903 réponses à ce sujet

[kregano]

mrfoo1 wrote...
If anything the Hammerhead and Firewalker pack was a beta test to get feedback.

I definitely have to agree with this. Bioware did the smart (but not popular with fans) thing by only giving us a few missions with the Hammerhead to see how we would react to it. This allows them to tweak the Hammerhead so it performs better in future DLC, especially if it's part of a big expansion pack.

[kalliba]

The Hammerhead DLC has one other benefit too, it opens up a lot of rich mining planets and you can get most of your mining out of the way early.

[RyuGuitarFreak]

Great topic. Really great. I wish I had seen this before.



I found some of you suggestions good, other not so much. I'll give my opinions.



Going back to ME1 Weapon stats - I don't think it's a good idea because in ME2 you already have the weapon stats regarding armor/shield/barriers efficiency. If you add cooling/damage/capacity it will get things too complicated and in my opinion, unnecessary. Let the weapons have their general upgrades and stats as they are.



Armor - Agree, but I do want to select armor parts/clothing/suits or whatever for my squad mate just as Shepard.



Heat Management VS Ammunition - Brilliant. This is PERFECT. Just what I would do to this system.



Cooldown - No. I would keep ME2's general cooldown. It encourages combine your powers with squad powers and I think it works better. Having a "energy bar" also adds more HUD to get in the way of the gameplay.



Skill Assignment and Evolution - Agree on Everything



Power Evolution - I don't know. You have some good ideas there but I think that charged variation would be too overpowered and the charging process would get on the way of the gameplay dynamic. But I do agree that the powers should evolve more from it's initial form.



Planet scanning - I didn't understand it very well, maybe it's my poor English, but I guess that add much more complexity to the process wouldn't make it better but there are some good ideas like the mining guild and selling and trading the minerals. I disliked the chemistry process, I don't know, I think it would just complicate things unnecessarily.

[yuncas]

BAWMP.

[Scarecrow_ES]

Ryu... at essense, we already have the sort of damage/cooling/capacity/whatever dynamic happening under the ME2 system. For instance, the Base pistol does less damage, but doesn't push out as much heat, and so has a higher capacity than the Carnifex, which does more damage and has a lower capacity per mag/thermal clip. I'm simply talking about adding a larger number of weapons in each category with clear stat tradeoffs to produce weapons that handle differently compared to the others in the category. In the ME2 system, this concept is in place, but there are far too few weapons in each category to make the tradeoffs matter. Instead, there ends up being one superior weapon in every category.

[Scarecrow_ES]

Oh, and further... while many people have expressed some dismay at my change in cooldowns, in reality it doesn't work much different in principle than the ME2 system, except that instead of performing 1 power, then being locked out until your cooldown period is over, you have enough "energy" (call it whatever you want), to perform 2 weak powers (or 3) before you run out of energy (biotic power, tech energy, whatever) to perform another. Then you have to wait to recharge at least enough to use the one weak power, or recharge more to use several back to back again. You will also have the capability to use a stronger power that completely depletes your "energy."



The problem with the global system is multi-fold. Yes, you can rely on your squadmates to combine powers and whatnot. But what it you are the power-user for your squad? What if you're the adept or engineer and your whole reason for being is to use powers so you bring a balanced squad with you made up of combat specialists or your opposite number (engineer if you're an adept and vice versa)? Then your squad is going to be SOL for combining powers, and you can't be a total badass power user because you can only put out one power at a time and you've got to wait a long time between strong powers before you can use another. Really, my system works far better for power users.



As far as cluttering up the HUD with more bars... I don't think that's necessary. After all, the ME2 system displays the cooldown on the HUD without being cluttered. It would be easy to adapt that kind of display to represent a 2 or 3 stage cooldown process like mine.

[Arijharn]

The flipside I guess (and they likely tried) is that if they released something like 10 weapons of a certain category, than the lines that deferrentiate (apologies if I mis-spelt that) them could blur and thus sort of make the concept redundant.



