68 réponses à ce sujet

[Killroy]

Literally any space rock that you are already visiting for ice-water and other metal/ mineral resources we need for manufactured components?

That's moronic.

To take your argument a step further, where are the resources coming from for the actual ammo blocks already in the weapons (which do run out and require replacement, just not in gameplay). Why don't we just use swords and spears?
because they're less effective. Same reasoning, just a different scale. You want every potential advantage you can get

Ammo blocks supply thousands of bullets and are tiny. You could probably pack a million ammo blocks into a cargo unit.
 

Why not? Thermal clips don't seem like a time or resource intensive manufacturing item considering they're very small and entirely disposable. Besides, you're gonna complain about something like this in a universe where I can manufacture and shoot infinite Fire/ Ice missiles from my space magic omni tool's minifactory, complete with their own internal guidance system?

They're one-time use items that get used at the rate of about 12 a minute.

You don't need 8 factories to do something like this. A small workshop would likely be more than enough to produce hundreds or thousands per day.

The hell are you talking about? They're not widdled out of balsa, they're machined, electronic components to weapons more advanced than anything on Earth.

[LinksOcarina]

Weapons were way too over-powered in ME1. Part of the reason gameplay was so terrible was because it was so easy to prevent your gun from overheating. Due to the inherent heat sinks in these weapons, BioWare had to turn all the enemies into bullet sponges (especially on Insanity) just to make the game seem challenging.

 

I prefer thermal clips. It severely undercuts the power of weapons by not allowing you to shoot forever and cuts down on your damage per second considerably. It's a fine balancing mechanic and I see no reason to change it.

 

Well to be fair, the re-introduction of the Avenger in the Citadel DLC showed that it could be done, you simply need to increase cool-down on the weapons and decrease weapon modding for heat sinks, effectively making them non-factors and removing the need for bullet sponges.  Basically turn the thermal clips into what they are, heat sink replacements, over stock ammunition. 

 

Id say why not a mix of both as well personally, some weapons without the need of thermal clips and some "older models" with it. You can also make thermal clips scarce for purposes of design as well.

[UpUpAway]

Where are the endless thermal clips coming from?
 

This is pure gibberish. It comes down to proper game design.

I'm not advocating "endless thermal clips" but limited ammo and the need to manually manage weapon overheating with enemies that are more realistically killed than those in ME1 where the ammo was infinite and overheats could be managed well enough by controlling the rate of fire - but the enemies would, on insanity at least, regen so fast they became all but impossible to take down with repeatedly accurate shots from a Specter Gear X sniper rifle equipped with High Explosive Rounds X, Frictionless Materials X and Scram Rail X and manually waiting for the rifle to cool between single shots (i.e. dealing 64% more damage than just the Specter Rifle X - which really should have killed almost any average enemy in the game with a single headshot).  As I said, he ultimately took 2 blasts to the face with the Mako's missiles before he dissolved.  Ridiculous.

 

If people don't want any ammo lying about, then have the squad carry it into the battle with them.  The game could vary that amount based on the expected length of the mission, the difficulty, and the class of the PC... but the overall supply would still run out if the PC did not manage the battle efficiently enough.  As a fall back (in addition to powers and melee), the aliens could rarely drop a loaded weapon that could be picked up and used - perhaps only if the game detected that the PC was actually out of ammo.

[Quarian Master Race]

That's moronic.

and this is argument by assertion

 

Ammo blocks supply thousands of bullets and are tiny. You could probably pack a million ammo blocks into a cargo unit.

And a billion thermal clips into another if you are so set on not having any manufacturing base whatsoever because you've no idea how an advanced civilization works. This isn't nearly as big an issue as you are making out, or an issue at all since the clips aren't deadweight, but a means to increase the effectiveness of weapons.

 

They're one-time use items that get used at the rate of about 12 a minute.

That's a ridiculous hyperbole. If you're using them at that sort of rate on average, your ammo block shouldn't last long anyway if not for contrived gameplay trappings to excuse infinite ammo. 

 

The hell are you talking about? They're not widdled out of balsa, they're machined, electronic components to weapons more advanced than anything on Earth.

