health as well as giving you additional health points.  Unfortunately the occluded senses and blood vessel animation are determined by % health, not absolute value of health.  Thus any damage (even above your base health) will cause a damage animation.

 

Rather, the red bar tracks your fraction (%) of max health.  When you Reave, it increases your max health by a fixed amount for about 30 seconds.  During this time period any health damage you receive is divided by the modified max health value to calculate your loss of % health.  This means that Reave is really more of a damage reduction than a health boost per se. (although it only benefits health, not shields/barrier).  Actually, the game tracks health points, not % health.  After calculating damage, it divides total health by the max health to get % health. 

 

The level of boost to max health depends on the rank and evolution of the power, not the number of enemies hit, meaning that Heavy Reave will always have a 40% higher boost in max health than Area Reave can (which translates to ~15% increase in damage capacity overall). However, hitting multiple enemies with Area Reave will increase your current health points more. The duration of the boost appears to be fixed at about 30 seconds, regardless of rank or evolution.

 

In addition to this boost, for the duration of leaching (3 to 5.5 seconds depending on level and evolution), Reave replenishes your % health at some prescribed rate.  I'm not exactly sure exactly how that rate scales with evolution or number of enemies, but suspect it is probably a fixed rate since it does not seem to depend on the health of the target you hit, and persists even when the target dies.  Thus I suspect Heavy Reave has the advantage here as well (since its duration is 40% longer). RedCaesar tried to do a test of this a while back (see above), but I don't think this test was very conclusive.   

 

@capn233: Sure, Area Reave provides more CC on clusters of debuffed enemies than Heavy Reave.  But if Red is going as a quasi-Adept with Area Pull and Shockwave, he's probably going to mostly be CC'ing debuffed enemies with those powers rather than Reave, since they have shorter cooldowns (and are more fun to watch!).  As I understood his original post, he wants to CQ with IA + Claymore with only limited use of Charge.  If a principle goal of Reave is to gain protection in order to move in the open while rushing protected enemies with the Claymore, I'd advise going Heavy.  

 

Of course you could play the entire game with Reave as your only power (group strip, CC, and protection all in one - it's like the jacknife of all powers). In that case, yes, I totally agree: Area Reave is definitely better for that.  But be sure to warm up the coffee first.

[Arkalezth]

When you Reave, it increases your max health by a fixed amount for about 30 seconds.

Thanks, that's what I wanted to know, regardless of the rest of the mechanics. I figured it had a duration, but I had never got confirmation of it, and I haven't used it much myself.

[capn233]

It isn't DR in ME2, it is a number of max health added, and the hp restored per second is directly related to damage dealt, like with Energy Drain.

 

Area Reave is better for CQB than Heavy Reave.  It CC's more units at once, and importantly it can defense strip and give protection at the same time as a result.

 

I agree that if you are going to turn Vanguard into Adept, potentially Heavy Reave could be better, although it is going to be worse than Heavy Warp.  Then again Adept never gets the Claymore and the weapon itself reduces the number of strategies that are going to make any sense if you plan to fire the Claymore very often.

 

Personally I think the only advantages of Heavy Reave are those that do not translate into actual practical ones.  Namely more boss armor damage and a bit more health regen per second.

[capn233]

Oh one other thing.

 

a_mouse, did you have Biotic Damage 5 when you did the Area v Heavy test?

[a_mouse]

It isn't DR in ME2, it is a number of max health added

Maybe this is a semantic issue, but based on the mechanics that I just explained in the previous post, it is effectively a damage reduction.  Reave does not add "extra health" on top of the red bar.  If it did, then whenever you had buffed health you would see no damage appear until your health dropped below its base value.  That's not what happens.  Even if you have buffed health, any health damage you receive registers on the red health bar, just at a lower rate (because the red health bar is % of max health).  I suspect the program actually tracks % health (not total health), and thus the reciprocal of the max health number is used as a damage multiplier in deciding how much % to take off.  In this sense the boost is (literally) a damage reduction.   Nope, you are right - ME2 tracks total health, not % health.  It just calculates % health for the HUD.

 

the hp restored per second is directly related to damage dealt, like with Energy Drain.

I don't think this is true. If it were, then reaving an enemy with a tiny sliver of health would have no effect on your health, since the damage done to that enemy would be negligible.  On many occasions I've heavy-reaved a single Collector Drone on the cusp of dying, and yet received a massive health restoration for ~5 seconds afterward.  So I don't think it's tied to the actual damage dealt to the enemy.  It might scale with potential damage, but on a single target this would favor Heavy Reave over Area Reave since the duration of Heavy Reave is longer.  The only thing I am uncertain about is whether it multiplies potential damage by the number of enemies hit.  However the max health boost does NOT scale with the number of enemies, so I suspect the restoration rate does not either*.  I've tried both Heavy and Area Reave for this purpose, but not noticed (qualitatively) any difference in the restoration rate depending on the number of enemies hit.  

