111 réponses à ce sujet

[Larry-3]

Waoh, hold on everyone. A bow and arrow does not necessarily have to fire a projectile, just like a staff does not need to be made out of metal alloy. I did imply futuristic advanced versions, did I not?

A bow could fire laser-induced plasma just like in Star Wars, or it could quietly fire a mini-camera to help you observe something you cannot reach or see.

A staff does not need to be made out of metal alloy, it could be made out of something else that can cut a tank in half like a lightsaber.

A trident does not need to be strictly melee; it could fire a beam, too.

Also, melee does not need to be a prerequisite; it could simply be optional. Yes a rifle fires ammo faster, but what I am stating is that we should also have a melee option just to mix things up. If melee weapons were implemented in -- which I really wish they were -- I could see them being a high risk high reward. Similar to a Vanguard charging in close and spinning around firing a shotgun.

If I could, I would pull out energy daggers, charge in after enemies and slice them up quickly like some kind of duelist.

If I had a bow or omni-bow -- whichever is fine -- I would launch a sticky EMP explosive to disable a tank, run up to it and toss a Grenade into it. I would rather do that than burn through heats sink after heat sink.

If a lot of enemies charged me, I would pull out my trident and start sending them flying like Neo did in the matrix. Or if it is an energy quarterstaff, I would cut them down when they approached me instead of spinning around with a shotgun.

If the enemies possess a gun, then I will just switch back to my gun or use biotics. Anyway weapon can be deadly in the right hands or sisuation. I understand that some people do not like melee weapons; that is why I stated "optional".

[RoboticWater]

Waoh, hold on everyone. A bow and arrow does not necessarily have to fire a projectile, just like a staff does not need to be made out of metal alloy. I did imply futuristic advanced versions, did I not?

A bow could fire laser-induced plasma just like in Star Wars, or it could quietly fire a mini-camera to help you observe something you cannot reach or see.

A staff does not need to be made out of metal alloy, it could be made out of something else that can cut a tank in half like a lightsaber.

A trident does not need to be strictly melee; it could fire a beam, too.

Also, melee does not need to be a prerequisite; it could simply be optional. Yes a rifle fires ammo faster, but what I am stating is that we should also have a melee option just to mix things up. If melee weapons were implemented in -- which I really wish they were -- I could see them being a high risk high reward. Similar to a Vanguard charging in close and spinning around firing a shotgun.

If I could, I would pull out energy daggers, charge in after enemies and slice them up quickly like some kind of duelist.

If I had a bow or omni-bow -- whichever is fine -- I would launch a sticky EMP explosive to disable a tank, run up to it and toss a Grenade into it. I would rather do that than burn through heats sink after heat sink.

If a lot of enemies charged me, I would pull out my trident and start sending them flying like Neo did in the matrix. Or if it is an energy quarterstaff, I would cut them down when they approached me instead of spinning around with a shotgun.

If the enemies possess a gun, then I will just switch back to my gun or use biotics. Anyway weapon can be deadly in the right hands or sisuation. I understand that some people do not like melee weapons; that is why I stated "optional".

I think the fact that you have to make excuses just to portray these kinds of weapons as even minimally viable shows how poor of an idea this would be for Mass Effect.

 

Anything you just suggested could be accomplished more practically with a combination of guns, drones, and explosives. Combat knives are fine but turning Mass Effect into Star Wars for no reason other than "fantasy weapons are cool," isn't acceptable.

[Oni Changas]

Hey unimaginatives. Wanna know why melee weapons are still viable in MEU? Ballistic shields don't stop blades or other blunt force weapons. The shields are supposed to block against projectiles.

[Larry-3]

I think the fact that you have to make excuses just to portray these kinds of weapons as even minimally viable shows how poor of an idea this would be for Mass Effect.

Anything you just suggested could be accomplished more practically with a combination of guns, drones, and explosives. Combat knives are fine but turning Mass Effect into Star Wars for no reason other than "fantasy weapons are cool," isn't acceptable.

Apparently RoboticWater believes that launching a drone is easier that simply firing from an omni-bow or crossbow.

I believe I stated that a bow could launch an explosive.