The hell are you talking about? Balsa? You know you can literally build entire weapons and their ammunition in small workshops in the modern day, right? Nevermind that the professional gunsmithing industry is based around such. There are even entire cottage industries in less developed parts of the world that build weapons and cartridges out of scrap metal in a hut with simple tools, such as Khyber Pass copies of AK's etc. Assuming manufacturing methods aren't stuck in 1850 in the MEverse like racial relations seem to be, but have actually kept up with weapons tech, this is a non issue.

where is your source that the clips themselves have electronic components? Even if that were the case, you didn't even attempt to address that the omnitool can literally manufacture fire and forget homing missiles complete with explosive compounds, automated sentry turrets and hardlight drones on the fly, which I assume aren't all guided solely by hopes and dreams. Why should they have a problem doing the same with simple clips? There's your feasible lore explanation right there (as if one really needs such in a universe with so much space magic) that satisfies all of your contrived conditions, unless you think omnitools are also unnessesary.

We both know the reason you're railing against this has nothing to do with in universe feasibility or practicality. 

[Killroy]

We both know the reason you're railing against this has nothing to do with in universe feasibility or practicality.

This is the pot calling the kettle black.
The thermal clips aren't electronics? Then why do they glowing red lights? TO make a fashion statement?
The guns and thermal clips could just be made in a small workshop because some people are making guns out of scraps now? So pay no mind to the hyper-advanced mass effect technology in the guns?

[Original Mako]

I liked the idea of no more "ammo pickups". Be it actual ammo or thermal clips or whatever. That's a very old game mechanic. Destroys immersion (for those who care) being able to pick up something by walking over it.

 

I liked the idea of limited ammo per mission. Like others have said, if fighting Andromedans, it's very likely that their guns don't work in the same way. Good old Javik's Prothean Rifle or the Collector Rifle certainly worked differently. I always thought that was interesting...

 

Here, in the Shepard timeline, the races used guns reliant on mass effect technology. Shooting little bits of matter at high velocities.

Sovereign: Your civilization is based on the technology of the mass relays. Our technology. By using it, your civilization develops along the paths we desire.

 

Yet why do rifles from the previous cycle NOT rely on this technology? They have "beam weapons". Much like the Reapers themselves.

[Khrystyn]

The problem with any infinite ammo system is that it invariably results in "bullet sponge" enemies and wars of attrition where the "attrition" only occurs on the side of the enemies.  Such battles require no real tactical plan to take down the enemies efficiently so as to stay within a limited supply of resources (ammo and manpower).

 

This problem of having 'enough' ammo and where they come from, is why I'd like to have the ability to use stealth; go around and evade conflict until it's really necessary. In the mean time, allow for voiding patrols and being discovered. This would allow for one to save the limited ammo/resources you are carrying for when you really need them later in the mission. Have options to steal from alien ammo dumps (steal their weapons and ammo to use against them). Run up to an alien from behind, knock it out, and take its weapon. Let the tactics involve more of a 'thinking' and solution process that varies throughout the mission. Our role-play options have been a mixture of weapons plus tech and biotic powers (except for the soldier). If our way through a battle could allow for alternate routes where we can achieve the mission goal and get a bonus for doing so without firing a shot, I think this would add a nice role-playing option - and perhaps address some of the 'I can only carry/find so much ammo' quandary. Just wondering.

[MichaelN7]

Maybe have two different weapon types?

 

One that is more powerful, but requires thermal clips.

Reload and you're ready to go.  The catch is that since you're LITERALLY a galaxy away, thermal clips are in short supply.

The other uses the overheat system.

You never run out of ammo, but they are comparatively weak and the cooldown can take longer depending on how much you overheat them.

 

In a way, it would be like bringing back the heavy weapons from ME2, except the heavy weapons are the ones that use thermal clips.

 

I honestly prefer the thermal-clip system, since it adds difficulty whereas the overheating just adds cooldown.

My powers already have a cooldown, so I don't want another one on top of that.

If a gun can't fire more than two or three times before it shuts down, it's a poor weapon.

 

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

 

Or perhaps make the "cooldown" a mod?

Thermal clips are standard, but you can mod your weapons to use a cooldown instead of thermal clips.

 

It would be akin to the High-Velocity Barrel or one of the "super" mods.  REALLY powerful, but with a downside.

In this case, increase of weapon weight by 25% (the system has to go somewhere, and I find it hard to believe a heat-distribution system wouldn't add weight to a gun) and it would render ammo powers 50% less effective as a drawback (since shooting "regular" metal is hard enough, but adding in elemental properties would likely increase the heat).

 

I don't want to worry if I can make the shot because a meter shows I might have enough to make it, I want to see a solid number.

