903 réponses à ce sujet

[EternalWolfe]

Not really complaining about the idea of damage resistence over bar for armor, but to be fair, it is ablative(according to the codex, anyways).  Although that doesn't explain why hitting anywhere still takes allows me to break the whole thing at once . . . (other then obvious 'making it really realistic would be a load of work)

Another note: Although I haven't tested it(and truthfully, have no idea where I remember hearing it), there are multiple levels of armor, but its class based - basically, as a Soldier, you take less damage to health then another class, Infiltrators and Vanguards next, ect.  Like I said, though, take that with a grain of salt(and maybe some google if you're really curious).

I agree(more or less) with the rest of your rant, although lorewise Shields shouldn't stop biotics or melee(since they react to high speed objects), barreirs should(since its under direct control of the biotic), and armor would have to be really heavy(which it isn't, at least noticably) to be able to cancel out lift/pull, singularity, ect(it may stop Throw if it was heavy enough though - but that's like YMIR heavy, not what a human is likely to be carrying around).  It would likely just weaken the effect/duration slightly(at best).  Don't think the game ever gave a actual weight for the armor.

As for Haestrom . . . I have no idea, unless your sheilds were reconfingured to react to the radiation from the solar rays(which, if i remember, was the problem).  I don't think the armor came with protection for high level radiation - could be wrong, of course.

[Arijharn]

Hmm, I thought it was Ablative armour for warships etc, not for personal body armour, but I can't remember either tbph.



I didn't know about the differing armour values as base in regards to your class, but that does make a bit of sense if it was apparent, but then again, maybe they did away with it in order to just increase the players health pools.

[FluxDeluxe]

Arijharn wrote...

To divert the subject a bit, I've played through the game for like the umpteenth billionth time and there is one feature of the game that irritates me possibly more than the to-heatsink-not-to-heatsink discussion or the multitude of weapons-are-they-replacements debate and that is armour.

Not as in armour that we can wear or exchange, I find that to be quite interesting (as long as there were more options available) but the actual armour mechanic in the game. I think it's pointless, I think it arbritrarily lengthens the game without making it in any degree more tactical (or alternatively, making it several degrees more fun). Why would a Sergeant Borris for example, wear 'armour' whereas Lieutenant Locke wouldn't? Wouldn't everyone in combat logically wear armour?

Why does the existence of armour for example arbritrarily mean that the effect of a Lift, a Throw, a Shockwave, a Neural Shock or a Cyro Blast for example be less effective? Why can it not effect the actual mind or body of the person/synthetic it's attacking? From a structural point of view what is the point of an Adept even putting points into Throw if it's only truly effective against non-shielded non-armoured targets while Warp is effective against not only armoured targets and Biotic targets, but can also be detonated to cause additional effect?

I prefer a system where Armour was a constant mitigating effect on damage, as opposed to a slight immunity effect until it's expiration (and Armour only existed for players in the form of Fortification). How I envision it working would be in that greater armour values would grant percentile increases via Tech Upgrades/class Skills in offering increased protection.  For example; an armour value of 31% would functionally mitigate damage from all sources by 31% (A hit for 100 would instead course 69 instead), although the actual percentages would probably be much lower since there is no such thing necessarily as light armour, medium armour and heavy armour anymore. Powers that course no damage would therefore ignore armour, but would still put armour wearers (no matter what percentage protection they afford) under effect. A Ymir Mech could still be lifted even if it had it's Shields for example, but if it was Thrown, then it wouldn't take as much damage necessarily due to the effects of either it's shields or its armour plates (1200 Newton force throw would cause that damage, but wouldn't necessarily cause that damage due to armour/shields worn).

I would also change the effects of Shields and Barriers somewhat too, not in what sort of abilities work best against these defences as that affords some fine tactical play and encourages squad mate usage but also by making abilities that were supposedly susceptible to breaching these defences valuable again (for example, in game Husks must batter through your shields, at least on Normal difficulty) prior to defeating your health. Melee might breach shields but not necessarily breach Barrier's (since Barrier's to me, are generated by the Biotic him/herself, and not by a mass field generator), Neural Shock might penetrate Barrier's but not Shields (can't think of a reason at the moment why it wouldn't penetrate shields, but to me it would make sense to being more able to breach a Barrier since it affects the mind directly). Maybe subsonic projectiles might be more able to breach shields but not barriers, maybe hypervelocity rounds might have the reverse effect.