Listen, RoboticWater, it is obvious that you favor guns and explosives. I have nothing against them. I am simply encouraging BioWare to bring more to the table. Everyone loves options. I am not asking BioWare to remove guns; simply add more options to combat. Think of KOTOR I and II: they have both guns and melee weapons. In fact, one of the weapons in those games was a crossbow. Killing enemies will get boring if one never get the chance to mix it up a bit.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

I wouldn't expect to see these weapons unless we go to a planet that has a civilization in their equivalent of medieval times.

[Broganisity]

Hey unimaginatives. Wanna know why melee weapons are still viable in MEU? Ballistic shields don't stop blades or other blunt force weapons. The shields are supposed to block against projectiles.

They are not viable, but highly situational and not as a standard for modern (in-universe and out-of-universe) combat. Kinetic Barriers, known simply as Shields to everyone, operates when a high-speed projectile reaches the wearer, where the shield will then activate to deflect the projectile, assuming there is enough energy in the shield's power cell. This lets you still manipulate the environment without accidentally knocking your chair over if you try to sit down in it. It also means that slow impact forces should still damage an enemy, though it appears that Kinetic Barriers received an upgrade between Mass Effect 1 and Mass Effect 2 as melee strikes do not bleed through enemy shields, yet rain still batters it and even damages it if the rain has a high enough acidity. Thus the effectiveness of melee abilities was reduced over the period of two years, and only slightly increased during the Reaper War, when large groups of close-combat melee units became more prevalent due to the husks.
 

Melee Weapons are viable only against single unaware targets and groups of melee-only enemies, but when faced with larger groups of mixed tactics, melee ceases to become viable. When you look at melee strategies in Mass Effect 3, you find that they are accented by powers and gunfire and that melee is best for an aggressive defensive tactic where you stake out a 'territory' and guard it until you can no longer do so, then retreat to a different spot. Melee lets you clean up certain trash units when its safe to do so. For example, the Vanguard is primarily a power and gunner than a melee fighter, simply fighting in close range with a shotgun while alternating between biotic charge and other biotic powers for the majority of their damage output.

Even amongst enemy units encountered in the series, the most feared melee ones are feared moreso for their other abilities than their melee prowess. Phantoms are known more for being annoying to attack with powers and for their palm blaster. Banshees are known for their scream, teleportation, power (and melee) denial, and magnet hands.

OP's concept of Melee in the Mass Effect universe is flawed in this sense as melee in the series is primarily a defensive-aggressive defensive tactic amongst non-Krogan towards a large surge of unarmed units encroaching on an allied line. It is not something where you can swing a bladed staff and decapitate a group of banshees then leap into the air, twirling about wildly while launching enemies about like 'you are in the matrix'. . .and even in such situations where that would be possible it is not because of the weapon, but because of biotic abilities that would not even require the weapon in the first place (Ex. Biotic Slash is essentially a variant of Shockwave). This is not Warframe. This is not Star Wars. Battles are not fought this way in the MEU, at least amongst the Council Races. Maybe we encounter other races who will fight like this but humanity doesn't need to do so.

----------------

I am not at all against the concept of improved melee combat, only that such a fantastical portrayal is not fitting for the universe. . .and then all that other stuff I mentioned prior in regards to how a bow could work but not in the way OP thinks. The Omni-Tool does all the work and allows for easier basic matters such as ordinance launching, whereas a Bow would be useful for damaging unprotected enemies, or even piercing armor the way the Graal and the Kishok do, it's the implementation of such a weapon that is the problem.

It would either be a form of Crossbow rather than an actual, the Omni-Bow of the Talon Mercenary, or it would not function like a bow at all but have the appearance of one. My money is on the former two.

[CrutchCricket]

Only if you show me the proof of katanas being used as primary weapons in modern military's.

 

I think you may have missed my point. Modern bows and arrows have little advantage over modern guns yet they still exist. Necessary lore? They will just be upgraded versions of the bow and arrow. This is my point the bow and arrow this exists today while offering little to no advantage over guns and it has been modernised.

 

Honestly, only your limited, imagination (not yours specifically) can blind you from seeing all the different ways the bow and arrow can be added to the arsenal of weapons in the Mass Effect universe. I would have liked to have been able to give you an example or two but that would require too much effort from me. You will just have to trust me that there are potential many ways from the bow and arrow to be 'modernised' and added to the Mass Effect Universe.

 

(Wasn't trying to be condescending more like baffled and curious.)