Another thing to consider is how many is too much? Too few? How many gameplay variations of a submachine gun could exist before becoming too much of an Assault Rifle? Sometimes the answer is in fact 'less is more.' I mean, look at the new Submachine gun that's going to come out with the Kasumi DLC... is that going to be unique or is it going to be essentially a re-skinned Tempest or Shuriken?



Having said that, there are all sorts of different statistics all weapons could have of course, but if a submachine gun starts to potentially outperform an Assault Rifle in a classic assault rifle role (principally short-mid range combat for example; or better arm penetration) then I think more problems will exist.



Anyway, that's my tangent thought over and done with.

[Scarecrow_ES]

Arijharn, I completely agree that once you get above a certain number of weapons of a given type, you really can't make them all that different. That's why I only suggested 4-5 in each category, with very clearly defined tradeoffs. Really, that's all you need to make sure there are enough weapons so that each one CAN be different, and using very specific modifications to a basic pattern so they WILL be different.

[OneDrunkMonk]

I honestly do not think Mass Effect should have to conform to pre-existing ideas of RPGs and 3rd person shooters. The lore of Mass Effect, the story itself should be able to direct the game onto the right course.



OK so recreated Shepard had to relearn his abilities in ME2, I understand. All the other characters shouldn't have to be built from scratch. Tali for example should have even more combat experience and Tech abilities in ME2 than in ME1, naturally. No need to add points here and there, she's got the skills. Another example, Samara could be considered a Biotic master, she was flinging people about before Shepard was even born. Why the need to add skill points to her at all? We are not dealing with an Elf fresh outta the woods with little to no abilities.



Biotic use takes it's toll on the body and mind. There should be a cool down or rest phase. However for trained and gifted Biotics the cool down time required should be short. Perhaps new Biotics can be enhanced but as far as Jack and Samara go they are pretty much at the top of their form.



ME1 got weapons right. Large capacity ammo due to the micro-particles the guns actually fired, however the guns will eventually overheat requiring cool down. So, trained in these weapons one knows to fire in short bursts, when to let go of the trigger before the gun is forced to vent and become momentarily unusable. ME2 system of picking up heat sinks is silly and just something recognizable to the shooter fans who run over and collect ammo clips in a gazillion other games.



We don't need a gazillion gun varieties. Really this just reduces Mass Effect to another shooter filled with gun porn. Whether as a Specter or Cerberus agent the best weapons should already be available with perhaps only a few possible upgrades/improvements as something unique found or bought or created.



Really Mass Effect needs to move away from the get-most-uber-weapon, wear-most-uber-armor, get-most-uber-power/magic then go fight uber boss at end game. This is already done by a gazillion other games and it's played out.



Now, what Mass Effect can do to make the players experience their own is to allow for tactics and skilled execution of combat maneuvers. Battles should be won by the player who is able to not only shoot straight but also use their environment and squad to the best advantage. Strategy and thinking your way through battles should be a priority. This is what makes a good combat team leader. Combat should be much like dialog choices where you have to make decisions moment to moment in order to get the desired outcome you want.



Speaking of dialog choices I really like the option to either excite or diffuse a situation in both ME1 and 2. I hope this continues and is strengthened. Too I really liked the quick time "Paragon" or "Renegade" actions in ME2. Thinking on your feet and making important decisions quickly is an important leadership trait and these quick time events better immerse you in the role of a leader.



My 2cents.

[Scarecrow_ES]

I largely agree with everything you've posted there, Monk. I thank you for adding your two cents to the topic, and hope you'll feel up to staying with the discussion (which unfortunately has slowed down a bit as we've come to more of an agreement on things).

[yuncas]

One thing I've thought of lately... velocity of the projectiles. Nothing should be able to avoid a bullet and yet frequently, at least with pistols, it happens. A reasonabe comparison for the heavier pistol would be a .45 caliber ACP round that moves between 850-1000 feet a second depending on the actual projectiles weight. From my relatively uninformed scientific viewpoint as well as a lore one the bullets ingame (in ME2 at least) do not move fast enough. The only reason I bring this up is when I'm 100 feet from an enemy I should not have to lead the target with my super futuristic gun to be able to hit him, especially when I'm using a 360 controller.