While gameplay must come before lore in some cases, mainly in order to make a really fun game, it seems to me more decisions where made to disregard 'lore' for no real purpose other than making a situation unique. This isn't necessarily a bad thing of course, but I did find it odd that Haestrom burnt through my shields while in ME1 it made quite a point to mention that toxic environments, gas and heat were notible in avoiding it. Basically, I don't like blackflips unless it was made for a good reason (i.e., was it sold well enough).

Anyway, sorry for the tangent, but I desperately needed to rant.

Logically what you're saying is true Sergeant Boris an lieutenant locke would wear armour. However as you already know games are designed on a difficulty curve although most enemies appear aesthetically to wear armour many don't for balance in game and dependent on the difficulty level.  I also disagree on it not adding any tactics. Enemies and their levels of shields/armour/barriers on higher difficulties should affect which of your team you bring along. For instance
Collectors - Miranda, Thane, Grunt ( For warping effects & concussive shot on barriers).
Husks - Grunt, Suze, Jacob (For one hit insta death from grunt, Incendiary ammo for Armor and shotguns as it's up close).
Geth - Miranda, Tali, Legion, Garrus. (For overload on synthetics & shields AI hacking etc.
 
Just a few examples
Tactics in party selection is much like rock, paper, scissors and that is what the combat system went out to promote in ME2 which is why so much emphasis is put on party selection. In the first game people used their favorite characters and for the most part it didn't matter who you used infact the achievments were specifically geared to use the same characters throughout an entire playthrough. To improve the mechanics of combat i'm glad they sacrificed absolute realism at the alter of gameplay.
 
  

[EternalWolfe]

Arijharn wrote...

Hmm, I thought it was Ablative armour for warships etc, not for personal body armour, but I can't remember either tbph.

I didn't know about the differing armour values as base in regards to your class, but that does make a bit of sense if it was apparent, but then again, maybe they did away with it in order to just increase the players health pools.

"Combat hard-suits use a dual-layer system to protect the wearer. The inner layer consists of fabric armor with kinetic padding. Areas that don't need to be flexible, such as the chest or shins, are reinforced with sheets of lightweight ablative ceramic."

As for the differing armor values, I can't remember where I saw it, and I can't seem to find it again, so I may have been wrong - sadly, I have the 360 version(since my gaming PC had its 'accident'), so I can't get in and check directly.

And BUMP

Modifié par EternalWolfe, 12 avril 2010 - 09:38 .

[Scarecrow_ES]

Just as a point of clarification, it should be noted that there is a difference between armor - such that each character wears - and armor - as appears as tech armor in the game. When we see along side a target's health bar a yellow armor bar, that is, in fact, tech armor, not body armor. For all intents and purposes, body armor in the game simply acts as a debuff against incoming damage of all types, whether bullet, melee, tech, or biotic. When talking about the rock-paper-scissors mechanic, or where a weapon might be described as being effective against armor, that refers to tech armor, and not body armor.



In the realities of the game world, body armor might actually have little actual effect against types of damage likely to be inflicted on the wearer in battle for the most part. Biotic powers effect the whole target, as do tech powers. Melee or other blunt damage would likely be transfered directly to the wearer in the same way it does in modern armor. The armor might be somewhat effective against fragmentation particles, as many 20th century body armors were, but should be largely ineffective against ME weapon projectiles, which would likely pass right through the armor, the person, and the armor again largely unnoticed (again the physics of these weapons make them fundementally useless in reality). Short of the basic environmental protection a combat hardsuit offers, as well as the various enhancements and sealing capability they offer, I can see that going without a traditional armor suit might be a real viability for some individuals.

[Arijharn]

I guess that my main gripe could in fact be the different sets of rules for players and the AI then, of which 'tech armour' would also fall into. I can understand however, perhaps the AI cheating to better know where you are, but I still felt it was pushing the envelope, especially since I was basically styling my Adept to be an Asari Commando... but that's another story.



To be fair though, I don't think Harbinger wear's 'tech armour' since he doesn't share any of the same... techness, as the others. It's stated that all Collector's for example have expansive cybernetics etc, but this wasn't demonstrated in game to my knowledge.