When did I claim katanas were used as primary weapons, or viable in modern combat? I would think Japanese officers still carry them ceremoniously, but that's no different than other officers carrying cutlasses and sabers. I.E. it's just for parade.

 

Obviously they exist but they aren't used in combat. Why are we arguing this? Do bows and arrows exist in the ME universe? Probably. Are any of them used in combat? No. And if we hightail it to another galaxy, chances are we didn't pack the archaic weapons anyway. Hence my idea that if we do encounter some bow like weapon, it'll either be native alien tech or improvised.

 

But an official weapons designer designing a viable "futuristic bow" and/or a military making that a part of their regular arsenal is just unlikely given any supposed advantages such a weapon might have could be built into a firearm type device much more easily. The modern crossbows being used today are situationally based on stealth takedowns because firearm noise suppression isn't good enough for a completely silent shot (it's not the tswip sound you hear in the movies). But if you solve that problem for ME guns, the advantage is gone. The penetration aspect is only secondary since we do have AP and shield penetrating/disrupting ammo available.

 

Waoh, hold on everyone. A bow and arrow does not necessarily have to fire a projectile, just like a staff does not need to be made out of metal alloy. I did imply futuristic advanced versions, did I not?

A bow could fire laser-induced plasma just like in Star Wars, or it could quietly fire a mini-camera to help you observe something you cannot reach or see.

I think the sticky blob gun thing Batman uses in the Nolan movies has this beat.

[ArabianIGoggles]

(Announcer codex voice) In the year 2190, the Alliance created an advanced bow and arrow made of a plasteel alloy with stealth properties to allow explosives and gadgets to be launched without the user being easily detectable. Because of its low cost, easy to produce, and easily modable body, the bow and arrow still see limited use on missions where other weapons would be overkill.

Sounds like the Crysis 3 bow and arrow. 

[Former_Fiend]

While I am personally in favor of options we saw in multiplayer such as the omni-blade variants, the omni-bow and shield, the side-arm katanas, and the biotic whips, as well as maybe the biotic hammer for our krogan companion, I wouldn't want to see much beyond those concepts. 

 

People throw Star Wars around in this thread a bit, but really what this makes me think of is Warhammer 40,000 and the plethora of melee weapons featured there when I see this suggestion. Well, that and Shadowrun, to a lesser extent. And while I love Shadowrun and like 40k well enough, Mass Effect isn't either of them and shouldn't lose it's identity in the imitation. 

 

We have our wrist mounted holographic crossbow and a nice variety of cutting implements. Let's enjoy them, but keep the focus on the guns.

[RoboticWater]

Apparently RoboticWater believes that launching a drone is easier that simply firing from an omni-bow or crossbow.

I believe I stated that a bow could launch an explosive.

Listen, RoboticWater, it is obvious that you favor guns and explosives. I have nothing against them. I am simply encouraging BioWare to bring more to the table. Everyone loves options. I am not asking BioWare to remove guns; simply add more options to combat. Think of KOTOR I and II: they have both guns and melee weapons. In fact, one of the weapons in those games was a crossbow. Killing enemies will get boring if one never get the chance to mix it up a bit.

In a universe where engineers can just spawn drones at will, yes. In Star Trek TNG, rather than transfer reports through memory sticks, they just hand off the entire datapad to the receiving officer (effectively an iPad) because they can just materialize another one at will. In the future, all kinds of crazy stuff is a button press away. Why use a bow when mini-fabricators can just make a rudimentary drone? 

 

Again, Mass Effect is not Star Wars; there aren't pre-cogs who can sense bullets before they're even fired. In this universe, people use guns, because that's what makes sense.

[The Hierophant]

This would be nice.

 

[Battlebloodmage]

Can I have the mjolnir where I can shoot lightning out of and lick?

 

[Oldren Shepard]

Today the soldiers and Marines still use a bayonet, 6 inches sharp metal could be useful in close combat, a small factory in our arms has great potential.

[N7Jamaican]

This is Ludacris... Ludicrous? 

 

[Larry-3]

Guns make combat boring after awhile.

[StealthGamer92]

Guns make combat boring after awhile.