 

*Correction: The boost in max health does not increase with number of enemies hit, but the boost in actual health points does.  Not sure about the regeneration rate.  

[a_mouse]

Oh one other thing.

 

a_mouse, did you have Biotic Damage 5 when you did the Area v Heavy test?

Probably 4 or 5, but I'd need to open the saved game to see exactly what it was.  (I will look up for you next time I am booted as a PC.)

[a_mouse]

ps.  I will also add that the health restoration rate during the 3~5.5 second duration of Reave is not uniform.  To me it looks like you get about ½ the restoration immediately (even if health damage to target has not yet occurred to any significant degree), then the other ½ occurs uniformly over the duration of Reave, and continues for the duration even if the target dies.  I just took a careful look (again) at RedCaesar's test, and notice that the magnitude of this initial "jump" in the red health bar does not double when you hit two enemies vs. one*.   Thus I don't think the AOE effect of Reave matters to the health restoration benefit.  

 

*Correction: yes it does, but it's hard to tell in Red's test since the jump depends on the current max health, which may or may not be boosted prior to the jump in health.  In a controlled test where this factor is known, Area Reave on multiple targets definitely does appear to grant more health points than Heavy Reave on a single target.

[capn233]

Maybe this is a semantic issue, but based on the mechanics that I just explained in the previous post, it is effectively a damage reduction.  Reave does not add "extra health" on top of the red bar.  If it did, then whenever you had buffed health you would see no damage appear until your health dropped below its base value.  That's not what happens.  Even if you have buffed health, any health damage you receive registers on the red health bar, just at a lower rate (because the red health bar is % of max health).  I suspect the program actually tracks % health (not total health), and thus the reciprocal of the max health number is used as a damage multiplier in deciding how much % to take off.  In this sense the boost is (literally) a damage reduction.  

 

This is not semantics. It is adding a fixed amount of health and giving you health restore.  Assuming that it is DR isn't even consistent with your own test where you can see that it gives you more max health.  It doesn't matter that the GUI doesn't give you an even bigger red bar, that is not how the gui works.  Your health meter is the same size regardless of max health.  And when you have higher max health pool, the same amount of damage reduces the bar by a smaller amount.  This does not mean you have DR since your health pool has not remained constant.

 

I asked about the number of upgrades before the test predominantly because I was trying to calculate the damage of each Reave spec in the test.  Incidentally, if you have 5 upgrades and ignore Champion the Area Damage should be 230.4, and it buffed health 231...

 

I do not think you see Reave use different regen rates.  On the contrary, it is giving you a damage based boost to health on impact (the same one that fills you past your old full health if you are at your old max).  I had thought the regen rate after that depends on damage dealt (and incidentally this should end up being the same between Area and Heavy since they have the same DOT rate at same upgrade level, they simply have different durations).  You don't get triple regen if you hit three targets with Area, and I am sure that is by design.

 

Changing forums didn't help, and it doesn't help that some of the original guys to look into things in ME2 don't post here any longer.  In the ME2 era I was not as interested in the minutia of mechanics as I am since ME3 came out, and it didn't help that this info is hard to find.

[a_mouse]

Hmm… I think what we have here is a failure in communication.  To help resolve this, I propose we first try to agree on a few basic things about the GUI.  

 

As I understand it, the red health bar indicates the current fraction of max health that you currently posses.    So for example, if your max health (on the stat screen) is 344, and your red health bar reads 50%, you have 172 remaining health points (which is the absolute amount of health damage you can absorb without dying).  In contrast, if you previously Reaved a target (say 20 seconds ago), raising your max health to 662 on the stat screen, and your health bar now reads 50%, it means you currently have 331 remaining health points.  

 

Do we agree?  

[capn233]

I agree that is how the HUD functions.  Damage Reduction would scale enemy attacks by a percent (like Hard Shields or Hardened Adrenaline Rush).  Reave doesn't function that way.  ME2 Reave adds an amount of health and gives you health regen as well as temporarily increasing max potential health.  ME3 Reave grants actual Damage Reduction where enemy attacks are scaled by up to -40%.

 

Similarly, when you get bonus shields from Energy Drain you might see the shield bar move at a different rate, but enemy attacks have not been scaled.  You just have more total shields.

 

It may very well look the same as if it was granting DR if you only go by the HUD, but you already know that it isn't DR because you looked in the power screen and saw that you had more total health.  It was +231 health in your earlier test for Area Reave.  This isn't hidden or anything else.  Once you cast Area Reave your max health is now 231 higher than what it was before and will remain that way until the max health buff wears off.