[Conman013]

Scarecrow, the many ideas that are collected in that first post are fantastic. I'm no so sure I agree with the mineral scanning portion, but it would be an interesting change. I full support your ideas and really hope Bioware takes a look at this thread and seriously considers some of those ideas. Here's hopin mate! Plus another supporter!

[Scarecrow_ES]

Well... with the scanning thing, I figured "If they're going to insist on defending this broken system to the point where the game designer is willing to go on record as saying its 'strangely addictive,' then I can, at the very least, try to find a way to make it actually not SUCK as much."



If they insist on keeping the system, I can't remove all the suck, but I can remove a lot of it by breaking up the monotony and making the system more useful. It goes with my "don't throw the baby out with the bathwater" topic philosophy.

[TafkanX]

stealth bump

[szomszedsrac]

***Please note that I have no experience in English language, so sometimes it may be not clear what  I'm saying. Sorry about that.***
Feel free to correct my mistakes if you wish.

I hope no one will take these suggestions as an offense against this great game. I just wanted to write down some of my thoughts about the game with good-will, and see if anyone's out there to agree or disagree with them. Or, at least, argue with them.

(Note that I played the PC version.)

---

1. COMBAT
It is clear that BioWare does not have great experience producing action games, but the evolution from ME1 to ME2 is significant and noticeable. However, if they want to push more towards the tactical-action gamestyle (that's likely) in spite of their great RPG-making experience, well, there are things needed to be added to the game. If you're watching only the combat in the game, you'll notice that there are much better games on the market. The gameplay isn't bad in ME2, really; it's repetitive, but working perfectly, and with some tactical enhancements, it could cross the line what separates a well-made game from a legend (notice that I'm only talking about the action - if I look at the big picture, ME2 is a legend already). I have some suggestions about what could give it an edge:

Changing the ROE (Hold fire, Return fire, Fire at will) would be nice. It would add some variety into the combat system along with jumping and crouching.

We have a lot of interesting teammates, and we can only bring 2 of them to a mission. I left some of them on the Normandy for the whole game except their loyalty mission. I don't know what's the point in this decision (maybe a framerate issue on the X360?), but with 3 teammates, we could have a much more interesting combat.

Increase the importance of melee combat, like it was in the Left 4 Dead.

Half of the special skills are some kind of shield-reinforcing skills or ammo powers. In general, our squad members are basically the same (I tweaked the game and gave everyone the assault rifle), until the last mission there's no real difference in which 2 members I have on a mission. I think they share the same AI, so they treat every situation the same. It's funny that Tali's bravery and is equal to Grunt's

You can add some variety with adding some new elements into the system, like a flashlight along with dark areas and a bunch of husks, or a biotic/tech ability that slows down the enemies (like the stasis in Dead Space). Ideas are limitless, however, resources are not, I admit it.

2. AMMO POWERS
Turn the ammo powers into weapon components, because it's a very unhappy and unrealistic thing that you have to spend talent points to get the power for an ammo skill - and it will be more realistic, because you couldn't switch between different ammo types on a mission. That's not necessarily means you have to bring back the original inventory system  (I was happy managing the team's stuff, but that's irrelevant), just to create another submenu for the selection-screen at the beginning of the missions. And the holograph on the weapons look ridiculous in the movies, so why not remove it?

3. AMOUNT OF GUNS
Choosing the number of weapons the player can carry also make sense, since they will be forced to choose the appropriate loadout for different missions - they can carry more weapons with restrictions: for example, if you want to bring five weapons with you (assault rifle, shotgun, sniper rifle, pistol/smg and a heavy weapon) that means you will move and lean out of cover slower, storm less, and so on. That method would repeal the old-fashioned way of choosing your class in some way, but also add another factor of customization for the gameplay.

4. WEAPON PROBLEMS
In real life, shotguns are devastating. They can bring people to the ground in one shot, but in the game, they are actually worthless and slow. When I played a soldier, I rushed towards an enemy with the assault rifle every time I had to - never felt that the shotgun could really help me in close quarters. I say let's add some punch and speed to the shotguns or remove them from the game, because there is no reason to use them in this condition. Having a fast, strong  weapon that can drop three husks in one shot - this is what this weapon should be up to.