[RyuGuitarFreak]

Hey, Scarecrow, tnaks for the answer and let's continue the good
discussion.

Scarecrow_ES wrote...

Ryu... at essense,
we already have the sort of damage/cooling/capacity/whatever dynamic
happening under the ME2 system. For instance, the Base...

Agreed. But I
don't really think there should be many variations. 3 or 4, 5 at
maximum. More than that should get messy.

Scarecrow_ES wrote...

Oh, and further... while many people have expressed some dismay at my change in cooldowns, in reality it doesn't work much different in principle than the ME2 system, except that instead of performing 1 power, then being locked out until your cooldown period is over, you have enough "energy" (call it whatever you want), to perform 2 weak powers (or 3) before you run out of energy (biotic power, tech energy, whatever) to perform another. Then you have to wait to recharge at least enough to use the one weak power, or recharge more to use several back to back again. You will also...

I think that this question about the power use is more subjective. Because adept, soldier or whatnot, you still should use your squad mates powers to your benefit. While I was a vanguard I made heavy use of pull to combine it with charge, and reave with warp. Concussive shot with the freezing skills of the engineer (Mordin) while playing soldier or squad cryo ammo. And I still think that the engineer and adept cooldowns are short enough for you being able combine some of your skills. I haven't played with them myself but I've seen plenty of video footage to see 2 combat drones, lots of warp explosions using singularity, throw after pull, etc. They can still play by themselves, just not so much.

Modifié par RyuGuitarFreak, 30 mars 2010 - 03:36 .

[Scarecrow_ES]

Yuncas... one of my main time sinks outside of this topic is with firearms design and gunsmithing. The physics associated with the weapons in Mass Effect are much different, in theory, to a normal chemical explosive firearm used today. Or... well... the same physics, but taken to extreme levels.



A .45ACP will fire a relatively heavy projectile (as pistols go) at a reasonably slow speed, and will deliver enough energy on impact to do some serious damage to a soft target. A mass effect weapon will fire a very light projectile... in fact orders of magnitude smaller than a standard .45ACP... we're talking hundreds of times smaller. If that round travelled only as fast as the .45ACP, it would have hundreds of times less energy at the target due to the lower mass. Therefore, to make up the energy, a mass effect slug would have to travel dozens of times faster than a comparable pistol round (energy increases with the square of velocity).



As a result, the round should seem to strike the target instantaneously upon firing as a result of the inordinately high velocity. Further, within the normal "effective" range of the weapon (limited mostly by the firer's ability to actually sight a target) there should be no bullet drop or change in trajectory due to atmospheric interferance. The round should fire perfectly straight.



A further issue is impact. A round moving at super high velocity with a miniscule point of impact would likely not be able to deliver up it's energy with enough ferocity to do any real damage. It's like firing a sewing needle at Mach 20. There's a good chance it's just going to fly right through whatever it hits. A .45ACP round will deliver up all of it's energy almost immediately with very little penetration. A 7.62mm (.308") NATO rifle round will have enough energy to completely demolish it's target and the 2 guys behind him. These are fairly thick rounds, so they have a big impact point and push a lot of material away when they hit, unlike the slug fired by a ME weapon which is just a tiny sliver of metal.



Not to mention the fact that you actually upgrade your weapons in ME2 to have computer aim assist technology to correct for errors in targeting. Realistically, you should be able to hit whatever you can get your reticules near without doing any sort of leading whatsoever. Of course it's doubtful you'd do any real damage thought, when it comes right down to it.

[Scarecrow_ES]

Ryu... like my OP states, I'm only recommending 4-5 weapons in each category, so we're right together on that one.



I agree you should be using squadmates to your advantage. At the same time though, you and each one of your squadmates is a galactic badass... the absolute best at what they do. Jack and Samara are apparently amongst the most powerful biotic users in the known universe, and your Shepard is amongst the most powerful whatever you set it as as well. So why is it Jack and Samara go from ripping the limbs of Ymir mechs and throwing people from room to room to barely being able to pull of a 1-level biotic attack without getting winded? And why is it that my superhero, galaxy saving Shepard can't seem to wipe his own behind unless he's got a team with him? Kinda sad really.