That's why they make more game's than just shooter, you want to cram in something for no good reason other than you want it despite how it clashes with the seting. Why shouldn't other's object? There are plenty of sword and shield, or modern game's that have bow's but luckily ME has as of ME3 restricted these gimick's to MP so people who want gimick's get them without impacting SP. Seeing those in SP would make me quit and go buy another game just to get away from these stupid gimick's every game over the last few year's has added "just because."

[Deebo305]

We're not in Medievil time's in ME so the tech's better than these dumb gimick weapon's, go to DA or one of the many other game's set in this era for those.

I'm inclined to agree

Even sword wielders like the Phantoms and Kai Leng were raising afew eyebrows.Sure it cool for the sake of being cool but a tad too ridiculous

I don't mind the Onmi-Blade though, that will still be the coolest addition to the seriew imo. Expand on that and I'm game

[Feybrad]

I'd like Shields like these Guys in ME3 and the Shadow Broker had.

 

That is all.

[Lvca_gr]

I think that, like some people already said, some of these weapons could be implemented, lore-wise at least (bypassing shields/kinetic barriers/whatever). 

 

Also, melee weapons would make some sense in the context of exploration/survival. If the PC and rest of the people that go to Andromeda do so because they are escaping the reapers (yes, yes, if that's the case...), having people capable of using weapons that do not require complicated maintenance, and that are relatively easy to replace as a sword or a baton (they are easier to make than a gun) could help the whole expedition survive. Unfortunately, Bows and crossbows are still an issue because of their "ammo".

 

I also think that cooling weapons should return, at least as an option, by the way.

[Laughing_Man]

Riot shields are a good idea, so are combat knives.

 

The omni blade makes no sense to me, it should be too fragile to be effective as a slashing / stabbing weapon.

 

Omni-Xbow is an obvious case of the rule of cool, an omni tool is perfectly capable of launching projectiles without resorting

to ancient ideas like an Xbow.

 

And Phantoms would have been much more threatening if they had heavier long range weapons,

and only used melee & SyncKills up close with a combat knife.

 

I think that going further in the direction of Sci-Fi flavored ancient weapons will only make suspension of disbelief harder.

[Chealec]

Hey unimaginatives. Wanna know why melee weapons are still viable in MEU? Ballistic shields don't stop blades or other blunt force weapons. The shields are supposed to block against projectiles.

 

I think you're confusing Mass Effect with Dune...

[Indigenous]

When did I claim katanas were used as primary weapons, or viable in modern combat? I would think Japanese officers still carry them ceremoniously, but that's no different than other officers carrying cutlasses and sabers. I.E. it's just for parade.

 

Obviously they exist but they aren't used in combat. Why are we arguing this? Do bows and arrows exist in the ME universe? Probably. Are any of them used in combat? No. And if we hightail it to another galaxy, chances are we didn't pack the archaic weapons anyway. Hence my idea that if we do encounter some bow like weapon, it'll either be native alien tech or improvised.

 

But an official weapons designer designing a viable "futuristic bow" and/or a military making that a part of their regular arsenal is just unlikely given any supposed advantages such a weapon might have could be built into a firearm type device much more easily. The modern crossbows being used today are situationally based on stealth takedowns because firearm noise suppression isn't good enough for a completely silent shot (it's not the tswip sound you hear in the movies). But if you solve that problem for ME guns, the advantage is gone. The penetration aspect is only secondary since we do have AP and shield penetrating/disrupting ammo available.

 

I think the sticky blob gun thing Batman uses in the Nolan movies has this beat.

Ok you missed my point. Katanas, the sword chealec, are used in ME3. However I can't seem to find the proof you require for them to be of use in the game.

 

How can you be so sure bows and arrows and any of the other weapons are not used in combat? I had no idea Katanas (sword) were used in combat in ME3, until they were. Bioware would never impose such ridiculous limitations on their universe.

 

I am sorry but neither one of us should make the argument about what futuristic 'official weapons designers' will design, especially in a fictional universe. You're not a futurist and if you were this argument would be a lot deeper (no insult intended), so lets not suggest limits human ingenuity. All I can do is point to the modernisation of 'archaic' weapons and suggest that we will probably see this carry on into the future.

 

What are we arguing? Well you needed a reason for certain weapons to be a part of the Mass Effect universe I simply pointed out that they probably already are and your arguments, if they were correct, would not have allowed the Katana to appear.