I had the same issue with the submachineguns. These weapons are designed to clear a room with their superior rate of fire, but as a vanguard, I was forced to use smg's every time, because the shotgun wasn't powerful enough, and I saved the pistol ammo for the armored enemies. After I found the assault rifle, I never used the smg again - the assault rifle can simply handle everything what an smg can (and more), so why bother anymore? Allowing the player to change the rate of fire (burst/full auto), and adding some extra damage in close quarters (but weakening the smg greatly against enemies in a distance)  could solve this problem and force the player to choose the right tool for the right job.

I was happy with the first pistol I've got, but when I received the "hand cannon", slowly I realized that this powerful weapon simply restricts itself to the heavy enemies, so I had to use another weapon in the majority of combat: again, the assault rifle.

Fortunately, the assault- and sniper rifles are good tools to use against almost every type of enemy, and they are diverse enough to satisfy the players. Same goes for the heavy weapons.

I noticed a "bug" with the sniper rifles: if you're behind a cover with a sniper rifle in your hand, using an attack power will cause the sniper rifle to zoom in. That's very annoying.

5. ASSUMING CONTROL
I played Clive Barker's Jericho recently, and turned out that sometimes one thing could turn an otherwise flat and uninteresting game into a good one. That one thing was the complete control over your fireteam, and I think it would be nice having the same feature in the new Mass Effect game  - of course not in the first playtrough, but as a reward in the second or third, after you've beaten the game at least once. In this way, it wouldn't affect the storytelling and the roleplay, and the player could focus on the story for the first run, but enjoy the second (or third) one with this tactical enhancement. If you don't like rewarding the player only because he's completed the game, then lock this feature to a difficulty  achievement.  This could be a very valuable reward for completing the game on Hardcore/Insanity, and make the player consider to "Play hard, go Pro"...

6. THE HUD
If I use the mouse wheel to change weapons, why should I put every weapon in my hand before I find the one I want? Please give us a weapon selection screen (like in almost every advanced action game) where we can scroll trough the weapons I have. Please don't tell me that I can freeze the time for this selection screen. Some players don't like pausing the game over and over for such a simple thing.

The squad screen looks good, but it would be better if the player could use it to spend the talent points for the members of the team.

Reducing the radar to an objective indicator (only appearing if the button is pressed, or when the time is frozen) is a significant backstep (at least I can still see where the enemies are), and the bigger area's (Omega, Citadel) maps aren't worth using.

I can't turn off those annoying tutorial messages.

My saves are all mixed if I start a second playtrough, because the game puts them to the list of my existing career, and I can't give them a name, so I have to use the good old paper to write down where I am.

Adding a statistics screen where the player could follow some basic things (like: shots fired, accuracy, percentage of headshots, weapon preference, medi-gel/time-freezing use, favorite teammates, and such things) would be useful. Maybe the game could mark the player's abilities with labeling (even rewarding) his results.

Achievements are good things, but like the squad screen they have little value. The majority of them don't give anything after received. Having less, harder, but more valuable achievements could be persuasive to play the game again.

One more thing (already solved, but important): please include a button to fix the mouse accelaration in the next ME.

---

Of course these are just random ideas came forward trough the 100+ hours I played the game, but I hope someone from Bioware will read it (not likely), or even consider it (very unlikely). There are some great suggestions about weapons and inventory already, so I won't waste the time writing down the same (and already suggested) things, I can only say that please, at least, consider what the players are saying.

Thanks for reading, I hope it wasn't too long and confusing.

[Blk_Mage_Ctype]

[lastpatriot]

In my limited opinion, my only real suggestion other than what has been said by many of you already is that I would really LOVE to see ME3 finalized as a massive, story-driven RPG that continues the variable plot options of the trilogy.  Don't ge me wrong, I'm a HUGE BioWare fan and I honestly believe that ME2 is perhaps one of the most fun games I've ever played but I was somewhat disapointed about how short it was.  What I mean is that after we assemble our team, build the Normady into something that even the Death Star would cower in fear of, and then do all the loyality quests, there really wasn't much more to the game than the final act of killing the Collectors.  I had assumed that once the team was complete and we attempted to attack the Collectors that there would be much more content based upon a massive battle to save the Normandy crew and then destory their "homeworld." 