The reality is, the current system is very restraining. You can say it's for the sake of balancing, or in order to make squadmates useful in combat. Whatever the reason for it though, it completely goes against the idea of these people being super powered fighters for good. It's completely counterintuitive to everything BioWare has shown us about biotic and tech users over the course of 2 games. The reality of cutscenes and the reality in gameplay don't mesh up. I think my very small change helps to bring the two together.

[Dualfinger]

Scarecrow, your whole weapon heating system reminded me of a little somthing I thought up that seems rather similar. My concept was more along the lines of a Blast-Vent System (BVS from here on).

Lets say that a assault rifle take 15 seconds for a "natural" cooldown like in the first game. The player can choose to sit out those seconds, hot weapon in hand but still with it functional. Or they can activate the BVS and the weapon becomes inactive as it opens reveling the heat sink, and in a suitably epic rush of steam rapidly dumps all the heat in, say, 3-4 seconds. Personaly I reckon it's great, the people have their infinite ammo, and Bioware gets it's "reload" squence. Everyone wins!

[Scarecrow_ES]

That's very creative, Dualfinger, and no doubt visually impressive, but I'm not sure if it fits any sort of realistic mechanic we could work into the game. Where would the "steam" come from?



There becomes the further issue of balance. If, for instance in an Assault Rifle, we knock down the rate of fire to a low enough level to truly punish the user for overheating, then the weapon, predicated on rapid fire, becomes useless altogether, even if it can still fire very slowly. It'd be far easier in that case to just switch weapons. The only other remedy you're giving the player is to have the weapon be completely knocked out for a very brief amount of time while you perform your BVS dump. Honestly, if all I have to do is overheat my AR, seek cover for a few secs or otherwise get out of the action, and then in 1/3 the time it would take to cool down naturally have a fully functional weapon again, there'd be almost no real reason to wait instead of just venting.



With a slow-firing weapon like a pistol or shotgun, there'd be no reason to wait at all, unless combat was of such low intensity that only being able to pop off one shot every so often wouldn't be an issue. I'm just not sure this type of arraingement really helps the problem, though I have to admit having a spectacular whoosh vent would be cool to see.

[Dualfinger]

You make a fair point, perhaps you can blast away and reach a critical heat level like in the first game, where the weapon locks down and stops functioning, at this point the BVS must be implemented. And really is that any different to firing full-auto until the thermal clip reaches its capacity and popping it out?

Asides from that, a gun could cool naturaly and venting is just optional, like reloading before it is required. As for the steam, it's come from the exposed heatsink, think the geth pulse rifle reload, only with more glowing innerds.

Also the 15 second natural cooldown was just an example to exaggerate the effect. The weapons would have to be carfully though out of course.

Modifié par Dualfinger, 30 mars 2010 - 06:13 .

[yuncas]

Scarecrow_ES wrote...

Yuncas... one of my main time sinks outside of this topic is with firearms design and gunsmithing. The physics associated with the weapons in Mass Effect are much different, in theory, to a normal chemical explosive firearm used today. Or... well... the same physics, but taken to extreme levels.

A .45ACP will fire a relatively heavy projectile (as pistols go) at a reasonably slow speed, and will deliver enough energy on impact to do some serious damage to a soft target. A mass effect weapon will fire a very light projectile... in fact orders of magnitude smaller than a standard .45ACP... we're talking hundreds of times smaller. If that round travelled only as fast as the .45ACP, it would have hundreds of times less energy at the target due to the lower mass. Therefore, to make up the energy, a mass effect slug would have to travel dozens of times faster than a comparable pistol round (energy increases with the square of velocity).

As a result, the round should seem to strike the target instantaneously upon firing as a result of the inordinately high velocity. Further, within the normal "effective" range of the weapon (limited mostly by the firer's ability to actually sight a target) there should be no bullet drop or change in trajectory due to atmospheric interferance. The round should fire perfectly straight.