 

In a split-second decision, I would rather have this thought go through my head:

"Okay, I have one shot left in my Eviscerator, so I KNOW that I can make one good shot before I have to reload."

instead of:

"Uh... the meter looks two-thirds full, but I need to make two shots, do I have enough?"

 

If BioWare keeps the thermal clip system, then they can focus more on things like narrative, story, characters, lore and things of much greater value to the Mass Effect Universe.

Again, these are just my thoughts, and I like the thermal-clip because it's simple.

[MichaelN7]

This problem of having 'enough' ammo and where they come from, is why I'd like to have the ability to use stealth; go around and evade conflict until it's really necessary. In the mean time, allow for voiding patrols and being discovered. This would allow for one to save the limited ammo/resources you are carrying for when you really need them later in the mission. Have options to steal from alien ammo dumps (steal their weapons and ammo to use against them). Run up to an alien from behind, knock it out, and take its weapon. Let the tactics involve more of a 'thinking' and solution process that varies throughout the mission. Our role-play options have been a mixture of weapons plus tech and biotic powers (except for the soldier). If our way through a battle could allow for alternate routes where we can achieve the mission goal and get a bonus for doing so without firing a shot, I think this would add a nice role-playing option - and perhaps address some of the 'I can only carry/find so much ammo' quandary. Just wondering.

 

I like this idea, it has a very "Deus Ex" vibe to it.

I just don't want Mass Effect to turn into the next "Skyrim" or "Deus Ex" or "XCOM" because BioWare thinks we want all our games to be the same.

To clarify, I'm not knocking your idea, it's just that when I want to play something like "Skyrim", I put in "Skyrim".  If I want to play something like "Deus Ex", I put in "Deus Ex".

If want to play something like "Mass Effect", I put in "Mass Effect".

 

What about something like the power generator during "Omega", where if you're an Engineer you can take the Paragon interrupt to bypass the otherwise tense battle of wills?

Not to railroad a player into choosing a particular class, but something where your class can influence your tactical options.

If an Infiltrator, then an obvious option would be to cloak and sneak by.

If an Engineer, hack the alarm to get the baddies to investigate somewhere else.

If an Adept, push a pile of crates over with biotics to make a distraction.

If a Soldier, pull out a rocket launcher, self-explanatory.

If a Sentinel, YOU are the distraction and make a shield wall so your squadmates can slip by.

If a Vanguard, pull a pincer move by charging into the baddie in the back of the line and then flank the other baddies.

Just a quick, off-the-top-of-my-head idea.

[Khrystyn]

....Such battles require no real tactical plan to take down the enemies efficiently so as to stay within a limited supply of resources (ammo and manpower).

 

Isn't the battle tactic of using combo biotic and tech powers against an enemy the way to use less of your limited ammo supplies? I hope I'm understanding your point correctly, and I also get tired of just firing into enemy sponges. I'm trying to learn how to take out ME enemies as an adept or sentinel without firing a shot myself, directing my squadmates to do the shooting for me, but it's a bit frustrating due to my slow reaction times and coordinating cool-downs for myself and my squadmate's powers. So far, it's way too complex for me.

 

I'd like to be able to use non-weapon/ammo tactics in an ambush scenario (melee and neural shock), such as taking out a guard or sentry (up close and personal), or progressively snipe them one at a time without alerting them to my presence or location; the silent kill instead of alerting a whole enemy patrol with a single shot. Still, I don't have a solution to solving the 'where did this ammo come from' conundrum.

 

My previous comment about using stealth could be one way to reduce the need to continually find replacement ammo/thermal clips - even if it's just for a few assignments or missions. Perhaps gain a bonus for completing a mission for not using all of your ammo?

 

I'm enjoying the input I'm reading from others in this thread.

[UpUpAway]

Isn't the battle tactic of using combo biotic and tech powers against an enemy the way to use less of your limited ammo supplies? I hope I'm understanding your point correctly, and I also get tired of just firing into enemy sponges. I'm trying to learn how to take out ME enemies as an adept or sentinel without firing a shot myself, directing my squadmates to do the shooting for me, but it's a bit frustrating due to my slow reaction times and coordinating cool-downs for myself and my squadmate's powers. So far, it's way too complex for me.

 

I'd like to be able to use non-weapon/ammo tactics in an ambush scenario (melee and neural shock), such as taking out a guard or sentry (up close and personal), or progressively snipe them one at a time without alerting them to my presence or location; the silent kill instead of alerting a whole enemy patrol with a single shot. Still, I don't have a solution to solving the 'where did this ammo come from' conundrum.

