151 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

Ok lets say they can. Lets say all classes can access them all as mods again. What's the argument against that?

I don't have one. That would be fine by me.

[Sylvius the Mad]

^There doesn't need to be real world explanations for gameplay mechanics.

The gameplay mechanics describe the physical rules of the setting. If those rules are incoherent, the setting becomes less believable and less interesting and a less fun place to play.

Otherwise the game in a fictional setting isn't going to work in the first place. Why can't a soldier have an omnitool that fires Incinerate? Why can't his omnitool use mass effect fields to lift targets into the air?

There should be in-game explanations for all of those things.

I am not necessarily opposed to turning ammo back into something that all classes have access to, but it should follow from gameplay not necessarily 'real life" sort of justifications. The hard part is making the combat classes unique, specifically soldier, without just giving them straight weapon buffs or creating a bunch of active powers on them that turn them into the combat caster with combat versions of tech or biotic powers.

I'm not generally a fan of class-based systems. I would prefer something classless.

[Cyonan]

Ok lets say they can. Lets say all classes can access them all as mods again. What's the argument against that?

 

The main argument against it is that it would hurt the Soldier's position of master of weapons, especially against the Infiltrator who had a very good weapon damage bonus in Tactical Cloak. Everybody else still can get Marksman if Ashley is alive, but that only comes at the cost of not getting AP or Warp Rounds from their bonus power.

 

Although the fix for that, if we don't want to start restricting weapons again, would be to give Soldiers weapon boosts elsewhere and to nerf Tactical Cloak(which should probably happen regardless).

[Iakus]

The main argument against it is that it would hurt the Soldier's position of master of weapons, especially against the Infiltrator who had a very good weapon damage bonus in Tactical Cloak. Everybody else still can get Marksman if Ashley is alive, but that only comes at the cost of not getting AP or Warp Rounds from their bonus power.

 

Allow the soldier to specialize in one or more weapons of their choice.  Make the soldier a more versatile class.

[SKAR]

The gameplay mechanics describe the physical rules of the setting. If those rules are incoherent, the setting becomes less believable and less interesting and a less fun place to play.
There should be in-game explanations for all of those things.
I'm not generally a fan of class-based systems. I would prefer something classless.

Make our own class. Or we can choose a class like vanguard and have biotic charge as it's main power and have a choice from many different biotic abilities including but not limited to flare, singularity, warp,etc. Same goes for tech classes.

[Cyonan]

Allow the soldier to specialize in one or more weapons of their choice.  Make the soldier a more versatile class.

 

I'm not a fan of having weapon restrictions like that because it just limits builds and kills off things like Shotgun Infiltrators, unless we're going to give everybody the option to specialize in 1-2 weapons of their choice and let the Soldier have 3-5.

 

It also means needing to make having every weapon class available to you actually make you versatile, which wouldn't be the case in Mass Effect 3's style of combat because of how the weapons are designed and the sheer variety of things within each weapon class.

[capn233]

The gameplay mechanics describe the physical rules of the setting. If those rules are incoherent, the setting becomes less believable and less interesting and a less fun place to play.

 

The problem here is conflating "real life" explanations with explanations supported in the lore. There is no lore that supports that all classes should have access to specialized ammo. Making an argument about real life 21st century ammo in 21st century firearms is not a justification for providing all classes with specialized ammo. Likewise, the even more general "it isn't realistic for adepts to be deprived of access from specialized ammo because they could just pick it up" applies to practically anything when taken to the logical conclusion.
 

There should be in-game explanations for all of those things.

 

The overriding factor for a game is that the gameplay is fun. Not that they explain the minutia of every balance decision. Is it better if the lore explains them? Sure, but it is secondary to the actual gameplay given that this is a game first and foremost.

 

It isn't even all that difficult to explain away something like this though.  Could simply be that Soldiers get extra training in weapon handling such that they are able to use more exotic weapons and ammos since they aren't spending training time honing biotic skills or learning how to properly use omnitools for whatever tech powers.
 

I'm not generally a fan of class-based systems. I would prefer something classless.

 

I would rather we get classes that are balanced well and provide unique gameplay experiences.  It may be that giving away ammo to the other classes is not entirely incompatible with this goal, but it means a rethink of the combat classes to an extent.  Likewise, access to all weapons for all classes required more thinking than occurred before ME3.

[Sylvius the Mad]

The problem here is conflating "real life" explanations with explanations supported in the lore. There is no lore that supports that all classes should have access to specialized ammo. Making an argument about real life 21st century ammo in 21st century firearms is not a justification for providing all classes with specialized ammo.