A further issue is impact. A round moving at super high velocity with a miniscule point of impact would likely not be able to deliver up it's energy with enough ferocity to do any real damage. It's like firing a sewing needle at Mach 20. There's a good chance it's just going to fly right through whatever it hits. A .45ACP round will deliver up all of it's energy almost immediately with very little penetration. A 7.62mm (.308") NATO rifle round will have enough energy to completely demolish it's target and the 2 guys behind him. These are fairly thick rounds, so they have a big impact point and push a lot of material away when they hit, unlike the slug fired by a ME weapon which is just a tiny sliver of metal.

Not to mention the fact that you actually upgrade your weapons in ME2 to have computer aim assist technology to correct for errors in targeting. Realistically, you should be able to hit whatever you can get your reticules near without doing any sort of leading whatsoever. Of course it's doubtful you'd do any real damage thought, when it comes right down to it.

These aren't exact quotes from the game but I believe it says something like /the weapons fire the projectile at such high speeds that normally it would pass right through a target doing a miniscule amount of damage and to compensate the rounds are designed to "mushroom upon impact to do the maximal amount of damage" transferring their kinetic energy to the target\\, similar to a hollow point bullet. The bullets actually shouldn't do any damage as they are represented ingame, at least with the smaller weapons. Tell me if you honestly believe firing a grain of sand (what the codex says) size bullet at say 200 mph would do any actual damage. No.(The reason I refer alot to smaller weapons is because the most recent memory I have is playing as an engineer on insanity, stuck with my pistol and submachine gun.) 

I don't really care that much about accuracy really, I can aim reasonably well, I'd just like the games own science and actual gameplay to match up. I shouldn't feel like I'm firing a 23rd century bow and arrow. Why go through all the trouble to create a vast and detailed, rich and engaging fiction if you're just going to ****** it up by plopping a big fat action game in the middle of it that doesn't even conform to the standards you yourself created.

[Mightyg]

I would propose a split/dual global cooldown system. This would effectively let you use 2 powers at the same time, while maintaining the balance and the anti spam advantages of the global cooldown. Doing so would allow for effective and tactical combinations of biotic and tech abilities while at the same time not being too overwhelming to keep track of without checking the power wheel.



Example: Tactical Cloak activated, still have one cooldown available to fire off an incinerate as your suprise attack.



Bypass the tediously long cooldowns of shield bonus abilities like power armor and geth shield boost while maintaining the cooldown on those specific abilities so they cannot be exploited.



Cryo Blast to Throw/Pull to Throw combos: increase the cooldown on throw to average levels and increase it's effectiveness to allow the knockback of small shielded/armored enemies. Throws cooldown was shortened due to it's relative ineffectiveness, and desire for it to be used in conjunction with other abilities.

[gauntz]

I really like most of the ideas here, but for power upgrades I'd like to see the system where any attribute of a power can be developed (not sure who suggested it.) For example, one could upgrade Throw and choose between increasing raw power (damage, and also because of logic range thrown etc) or decrease cooldown, or maybe even choose between increasing damage by condensing power or decrease power but increase area of effect by stretching the "force" over a larger area. Talents with more attributes like Pull (length of time lifted from ground, speed of levitation towards caster, length of height lifted, cooldown, area of effect) would obviously have more eligible attributes to increase.



Love the power bar suggestion, would blast current and old system away.

[Master Smurf]

I am no gun nut but isnt the problem with a gun like the desert eagle is that the recoil stops you from firing off rapid because you wouldnt be able to keep your aim accurate.

(iirc) In ME the Hand Cannon just fires slower instead of actually moving the reticule away from your target and forcing you to wait that second and focus your aim. My point in all of this is there maybe other ways to differentiate gun types than one fires slow and does big damage and the other fires fast doing less. I think we already have this somewhat with the tempest (never really used it that much to tell)



Also following on from Monk's point - I would love to see certain characters use certain weapons eg. Miranda/Jacob would use the M3 - it would be seen as a more reliable weapon in combat whereas Jack would use the Hand Cannon - big damage, who cares about recoil or taking down enemy efficiently.

It would also be nice if you could suggest your squad member train in a certain area - their agreement to this could vary based on your level of influence, suitably of new skill to character etc.

On the powers and using squad - I think Samara's Reave or Jack's Shockwave should be more powerul than Sheps ever could like wise Legion/Tali with AI hacking or Drone.

