4 réponses à ce sujet

[Unblinking Eye]

Why did technology regress to the point that weapons need ammo? Was this an insidious plot by the Collectors to send the known galaxy back in time. Shepard will get to use a black powder musket for the last big boss fight. Bah! ammo...

[Jus_Sanguinis]

Read the fluff behind it. The weapons themselves still have "unlimited" ammunition but they instead use disposable heatsinks to allow for massive volume of fire. Supposedly it takes a shooter less time to eject and plug a new heatsink in than to wait for the weapon to cool down from sustained fire.

Modifié par Jus_Sanguinis, 26 janvier 2010 - 07:16 .

[Unblinking Eye]

well you'd think that would mean if out of "disposable heat sinks" you'd still be able to fire a weapon albeit at a slower rate of fire. lack of sniper ammo, i mean "disposable heat sinks" sucks. i'll get over this in time, but the change in the actual mechanics (overheat vs. ammo[ie "disposable heat sinks"]) seems like a step back. Bah! "disposable heat sinks"

[Jus_Sanguinis]

Fluff response: Tried running a processor without it's cooling elements installed?



Mechanics response: I personally think it's a great change, it makes firefights feel more desperate as your ammo counter starts counting down (it doesn't matter in the long run since "disposable heat sinks" are scattered everywhere).

[Unblinking Eye]

fluff response: weapons use teeny weeny mass effect fields to shred off the round from the ammo block. weapons would already be designed with some kinda of cooling element. why make a weapon with more moving parts & increase the chance for malfunctions to happen?



mechanic response: why should you have to pick up sinks at all if the place is littered with them anyways? i would argue that you get that same feeling of desperation waiting for your weapon to cool in the middle of a fire fight