 

My previous comment about using stealth could be one way to reduce the need to continually find replacement ammo/thermal clips - even if it's just for a few assignments or missions. Perhaps gain a bonus for completing a mission for not using all of your ammo?

 

I'm enjoying the input I'm reading from others in this thread.

 

Yes, I like where you're going with this.  Powers are one way to reduce ammo usage and well as "survive" a fight if one allows ammo to run dry... and stealth moves and the ability to steal an alien's weapon right out of his "claws, paws, tenticles, whatever" would compliment the whole thing very nicely. (I really enjoyed hijacking mechs in ME3 and my play style is really both a long-range and close-range "sniper." - i.e. infiltrator)  So, yeah, all I'm really asking is not to return to the "infinite" ammo situation of ME1... every shot should have to count and if the PC doesn't advance and gets bogged down in a battle of attrition, then the enemy should be able to inflict some "attrition" on the PC (i.e. run the PC dry of ammo).  Another mechanic that could be added is that if the battle goes on too long, squad members start to go down and not get back up until after the battle is done.  That is usually the way I played ME by not using any method to revive fallen squaddies.  It was frustrating because their AI was lacking and they often wouldn't follow cover orders designed to keep them alive and to advance us effectively across the battlefield, but at least it was a bit more challenging to have to sometimes finish battles on my own rather than keep popping the team back up with "just a scratch."

[Sylvius the Mad]

Weapons were way too over-powered in ME1. Part of the reason gameplay was so terrible was because it was so easy to prevent your gun from overheating. Due to the inherent heat sinks in these weapons, BioWare had to turn all the enemies into bullet sponges (especially on Insanity) just to make the game seem challenging.

I prefer thermal clips. It severely undercuts the power of weapons by not allowing you to shoot forever and cuts down on your damage per second considerably. It's a fine balancing mechanic and I see no reason to change it.

Given that in ME2 and ME3 we can only miss voluntarily (because of the removal of the accuracy mechanic), I fail to see how that adds anything.

And if it did, all it would add is frustration by making the combat more difficult in a way Shepard could never overcome.

The player could, but that's a whole other can of worms.

[Revan Reborn]

Given that in ME2 and ME3 we can only miss voluntarily (because of the removal of the accuracy mechanic), I fail to see how that adds anything.

And if it did, all it would add is frustration by making the combat more difficult in a way Shepard could never overcome.

The player could, but that's a whole other can of worms.

You are conflating two very different issues. One has to do with gun balance and making the experience engaging and challenging. The other was a poorly conceived progression mechanic - that made zero sense due to Shepard being one of the galaxy's best soldiers - in which handicapped player hand-eye coordination and reflexes because of arbitrary and overbearing RPG elements.

 

The RPG progression in ME1 had nothing to do with making the game challenging. It was purely incorporated based on the premise of the player's character evolving through the course of the game. The problem with this concept is that Shepard was already an established war hero, as I articulated earlier. His incompetency to aim with all weapons was completely immersion-breaking and only hindered the player's ability to play what was a poor attempt at a 3rd person shooter.

 

Weapons, on the other hand, entirely affected the overall experience and challenge of the game. It was far too simple and easy to kill because weapons would never overheat and there was no ammunition system in the game. While ME2/3's solution may not be perfect, it is far superior over what ME1 had, which is why BioWare tossed that ill-conceived system to start. If BioWare wants to further tweak and refine the system, fine. They just shouldn't revert back to what was a lousy mechanic that led to all enemies ultimately becoming bullet sponges for an increasingly boring and mundane gameplay experience.

[UpUpAway]

You are conflating two very different issues. One has to do with gun balance and making the experience engaging and challenging. The other was a poorly conceived progression mechanic - that made zero sense due to Shepard being one of the galaxy's best soldiers - in which handicapped player hand-eye coordination and reflexes because of arbitrary and overbearing RPG elements.

 

The RPG progression in ME1 had nothing to do with making the game challenging. It was purely incorporated based on the premise of the player's character evolving through the course of the game. The problem with this concept is that Shepard was already an established war hero, as I articulated earlier. His incompetency to aim with all weapons was completely immersion-breaking and only hindered the player's ability to play what was a poor attempt at a 3rd person shooter.