I don't care if the rules don't conform to the real world. I just want them to make sense in the setting.

If there's some reason why an Adept can't press the Cryo button on his rifle, I want that reason ti be credible.

Likewise, the even more general "it isn't realistic for adepts to be deprived of access from specialized ammo because they could just pick it up" applies to practically anything when taken to the logical conclusion.

I'm always going to take everything to its logical conclusion.

That's basically the point of logic.

The overriding factor for a game is that the gameplay is fun. Not that they explain the minutia of every balance decision. Is it better if the lore explains them? Sure, but it is secondary to the actual gameplay given that this is a game first and foremost.

That's fine, as long as we know what constitutes fun.

Everyone likes having fun. Not everyone agrees about what fun is.

[Cyonan]

I don't care if the rules don't conform to the real world. I just want them to make sense in the setting.

If there's some reason why an Adept can't press the Cryo button on his rifle, I want that reason ti be credible.

 

Only Soldiers get it because only they have the capacity to carry that much spare equipment mods for their weapons while everybody else is taking up space with either their tech equipment or biotic amps.

 

In either case this is a gameplay issue. The lore should be adapted to fit the gameplay only after it's been decided what to do with ammo powers.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Only Soldiers get it because only they have the capacity to carry that much spare equipment mods for their weapons while everybody else is taking up space with either their tech equipment or biotic amps.

In either case this is a gameplay issue. The lore should be adapted to fit the gameplay only after it's been decided what to do with ammo powers.

I'll agree that the rules should be built first, and then the lore constructed in a way that conforms to the rules.

But there must be no disagreement between the two.

[capn233]

I'm always going to take everything to its logical conclusion.

That's basically the point of logic.

 

And then you end up in "bad design land" once you do.

[Sylvius the Mad]

And then you end up in "bad design land" once you do.

You end up in nonsensical design land if you don't.

[Cyonan]

You end up in nonsensical design land if you don't.

 

I would rather have the nonsensical design that makes a good game over ending up in bad design land.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I would rather have the nonsensical design that makes a good game over ending up in bad design land.

I don't think a nonsensical design can make a good game, because a game world that doesn't make sense fundamentally breaks roleplaying.

[InsanityWolf]

I don't know about any of you but I always found disruptor ammo, warp ammo, etc... as a waste of an ability. I don't believe they should take up an entire power slot, especially now that MP have introduced so many knew abilities that can work with every class. I propose special ammo be reduced into some type of weapon mod that don't last the entire mission. I think it would be cool to carry a few with you and the effect last until it's time to switch out for a new thermal clip. I think it would be much more interesting this way. So any Ideas?

 

I really like this idea. Presuming a smart player choice in terms of ammunition for a mission would add a nice little detail to insanity mode for example.

[Cyonan]

I don't think a nonsensical design can make a good game, because a game world that doesn't make sense fundamentally breaks roleplaying.

 

Not all games are about roleplaying. Even you who is only interested in RP should know that.

 

but even games like Baldur's Gate have fundamentally broken roleplaying based on this line of reasoning.

 

Unless you want to tell me that a Mage can become trained in the use of a dagger but not a short sword because of some in-game explained reasoning that isn't complete BS.

 

The dagger isn't a more complicated weapon to learn than the short sword. The only reason you can't is because "the class restriction said so".

 

I can't think of a single game that wouldn't have fundamentally broken roleplaying based on this.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Not all games are about roleplaying. Even you who is only interested in RP should know that.

but even games like Baldur's Gate have fundamentally broken roleplaying based on this line of reasoning.

Unless you want to tell me that a Mage can become trained in the use of a dagger but not a short sword because of some in-game explained reasoning that isn't complete BS.

The dagger isn't a more complicated weapon to learn than the short sword. The only reason you can't is because "the class restriction said so".

I can't think of a single game that wouldn't have fundamentally broken roleplaying based on this.

It depends how severe the failure is.

Ammo powers are dumb, but they're not catastrophic. So are classes and class-based restrictions.

As for your BG example, the mages should be able to learn swords. They just don't. The problem there is the restrictiveness of the class definitions. The bigger problem would be if, like in DA2, that mages couldn't even equip swords.

[Cyonan]

It depends how severe the failure is.

Ammo powers are dumb, but they're not catastrophic. So are classes and class-based restrictions.

As for your BG example, the mages should be able to learn swords. They just don't. The problem there is the restrictiveness of the class definitions. The bigger problem would be if, like in DA2, that mages couldn't even equip swords.

 

There's little point in equipping a weapon you'll never hit anything with because the penalty is so insanely high.