[a_mouse]

I think where we are getting hung up is our assumptions about how ME2 keeps account of your current health.  The way you are thinking, it tracks actual health points:

 

delta(health points) = current health points - damage value

 

The game then divides your health points by the maximum health, and displays that as a fraction in the HUD. 

 

But I am not sure it really does that.  Instead, I think it may track your % health directly, calculated as a function of time as:

 

delta(% health) = current % health - (damage value/max health)*100%

 

Otherwise I'd expect the red health bar to decrease when you activate Reave since your health level at that moment (before you have leached a significant amount of health) would be a smaller percentage of the new (increased) max health.

 

Either way you calculate it, you get the same decrease in % health for given amount of damage.  But in one case it is calculated as reduced damage to % health, the other way it is calculated as fixed damage to a larger health pool (this is what I mean by the issue being somewhat semantic).  However, the occlusion of senses and red blood vessel animation is tied to % health (not total health points), so from a practical standpoint it is really the % health that matters to your experience in-game.

 

One way we could test which way it does the accounting is to examine what happens if you have partial health when Reave wears off.  If you are correct in how it does the accounting, the health bar will jump UP, since for a given health level (in points), the % health will get higher (since the max health drops back down).  On the other hand, if I am correct that it track fractional health as a conserved quantity, the % health will not jump when the max health drops.

 

I will test, and get back...

 

Testing complete.  And you were right - the game tracks health points on an absolute basis, not on a percentage basis.  The health bar does indeed jump up when the 30 second duration of the max health boost ends!

[capn233]

The real importance of the distinction is that if Reave grants DR, then the extra amount of shots that you can tank is proportional to the DR amount AND Shepard's starting health amount.  With a fixed health boost tied to Reave damage, the extra number of shots that you can tank is only proportional to Reave's bonus.

 

A simplified example would be if Shepard has 300 health and Reave were to grant 200.  There is an enemy that does 100 damage per shot.  In this case you can take 5 shots to go to 0 damage.  This would be equivalent to Reave simply granting 40% DR to Shepard's 300 total health, as 40% DR would reduce each shot to 60, and it will therefore reduce 300 health to 0 in 5 shots.

 

What happens if then Shepard levels up a passive and gains 100 health to get to 400?  With a 200 health bonus from Reave you would have 600 hit points, and you would take 6 attacks at 100 damage to go to 0.

 

However, if Reave granted 40% DR to 400 hp, then each attack would deal 60 damage and so if you get hit with 6 attacks you would still have 40hp left.  Hence making the distinction in function is not trivial.

 

Whether or not the HUD functions in one way or another, or even if the wounded graphic shows up at a percent of health is beside the point.  The question is how Reave functions, not how the HUD functions.

[a_mouse]

The real importance of the distinction is that if Reave grants DR, then the extra amount of shots that you can tank is proportional to the DR amount AND Shepard's starting health amount.  With a fixed health boost tied to Reave damage, the extra number of shots that you can tank is only proportional to Reave's bonus.

 

A simplified example would be if Shepard has 300 health and Reave were to grant 200.  There is an enemy that does 100 damage per shot.  In this case you can take 5 shots to go to 0 damage.  This would be equivalent to Reave simply granting 40% DR to Shepard's 300 total health, as 40% DR would reduce each shot to 60, and it will therefore reduce 300 health to 0 in 5 shots.

 

What happens if then Shepard levels up a passive and gains 100 health to get to 400?  With a 200 health bonus from Reave you would have 600 hit points, and you would take 6 attacks at 100 damage to go to 0.

 

However, if Reave granted 40% DR to 400 hp, then each attack would deal 60 damage and so if you get hit with 6 attacks you would still have 40hp left.  Hence making the distinction in function is not trivial.

 

Whether or not the HUD functions in one way or another, or even if the wounded graphic shows up at a percent of health is beside the point.  The question is how Reave functions, not how the HUD functions.

I think you missed my point.  Even if ME2 tracks %health, that would still take into consideration the increased base, since it is part of the denominator used to determine the reduction in % health per shot.   For example, for the scenario you just described, the change in % health would be:

 

Case 0.  base 300, no reave.  shot -100.

Change in % health per shot = -(100/300)*100% = -33.3%.  (3 shots to die)

 

Case 1.  base 300, bonus 200.  shot -100.

Change in % health per shot = -(100/500)*100% = -20%.  (5 shots to die)

 

Case 2.  base 400, bonus 200, shot -100.

Change in % health per shot = -(100/600)*100% = -16.7% (6 shots to die)

 

The same.  So I think this aspect really is semantics.  You are talking about damage reduction in absolute terms (health points), I am talking about damage reduction in relative terms (% health).  