The end of the game just felt rushed is all.

[yuncas]

For having no experience with english that guy put forth a very coherent and focused post. Not many who speak english as their first language can write that well. I agree with the ammo powers and the holographic indicator part, as well as the part about the assault rifle being easily the most adaptable weapon and the shotgun being underpowered. The shotgun is tailor made for up close and personal fighting and yet it falls short in comparison to smg's and ARs to some extent. Low magazine capacity and low power limit it's effectiveness, along with it's expected low accuracy at range. I also agree with the hud/radar part and also think a statistics screen would be an interesting add on.

[yuncas]

bawmp

[Scarecrow_ES]

Yes, very good additions, all. Far better than a simple bump post, certainly. And echoing Yuncas' sentiment, for having English as a secondary language, you've done far better than the average forum post, and I thank you very much for adding your ideas to the thread.

[szomszedsrac]

Hard to step away from the hungarian sometimes, but it's always good to know that some people could actually understand what I'm trying to say



Keep up the good work you started here, people. If I can come up with anything constructive, I'll post it.

[Scarecrow_ES]

Thanks again for stopping by... you're very welcome here.

[EternalWolfe]

In an attempt to resuscitate the thread, I've got a few ideas from the 'What happened to this being an RPG?" thread.  I should note that the original systems were proposed by Terror_K and Timberly, and are rewritten here as proposals by me.  My own thoughts on changes to be made are tabbed.

Now that legalities are out of the way, lets get started.

LOOTING SYSTEM

Currently we run a static looting system.  Items are in the same spot everytime, from the same thing, on the same missions.  This proposal is to return a bit of the random chance that plays a bit in many RPGs, without the overload of items that came with the first, along with being a sensible solution(in-universe, that is).
 
The system itself is simple enough - when you kill and enemy, you go up and scan its body and weapons for possible upgrades it might have.  Doing so gets you a random chance that they have something that you haven't already scanned.  If they do, it is scanned into the omni-tool(just like in ME2) and put into the computer onboard.  Obviously, its possible to be incredibly unlucky at finding them, so another method needs to exist - stores.  You could just buy the upgrade(providing you have the money), or you can hope you find it along your missions - its up to you.
         -Along with the chance to drop an item, there could also be a chance of it being a 'better' loot - such as higher level upgrades(assuming stacked upgrades) or being a rarer/special mod.  All items you could find would be assinged to several levels, and if you had all upgrades of one level that drops, I would assume it to move up and choose one from the next level.
        -The chance to drop an item, as well as the loot level chance, should both be determined by the 'rank' of the enemy.  Lower rank enemies(like common mercs, or the basic Geth Trooper) would have similarly low chances to drop an item, and a realitivly large chance of it being from the lowest level of items.  This increases as you move up in rank.  Bosses should, imo, have a 100% drop chance, with a good chance for it being high level - a reward for winning.
        -If you are using stacked upgrades(as opposed to combining upgrades like ME2s weapon upgrades), to avoid people buying the highest level upgrade and ignoring the lower ones, on the research screen, have those that you don't have the previous upgrade for say something like "Critical Data missing - require more advanced base".  The idea is, you only give a quick scan to the body, and don't get all the data for higher level upgrades, therefore needing the previous upgrade to fill in missing data.
      -Some other items that could be found might be money, medi-gel, clips, heavy ammo, ect.  This gives the idea more use, even after you've already gotten all upgrades/scans/weapons/ect.
        -This system assumes that you won't be put on such a tight budget like ME2s(as it would be impossible to know exactly how much any one player will need).
 
TECH SKILL

This paticular system is meant to give techies back some use for outside combat, as well as some non-combat flavor for the game.  I would like something to reward people for bringing along Biotics(and putting points in a Biotic skill) as well, but I don't know what sort of system to best use.  Any ideas would be welcome.