 

Weapons, on the other hand, entirely affected the overall experience and challenge of the game. It was far too simple and easy to kill because weapons would never overheat and there was no ammunition system in the game. While ME2/3's solution may not be perfect, it is far superior over what ME1 had, which is why BioWare tossed that ill-conceived system to start. If BioWare wants to further tweak and refine the system, fine. They just shouldn't revert back to what was a lousy mechanic that led to all enemies ultimately becoming bullet sponges for an increasingly boring and mundane gameplay experience.

Unfortunately, with the PC being described as a "rookie," I think we are doomed to go back to feeling like the PC can't hit the broadside of a barn door... not really looking forward to that.  Hope I'm wrong.

[Xen]

Given that in ME2 and ME3 we can only miss voluntarily (because of the removal of the accuracy mechanic), I fail to see how that adds anything.

And if it did, all it would add is frustration by making the combat more difficult in a way Shepard could never overcome.

The player could, but that's a whole other can of worms.

The "accuracy" mechanic was never removed. Every single non-heavy weapon in ME2 and 3 has idle spread and bloom with the exception for some sniper rifles while aiming down the sights (because duh, that's the whole point of the weapon class), or homing projectile weapons like the Adas rifle. It was simply no longer tied to arbitrary passive skill trees (though accuracy can be affected by active powers like Marksman, Devastator and Hunter Modes), so we don't get nonsense like Commander Shepard the N7 war hero who can't hit the broadside of a Mako from 10m away no matter how hard he tries.

You're choosing to play the games in an extremely specific fashion that is essentially an exploit (given that it was removed from at least the console versions via automatically descoping you if you attempted to use the power wheel while ADS). That's not reflective of the overall design evolution of the game, which has gladly moved forward from holding the trigger on a krogan for 2 full minutes and spraying several hundred/ thousand rounds per mission, which according to lore should have exhausted the weapon's ammo block without gameplay trappings.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Weapons, on the other hand, entirely affected the overall experience and challenge of the game. It was far too simple and easy to kill because weapons would never overheat and there was no ammunition system in the game. While ME2/3's solution may not be perfect, it is far superior over what ME1 had, which is why BioWare tossed that ill-conceived system to start. If BioWare wants to further tweak and refine the system, fine. They just shouldn't revert back to what was a lousy mechanic that led to all enemies ultimately becoming bullet sponges for an increasingly boring and mundane gameplay experience.

But ME2 and ME3 were no less boring and mundane, because the only risk that ever arose only happens if the player chooses it.

Just as the ME1 weapons become too powerful unless the player intentionally gimps their cooling systems, there's never any shortage of ammo in ME2 unless the player intentionally gimps aiming by doing it in real time.

ME3 them made ammo extremely plentiful, and powers more effective, thus rendering the thermal clip mechanic entirely pointless.

I fail to see how the problem you describe in ME1 was in any way fixed by ME2 or ME3.

As it happens, I think ME3 has the best combat in the series, largely because of the increased effectiveness of powers, and the free selection of weapon types.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Unfortunately, with the PC being described as a "rookie," I think we are doomed to go back to feeling like the PC can't hit the broadside of a barn door... not really looking forward to that. Hope I'm wrong.

I hope you're right. That sounds good.

[Sylvius the Mad]

The "accuracy" mechanic was never removed. Every single non-heavy weapon in ME2 and 3 has idle spread and bloom with the exception for some sniper rifles while aiming down the sights (because duh, that's the whole point of the weapon class), or homing projectile weapons like the Adas rifle.

I'll confess to not knowing what spread or bloom ar in this context. Did this reduced accuracy affect pistols, as well?

Also, I use sniper rifles pretty much exclusively, so I wouldn't have seen them.

It was simply no longer tied to arbitrary passive skill trees (though accuracy can be affected by active powers like Marksman, Devastator and Hunter Modes), so we don't get nonsense like Commander Shepard the N7 war hero who can't hit the broadside of a Mako from 10m away no matter how hard he tries.

They shouldn't have written a story that fit so poorly with the mechanics.

You're choosing to play the games in an extremely specific fashion that is essentially an exploit (given that it was removed from at least the console versions via automatically descoping you if you attempted to use the power wheel while ADS). That's not reflective of the overall design evolution of the game, which has gladly moved forward from holding the trigger on a krogan for 2 full minutes and spraying several hundred/ thousand rounds per mission, which according to lore should have exhausted the weapon's ammo block without gameplay trappings.