 

Where I think this actually matters is not how damage is calculated, but whether %health or absolute health are being conserved.  If ME2 tracks % health, then there will be a jump in health points when the max health bonus is activated or expires (due to change in max health with no change in %health).  If it tracks total number of health points, then there will be a jump in %health when the max health bonus is activated or expires (due to change in max health with no change in health points). The reason this distinction matters is that I am trying to sort out quantitatively (from changes in the HUD) what Reave is actually doing in terms of granting health points or % health for the different evolutions when one (or more) targets are hit with Reave.  

 

I have some results which I think you will like, but not sure I will get a chance to post until later today.  This has become a distraction to Red's thread, so will post separately. 

[capn233]

You can't base everything on the HUD.  It only graphically represents how much health you have relative to your current maximum.  Just like the shield bar.

 

Honestly this is a huge thread derail, but here are my suggestions.  You already know that Reave increases your actual max health.  Your own test shows that.  The only test you need to run is to start with Rank 1 Reave, hit a target, and see the bonus to max health.  Then Rank 2 Reave, then Rank 3.  Then tell me what upgrades you have and what the passive is so I can actually see if passive matters for the health boost (from your last test it looked like duration from Champion may not have counted for health boost, or it is stacking in a way that I don't anticipate).

 

Your examples also are only the same at the same health level.  So run an Adept with no points in Biotic Mastery at the same level (like Level 20) as a Soldier with Shock Trooper and see if the attacks are really based on a fraction of your health.  If this ends up to be the case, then it would be amazing that they coded the game like this.  They certainly did not code ME3 like this (I know this for a fact), and they probably did not code ME1 or ME2 like this (enemy base damage multiplied by difficulty multiplier and then scaled to Shepard's level).

[a_mouse]

Your examples also are only the same at the same health level.  So run an Adept with no points in Biotic Mastery at the same level (like Level 20) as a Soldier with Shock Trooper and see if the attacks are really based on a fraction of your health.  

You are putting words in my mouth.  I'm not saying that damage from enemies is defined as a fraction of your health.  It is defined in terms of a certain number of health points.  What I am saying is that there are two ways to calculate the change in %health (as displayed by the HUD) resulting from that damage.  You can subtract the damage from the pool and divide by max health, or you can divide the damage by the max health and then subtract from %health.  These are mathematically the same thing:  

 

Let X = health

Let N = max health

Let D = damage from enemy

Let x = X/N = fraction of health (as displayed in HUD)

 

x2 = x1 - D/N  (normalizing damage first, then accounting % health)

x2 = (X1-D)/N  (accounting health points, then normalizing)

 

If you change N (via Reave), a given amount of (extensive) health damage D (which I agree with you is not reduced by Reave) will result in a smaller change in the fraction of available health (D/N). This is literally all I meant by the term "damage reduction."  Based on your reaction, it appears it was an unwise choice of terminology!  

[capn233]

Damage reduction is a mechanic that likely works in ME2 like ME3, even if it isn't as prolific.  It is basically the same as the mechanic in ME1 called Damage Protection (although stacked differently).  So no, I don't think it should be co-opted to mean something else as someone who plays the games out of order may come along and think that ME2 Reave works similarly to ME3 Reave because we are now talking about damage reduction.

[a_mouse]

Fair enough.  Anyway, here's the results of the tests (hopefully addresses you other questions about upgrades, passive bonus):

 

Sorry Red for hijacking you thread.  You've probably finished the entire play-through by now (using Area Reave no doubt).

[RedCaesar97]

Sorry Red for hijacking you thread.  You've probably finished the entire play-through by now (using Area Reave no doubt).

 

No problems. I actually just finished the last of the pre-Horizon recruitment missions, so I play Horizon next. After that, I can play around with the talent points and try different things.

 

I am actually wondering if i should even bother with Reave now on the Vanguard. I know I wanted to play it like an Adept that can charge, but after reviewing your suggestions and thinking about it some more, Reave seems like such a wasted talent on a Vanguard. I always thought that, but even if I sit back and play like a caster, I think it is kind of wasted.

 

Maybe when I get a chance to play around with it I may come up with something interesting.

[capn233]

Reave will dominate a playstyle regardless of who it is on.  IIRC that is why strive thought it was better on an Engineer than an Adept (cast Drone, and then run around with Reave).

 

The main problem to play as an Adept with the Vanguard is that you are missing two key skills, namely Singularity and Warp, and to an extent Throw (although Charge could be substituted, albeit with longer CD).  This isn't trivial since you don't have any power to stick protected targets.  You can spam Stasis, but I don't know that this will really be like an Adept either.

 

I don't know how the Claymore figures into this.  If I was just told to come up with an effective way to play a Vanguard w/ Claymore with limited or no Charge I would probably pick Reave.  I suppose if you make sure you can invest into Pull you can end up using that on unprotected targets to make it a little different.

 

I suppose you could go back to Slam and get Pull and then do Pull into Slam which is pretty entertaining.  You could also try to limit charging to only targets that have been previously pulled on maps where you can knock them off.