First off, you get a Tech Skill you can put points in(just like any other ability).  It may or may not be connected to an attack skill.  This plus the tech ability of your party members(characters like Tali and Legion would have higher tech ability, while ones like Garrus and Miranda would have lower ability) is your total skill value(shown as a number or a bar, however you like).  When hacking into things, the items you get is based on your skill - the higher the skill, the better items you find.
       -The first thing I would like to note is a major change in the system.  Rather then the skill being directly related to how high of item you get, it should be a chance of getting better items(much like the one I mentioned in the previous proposal).  This could also be combined with a chance of getting items at all with ones that normally just give money and/or items.
      -A point on making sense, I also think we should forgo safes and boxes in favor of computers, PDAs, ect, as it makes little sense that ones tech skill affects what people are keeping in their safes or in the boxes.
      -Along with the chance to get items, something that might make it more useful in the long run is a chance of increase to consumable things found in the systems, like money, for starters.
      -This system is used along with the previous one and all its points, such as the stores to help for bad luck and not being on a tight budget.

Thanks for reading(and sorry for anyone's head who may have exploded trying to decode my poor excuse for explainations).  Any feedback/ideas would be welcome.

The originals are on this page and this page.  Probably better explained

Now then: CLEAR *BZZZZP*

Modifié par EternalWolfe, 18 avril 2010 - 11:59 .

[Scarecrow_ES]

I'm highly conflicted myself about loot systems. For you to get any true advantage from a loot-based system, the potential incidence of loot has to occur very often... virtually every dead enemy caring some form of loot upon death. This is great if you have some sort of economy system to handle said loot, or robust RPG systems for handling loot items. Mass Effect has neither of these. Given this fact, with the full loot system in place, we end up with the problems we did in ME1, where we find ourselves with more junk than we know what to do with, and no means to use any of it beyond conversion to omni-gel.



A limited, but largely random, system would not do much better. It gives you the sense of discovery, sure, but as an alternate means of acquiring items and upgrades, it stinks. The difficulty in the randomness is that it'd be very difficult to control exactly what you'd get. Some players might walk in and get that ultra-rare upgrade that they'd otherwise have to spend boo-koo bucks on, and other players are going to get random junk that's simply not needed. There's also a good chance, under this type of system, that a player could have already gone out and purchased all the various upgrades of a certain level or category, and thus no loot drops would really be available for that player when he's out and about in the level.



So the player then has to worry about hoping to find a rare but needed drop somewhere in a level, or risk buying it in the store ahead of time and maybe missing the chance to see it drop in a level. Given that the mission stricture we're presented with is so linear, I don't think this system makes much sense. Maybe it would work much more in a more open world style RPG where it's possible to grind for upgrades and whatnot, but for ME I just don't see it working. Of course, the ME2 system of static drops in levels that can be missed and lost forever is just ridiculously stupid and NEEDS to change. Is there a better fix out there? Sure.



The best solution here is probably a pseudo-random loot system... or more accurately, a loot system that is very rigidly structured, but is handled somewhat randomly in-game. We get rid of the static point level drops, and now have drops occur, as suggested, upon killing enemies. But rather than having the item to be dropped be fixed according to mission space, we have them determined by player progression.



One thing that sucks about ME2 is, you can sit there forever waiting for the next gun to hit your inventory, or the very upgrade you need to progress in a given upgrade tree just because you haven't played the missions in exactly the order BioWare envisioned for you. To fix that, we ensure that the upgrades you find are always the next ones on your list. If you already unlocked Assault Rifle Damage 2, then you can expect that sooner or later you're going to find Assault Rifle Damage 3 somewhere. As you progress in player level, skill level, and upgrade level, you'll encounter progressively higher end mods.



Now, it might not make sense that the basic fodder enemies in the game seem to be getting better and better tech as you go along, so we include a progressive system for dropping, as suggested. Lower level enemies will provide lower level drops. More powerful enemies will leave more powerful drops. Assault Rifle Damage 1,2, and 3 might be found on your basic henchmen, but 4 and 5 will come along on higher grade enemies, and some of the very best upgrades and mods will only occur with the sub-boss type enemies (usually unique upgrades not tied to a progression tree). This allows for a highly scaled upgrade progression. You'll run into a lot of low-end upgrades fairly quickly in the game, and eventually you'll exhaust them and stop seeing them when you kill low-end baddies, just as you would expect in real-life. As you progress through the game, new drops will be less frequent.