[N7Jamaican]

I don't mind new weapons, but bows, staves, swords, etc seems best suited for a fantasy RPG set in medievel times.

[MrFob]

Ok, so here is a question about the bow idea: The purpose of a bow is to propel a projectile by putting tension on a string and then release it, right? Why would anyone use this rather archaic design in an age where projectiles are usually propelled with magnetic accelerators (which in the case of mass accelerators are augmented with ME fields). With a magnetic accelerator you can precisely determine the speed of the projectile and if you don't propel it to speeds that are high enough to really mess with air density around them (say the same as a bow could), they will even be silent as well. You can also propel any projectile as long as you add some form of magnetic material to it, even better than a bow could. And your ammo management is going to be way more efficient than a quiver, that's for sure.

So why on earth (or beyond) would anyone use a bow over a mass accelerator?

 

There is one aspect about this whole idea, that might be kind of cool: IMO: Imagine the protagonist and squad were for some reason stranded on an underdeveloped world without equipment for a mission or two and they have to use the archaic weapons of the indigenous people to defend themselves (maybe bows, maybe muskets with bayonets or whatever). That could make for a fun change of pace but I wouldn't want it for more than one or two missions and I doubt that it makes a lot of sense for the devs to create a special set of weapons (and possibly mechanics) just for such a short stretch of gameplay.

 

But in the normal game, I am with RoboticWater. I hope the devs will look at the ME universe and create things that are derived from that context of the setting, rather than creating things for the sake of creating it and th, would depend on the civilizationeir "coolness" and then shove them into the setting with some bogus explanation (or rather excuse). Unfortunately, that has already happened to often in Mass Effect anyway.

[CrutchCricket]

Guns make combat boring after awhile.

Then make better guns.

 

In all seriousness, your suggestions (especially when you want melee weapons to not be melee) still amount to shooting things at other things. So... still shooting. Maybe you shoot AOE things or gadget things as opposed to damaging things, but you're still shooting. Implying all you want is different visuals. So... design better guns.

 

I an in favor of enriching gameplay by shooting things other than damage. Using tactical gadgets, traps and so on. You just need to make it appropriate to the setting. Or have enough Rule of Cool to mitigate the break. I know it seems like I'm arguing against you a lot but given that I accept the latter, I'd say I'm more neutral, but still pointing out the requirements and potential pitfalls.

 

Ok you missed my point. Katanas, the sword chealec, are used in ME3. However I can't seem to find the proof you require for them to be of use in the game.

 

How can you be so sure bows and arrows and any of the other weapons are not used in combat? I had no idea Katanas (sword) were used in combat in ME3, until they were. Bioware would never impose such ridiculous limitations on their universe.

 

I am sorry but neither one of us should make the argument about what futuristic 'official weapons designers' will design, especially in a fictional universe. You're not a futurist and if you were this argument would be a lot deeper (no insult intended), so lets not suggest limits human ingenuity. All I can do is point to the modernisation of 'archaic' weapons and suggest that we will probably see this carry on into the future.

 

What are we arguing? Well you needed a reason for certain weapons to be a part of the Mass Effect universe I simply pointed out that they probably already are and your arguments, if they were correct, would not have allowed the Katana to appear.

And how much scorn and derision has that drawn? Have I defended Fail Leng or his phantom harem? Like I said above you need to keep weapons appropriate or make them cool enough to make us overlook their problems. ME3 didn't pass the threshold. The Metal Gear Sold series' cyborg ninjas, which I suspect were at least part of the influence did, for the most part anyway. But whether you think they were cool or not, the setting of MGS was already more amenable to outlandishly improbably characters. It's that mix that makes it a pass or fail. But whether it's realistic or not is never in serious debate.

 

You're mistaking can for ought to when it comes to Bioware putting weapons in the game. Can they make bows usable in combat? Sure. Should they? That's the discussion.  A lot of people say no.

 

This is nonsense and you know it.  I don't need to be a "futurist" or a weapons designer to know that everything you can do with a bow you can do better with a gun, and that it's illogical to go backwards in development. The modernization of archaic weapons is irrelevant to this discussion because we are talking about combat and none of them are being used in combat.

 

These arguments were just as valid before ME3 as they are now. The reason katanas are in ME3 is because Bioware didn't give a damn about them. They banked on them being cool enough to overlook, only they weren't.