Swapping out the ammo block could happen off-screen (like eating and sleeping). It's not fun, so why model it?

I don't acknowledge that exploits exist. Everything we can do is merely stuff we can do. And we can aim while paused.

Even with a delay (which I didn't see, because PC), being able to pause to find targets is extremely valuable, and not doing that gimps Shepard severely.

I don't want to gimp Shepard in that way.

Also, the AI always seems to know where Shepard is, so it's only fair that Shepard should know where his enemies are without having to spend time looking for them.

And then there's the lore-breaking impact of player skill on combat. You complained that Shepard couldn't hit the broad side of a Mako in ME1, but in ME2 that remains true as long as the player lacks skill. Explain why that Shepard is bad at aiming.

[Bruno Hslaw]

Just give me ammo mags. A set of useful weapons, that I do not need to scavenge ammo for. Really is it realistic that they send you on missions without a proper supply of ammo? I do not think that is realistic. This is immersion breaking for me.

[UpUpAway]

Just give me ammo mags. A set of useful weapons, that I do not need to scavenge ammo for. Really is it realistic that they send you on missions without a proper supply of ammo? I do not think that is realistic. This is immersion breaking for me.

 

I agree... however, unfortunately the developers do have to have some sort of fall back to allow people who spray and pray a chance to finish the game.  The ability to scavenge for additional ammo is the easiest, but I like the idea of being able to decide to risk going after an enemy in close to steal his/her weapon if I really think I'm running low on ammo much better.

[UpUpAway]

I hope you're right. That sounds good.

 

Looking for an equalizer in MP (i.e. handicapping better players with bad accuracy mechanics), are we?  Come on... having one's sniper rifle go from floating around like a bobblehead doll and no way to really steady it at the beginning of the game to coming up rock solid and pretty much automatically on target by the end of the game is just not a good way to handle player skill progression during a game.

[Laughing_Man]

I agree... however, unfortunately the developers do have to have some sort of fall back to allow people who spray and pray a chance to finish the game.  The ability to scavenge for additional ammo is the easiest, but I like the idea of being able to decide to risk going after an enemy in close to steal his/her weapon if I really think I'm running low on ammo much better.

 

Call for a re-supply, you will get an air-drop or a small carrier robot with ammo, depends on where you are.

 

Or they can just go for energy weapons with a large ammo pool that slowly recharges back.

 

Or go back to ME1 style overheat mechanics and work to improve it somehow without the dumb heat-sinks thermal clips.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Looking for an equalizer in MP (i.e. handicapping better players with bad accuracy mechanics), are we?

I have zero interest in MP. I will never play it.

Come on... having one's sniper rifle go from floating around like a bobblehead doll and no way to really steady it at the beginning of the game to coming up rock solid and pretty much automatically on target by the end of the game is just not a good way to handle player skill progression during a game.

I think the ME1 accuracy cone is the way to go. You aim a reticle that gets smaller as the character gains skill, and the position on the shot within the reticle is random.

ME1 probably started with the reticle too big, but the principle didn't deserve to be thrown away.

[UpUpAway]

Call for a re-supply, you will get an air-drop or a small carrier robot with ammo, depends on where you are.

 

Or they can just go for energy weapons with a large ammo pool that slowly recharges back.

 

Or go back to ME1 style overheat mechanics and work to improve it somehow without the dumb heat-sinks thermal clips.

 

Request an air drop - OK, but in some battles this probably does not suit the situation.  Energy weapons that recharge - uh uh (infinite ammo a la the skycar dealership in Citadel DLC = just promotes infinite enemy spawns and PC then just bails from the battle whenever they feel like ending it.  ME1 overheat and infinite ammo = Noooooo, for reasons already discussed = bullet sponge enemies.  Player should have an honest chance of actually running out of ammo, which compels them to do some tactical thinking during the battle to progress across the zone before they run out of ammo.

[Nitrocuban]

I don't understand why we can't just keep ME3's way of doing it.

The use of Thermo Clips madethe gunplay better, I think we do not have to discuss this anymore. Like in ME3 we can have some guns with internal heatsinks (like the Prothean Particle Rifle etc) to spice things up and/or have a weapon mod that (with some drawback) turns every gun into a thermoclip-less one.

"Ammo" supply is not a problem, just let our tech dude find an easy way to retrofit our weapons for the use of Andromeda Bad Guys'  thermal clips.