[billywaffles]

I agree in the Armor part. It is ridiculous seeing Miranda wearing "Dance-wear" and Jack half naked in the Suicide Mission instead of armor, tbh...

[Titan98RG]

Master Smurf wrote...

On the powers and using squad - I think Samara's Reave or Jack's Shockwave should be more powerul than Sheps ever could like wise Legion/Tali with AI hacking or Drone.

i agree with this.  esp for a non-adept shep.  but then insanity would be much harder...

[RyuGuitarFreak]

Scarecrow_ES wrote...

Ryu... like my OP states, I'm only recommending 4-5 weapons in each category, so we're right together on that one.

I agree you should be using squadmates to your advantage. At the same time though, you and each one of your squadmates is a galactic badass... the absolute best at what they do. Jack and Samara are apparently amongst the most powerful biotic users in the known universe, and your Shepard is amongst the most powerful whatever you set it as as well. So why is it Jack and Samara go from ripping the limbs of Ymir mechs and throwing people from room to room to barely being able to pull of a 1-level biotic attack without getting winded? And why is it that my superhero, galaxy saving Shepard can't seem to wipe his own behind unless he's got a team with him? Kinda sad really.

The reality is, the current system is very restraining. You can say it's for the sake of balancing, or in order to make squadmates useful in combat. Whatever the reason for it though, it completely goes against the idea of these people being super powered fighters for good. It's completely counterintuitive to everything BioWare has shown us about biotic and tech users over the course of 2 games. The reality of cutscenes and the reality in gameplay don't mesh up. I think my very small change helps to bring the two together.

Yeah, I kinda agree with you. Jack took down 3 Ymir heavy mechs with some kind of biotic explosion. 1 heavy mech was able to take down an entire quarrian squad. In cutscenes. In gameplay they are bosses/midbosses, like Harbinger. I think it's not the gameplay that is restraining, the cutscenes are over the top lol

Shepard and the squad are like war heroes, at the level of Solid Snake and other type of war fiction heroes. Not comic book ones like Superman, they are fine the way they are, but Bioware should definitely look for some inconsistencies on cutscenes/gameplay possibilities.

[OneDrunkMonk]

I think the difficulty lies in that we all like to "build" characters, that's one of the main attractions to an RPG, but that game dynamic doesn't translate well in Mass Effect. Certainly a character grows and becomes more proficient through experience but we are already at a point in the Mass Effect story where all the relevant characters are near top in their field. The only characters in ME2 that could realistically skill up is Shepard (due to bring brought back from the dead) and Grunt (for having most of his experience fed to him in a tank not a battlefield). As stated by others in this thread the rest of the team are already the best of the best. Pretty much the same can be said for armor and weapons. Sure, Cerberus scientist come out with a BFG5000 for you to use or you manage to find a rare armor upgrade on Omega, I can dig it. Otherwise you shouldn't need to do major upgrades.



So in keeping with the Mass Effect story and characters as it stands now I propose that the emphasis go into actual hands-on tactics, good leadership skills and decision making as oppose to more toys and upgrades. Put it upon the player to make the most effective use of Shepard's skills. What you say in a situation has even more importance on the outcome. What you do in combat, how you position yourself and teammates, how you execute your and your teammates skills becomes even more important to the outcome of the battle.



By this I think we get a more evolved RPG experience. Instead of maxing everyone out with armor and weapons and such then throwing them haphazardly into combat why not put emphasis on how players actually make use of their kick-@ss team? I recommend expanding squad commands and put in a gambit system. One of the biggest challenges in both ME1 and ME2 is trying to keep your team alive and the enemy dead. God knows in ME1 I had to sometimes put my squad in a different room entirely in order for them not to charge in and get killed. So let's expand tactical commands, let your team members do as they do best but within the framework of your direction, your team leadership.



Too I think dialog and quicktime actions can be expanded, a good combination of thinking on your feet and careful consideration of all available information before proceeding. There is lot's of room for role-playing a character in Mass Effect, let's just move it beyond looting corpses and having to max out character skills, weapons and armor.