You're always going to get access to the next mod on your list, so to speak, so you're not going to get a drop for an upgrade tree that you yourself aren't investing in. Alternatively, if you invest in a specific upgrade tree, by buying or researching the next available mod for that tree when it shows up rather than letting it sit, then you'll upgrade that particular tree faster. This will allow you to tailor your character to how you want to play, and invest in the upgrade areas you care about most first. Don't give a crap about Shotguns, but want your ARs to be tip-top? Then let your Shotgun research sit for a bit, and invest those credits or minerals in the next piece of AR research instead. This will throw the next AR drop into the queue, while your Shotguns will just sit there and wait til you're ready.



Loot drops themselves will be random, and infrequent (as necessary for progression balancing). As you move through a mission and kill enemies, there will be a random chance (as determined by the number of upgrades waiting in your queue, a random draw of which item in the queue gets dropped, and the predetermined event ratio) of one of those enemies depositing an upgrade, which can show up on your HUD as any other point of interest will. If you fail to notice it, or for whatever reason just don't pick it up, it will just fade back out of existance and go back into your upgrade queue. This ensures you don't end up with a one-time chance at picking up the upgrade. If you miss it, it will just show up later.



In this system, progression would still be linear, as it is in ME2, but it would give the illusion of randomness. Plus, you'll actually have a little more control over it, since you have to push the upgrade system yourself through research and all. But beyond that, we get rid of the very strict and predetermined, one and done, mission-based upgrade structure for a purely progressional one, which works FAR better for our ME universe needs. This system would work equally well for upgrades, mods, components, schematics, whatever.

[Scarecrow_ES]

Oh!!! Side note!!!



I'm thinking about adding some of the better topics we've discussed in the thread to the main page for the benefit of the newer readers or just the ones who have trouble keeping up. If there are any suggestions of just which proposals you guys would like to see added to the main page (keeping in mind we need to stick to the ones that have the most widespread interest and the greatest need of fixing) then I'd love to hear them.

[Scarecrow_ES]

One thing I'd like to add to the discussion is a newer progression system for skills. I've been thinking about this often, and honestly I have no idea if I've already discussed this in my thread before now. If I have, and this is a repeat, then I apologize.



One thing that has been brought up time and time again on these boards is a sense of a plack of RPG elements in ME2, especially when it comes to character skill progression. I've already discussed a few ways to improve the skill system to give a bit more choice to the player in how he sets up and builds his character, but I wanna take it a step farther.



What I propose is a simple system, whereby power progression is broken down into various aspects of the power, such as duration, intensity, area of effect, force, etc, which can all be upgraded independently of each other. Rather than upgrading a power as a whole, having it get progressively better in an even manner as you invest skill points into it, and then choosing between which of two slightly different evolutions you wish to take once the power is upgraded to it's max... I propose the player get to choose which aspect of the power is most important to him, and give him the opportunity to invest in those areas specifically.



Each power will be divided into a series of subcategories which makes sense for that power. For instance, Incinerate might be divided into damage, area of effect, and duration. Each one of these categories will have several slots into which skill points can be invested, and investing a skill point improves only the specific category that's chosen. Once a certain number of points has been invested into the total power (a sum total of each point invested in each power attribute category), then this will unlock the evolved form of the power. In this way, it will not be possible to max out every attribute category of a power. Instead, the player will have to choose just how this power ends up working according to how he likes to play the game.



It might be possible, then, for one player to build Incinerate to do a massive about of damage to a single target for a moderate amount of time, while another player's Incinerate could burn for a long time over an entire group. The evolved form of the power would be akin to the charged evolved system I discussed in my OP, but it's possible that the evolved form might also reflect the choices made by the player in the basic power build.



I believe this adds a much higher degree of choice and customization to the few skills/powers the player is presented with. By allowing the player to choose which aspects of a power are important to him, and giving him the ability to accentuate those aspects to whatever degree he sees fit, the player is given the freedom to truly tailor his character to his gameplay needs. Even characters within the exact same class could end up playing wildly differently if players could truly customize individual powers. Combined with my other skill tree modifications, I believe we'll see a much more diverse build-set than we currently see in ME2.

[FluxDeluxe]

Scarecrow_ES wrote...

One thing I'd like to add to the discussion is a newer progression system for skills. I've been thinking about this often, and honestly I have no idea if I've already discussed this in my thread before now. If I have, and this is a repeat, then I apologize.