 

Although as I recall Mages straight up can't equip armour, helmets, or shields.

[Malanek]

You end up in nonsensical design land if you don't.

You're using the word nonsensical incorrectly. Making gameplay decisions for reasons of improving gameplay at the expense of realism, follows a logical line of reasoning whether or not you agree with it or not.

[Sylvius the Mad]

There's little point in equipping a weapon you'll never hit anything with because the penalty is so insanely high.

That's not for the developers to decide. They need a reason to prevent it, not a reason to allow it.

And they don't have a reason to prevent it.

Although as I recall Mages straight up can't equip armour, helmets, or shields.

That was a slightly clumsy implementation of the rules.

AD&D mages aren't supposed to be able to cast spells while wearing forbidden armour, and BioWare didn't build in the mechanic to disable spellcasting. There they had an actual design reason to prevent us from equipping the armour, because the development cost of the alternative was too high.

[Sylvius the Mad]

You're using the word nonsensical incorrectly. Making gameplay decisions for reasons of improving gameplay at the expense of realism, follows a logical line of reasoning whether or not you agree with it or not.

If the result is a set of rules which render the game's setting internally contradictory, that's nonsensical.

Realism does not matter. Coherence does.

[Cyonan]

That was a slightly clumsy implementation of the rules.

AD&D mages aren't supposed to be able to cast spells while wearing forbidden armour, and BioWare didn't build in the mechanic to disable spellcasting. There they had an actual design reason to prevent us from equipping the armour, because the development cost of the alternative was too high.

 

Then why does a multi-classed character with arcane caster levels get their spells disabled when wearing armour?

[ZipZap2000]

The main argument against it is that it would hurt the Soldier's position of master of weapons, especially against the Infiltrator who had a very good weapon damage bonus in Tactical Cloak. Everybody else still can get Marksman if Ashley is alive, but that only comes at the cost of not getting AP or Warp Rounds from their bonus power.

Although the fix for that, if we don't want to start restricting weapons again, would be to give Soldiers weapon boosts elsewhere and to nerf Tactical Cloak(which should probably happen regardless).

And that's great if you want to play a game with Ashley in it. But changing the ammo system in that game is not an option so its irrelevant.

And no it doesn't hurt the soldiers position. Barely anybody plays infiltrator in campaign anyway its boring. Soldier is vastly more popular, so its not like people will suddenly decide not to play as one.

Make cloak interfere with ammo mods and boom the problem is solved. Cant have active ammo while cloaked. No bonus.

[capn233]

You end up in nonsensical design land if you don't.

 

Right, and this was actually my entire point.

 

Basically you have the "adept should get all ammos because they can use a gun" which is equivalent to "soldier should get overload because he can use an omnitool."

 

This cannot coexist with the whole class system, so one has to be rejected.

 

Rejecting the class system absolutely is not the answer.  The game will undoubtedly be worse if they do this.

[Cyonan]

And that's great if you want to play a game with Ashley in it. But changing the ammo system in that game is not an option so its irrelevant.

And no it doesn't hurt the soldiers position. Barely anybody plays infiltrator in campaign anyway its boring. Soldier is vastly more popular, so its not like people will suddenly decide not to play as one.

Make cloak interfere with ammo mods and boom the problem is solved. Cant have active ammo while cloaked. No bonus.

 

I was more just noting that Marksman is an option. Even without it you can get Warp or AP Rounds as any class. Warp Rounds especially are very potent on biotics because the tooltip is wrong about "increased damage to already lifted targets". It's a multiplicative damage bonus against any biotically primed target, not just those that are lifted.

 

I know it wont work exactly like ME3, but it's still the best benchmark we have for Mass Effect combat at the moment so that's what I use.

 

I'm not talking about which is most popular because I don't give a damn about that. Infiltrators in ME3 already challenge the weapon superiority of Soldiers because Tactical Cloak is simply broken. A lot more so than Adrenaline Rush is without the MP changes.

 

Soldiers are supposed to be the weapon masters. Ammo Powers in ME3 were the only thing even letting them stay in the competition because Incendiary Rounds are about the only thing even more broken than Tactical Cloak was, and that was because of a bug.

 

A better solution is to just nerf Tactical Cloak. It's way too strong in its ME3 iteration anyway.

 

Keep in mind this isn't my actual opinion about what should happen with ammo powers. It was just asked what the counter-argument would be and this was the best thing I could think of.

 

I think that ammo powers should become mods again like in ME1 and Soldiers should be compensated for it elsewhere so they keep their weapon superiority over the other classes.

 

Still nerf Tactical Cloak though =P