One thing that has been brought up time and time again on these boards is a sense of a plack of RPG elements in ME2, especially when it comes to character skill progression. I've already discussed a few ways to improve the skill system to give a bit more choice to the player in how he sets up and builds his character, but I wanna take it a step farther.

What I propose is a simple system, whereby power progression is broken down into various aspects of the power, such as duration, intensity, area of effect, force, etc, which can all be upgraded independently of each other. Rather than upgrading a power as a whole, having it get progressively better in an even manner as you invest skill points into it, and then choosing between which of two slightly different evolutions you wish to take once the power is upgraded to it's max... I propose the player get to choose which aspect of the power is most important to him, and give him the opportunity to invest in those areas specifically.

Each power will be divided into a series of subcategories which makes sense for that power. For instance, Incinerate might be divided into damage, area of effect, and duration. Each one of these categories will have several slots into which skill points can be invested, and investing a skill point improves only the specific category that's chosen. Once a certain number of points has been invested into the total power (a sum total of each point invested in each power attribute category), then this will unlock the evolved form of the power. In this way, it will not be possible to max out every attribute category of a power. Instead, the player will have to choose just how this power ends up working according to how he likes to play the game.

It might be possible, then, for one player to build Incinerate to do a massive about of damage to a single target for a moderate amount of time, while another player's Incinerate could burn for a long time over an entire group. The evolved form of the power would be akin to the charged evolved system I discussed in my OP, but it's possible that the evolved form might also reflect the choices made by the player in the basic power build.

I believe this adds a much higher degree of choice and customization to the few skills/powers the player is presented with. By allowing the player to choose which aspects of a power are important to him, and giving him the ability to accentuate those aspects to whatever degree he sees fit, the player is given the freedom to truly tailor his character to his gameplay needs. Even characters within the exact same class could end up playing wildly differently if players could truly customize individual powers. Combined with my other skill tree modifications, I believe we'll see a much more diverse build-set than we currently see in ME2.

it's a good idea but a bit cumbersome. For passive powers your harking back to 1 with individual charm initmidate bonus, individual defense and weapon damage bonus. Plus for things like charge and tactical cloak there wouldn't much point in customising duration over damage or vice versa.

[Scarecrow_ES]

Well, it's not actually like that. We still keep the limited power system, you just customize power effects. You customize what gets improved in Incinerate or Charge or whatever. It retains the more limited nature of the ME2 skill trees, but gives you more control over those trees than you got even under the ME1 system. Rather than investing skill points in a way that gives you no control over power progression other than adding a fixed incremental improvement, you apply your points directly to whatever you want improved.



Each power will have attributes which makes sense for the power. For instance, Incinerate will likely have the amount of damage per second the power can do, the duration the power lasts, and the area of effect the power will have. Tactical cloak will likely have duration as well, the passive damage bonus applied under cloak, and maybe something like movement speed or passive defense bonus or who knows... whatever fits for that particular power. Each one would likely end up different, and there is a huge opportunity here for the class specific passive skill sets to really differentiate each character.



In terms of complexity, it sits somewhere between ME1's massive but ultimately pointless system, and ME2's extremely stripped down and pointless system, but it adds a dimension of true customization to powers that hasn't existed in either.



I mean, taking Tactical Cloak, as an example. Breaking up attributes for that power and allowing the player to upgrade them independantly could lead to wildly different uses for Cloak. One player may choose to emphasise the damage bonus part, and minimize duration - basically turning this into the old Assasination sniper power. OR, a player might play up the duration part over the damage bonus part, which could allow him to stay cloaked for far longer and really play a stealth role for a change. Or, of course, he could split the difference, and reach a balanced power. Not even the current evolution system creates that level of differentiation in powers.

[Scarecrow_ES]

It really sucks that this thread gets pushed off the front page so quickly. I liked it better when I was stickied and this thing could get read... at the very least they could keep me on the bottom of the front page!

[Conman013]

That really bites that you got knocked off the front page Scarecrow. Probably another "We love Tali" thread....but I do like your idea for the power system. That could seriously change the way that players play Mass Effect. As I've said before, I really hope Bioware gives some consideration to your ideas. You've got some really phenomenal ones.