186 réponses à ce sujet

[cruc1al]

tonnactus wrote...

rastakore wrote...

Some of you that are praising the ME1 combat don't seem to remember how god damn awfull the ai is... why go into cover when all they do is run into you?

Loki mechs do this.Fenris mech do this.Enemy shotgunners and krogan do this.
Pyros do this.
Of course,its  more stupid that enemies with their bigger numbers dont use this advantage to flank shepardts team and finish them of.

Mechs do it because they're programmed to do it. Shotgunners are trying to get close because they have shotguns, krogan are heavily armored and have lots of health and they regenerate plus they use shotguns (and Grunt would tell you any Krogan who just sits behind cover is a coward), Pyros also need to get close. Other organics don't need to get close, and they're not always very organised either (they're just a bunch of mercs) so you wouldn't expect them to excel at team work and be courageous when fighting the spectre who killed saren.

[bjdbwea]

SmokeyNinjas wrote...

I really don't get how anyone could think ME had better combat then ME2 when in ME you can just lock down whole battles with Biotics, lame<_<

Which of course you can't do in ME 1 for quite some time, only after you gained some levels. Both games are easy on later levels, but ME 1 at least provides a challenge in the beginning. You do NOT have the powerful biotics, you don't easily hit anything if you don't spend the points, a single hit can kill Shepard, and so on. (I'm talking about both games on the highest difficulty of course.)

[TJSolo]

cruc1al wrote...

Dudeman315 wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

tonnactus wrote...

Defined number of enemies in all areas.Not stupid endless spamming like with the drones in Talis Mission.What exacly was so frustrating???

1) Not hitting with assault rifles until you had endgame weapons because of the only 1 accuracy

2) Too many enemies when doing side missions on early levels.

3) Very overpowered Biotics (though, the nerf they got in ME2 was too extreme; something in between 1 and 2 would be perfect)

4) Some enemies (especially Krogan with their reg) had too much health, so you did effectively 5 minuts fire at them nonstop without killing them

1) Yeah rpg based combat--it could have been done better---but I'd love to have skill based combat back
2) Vs infinite no xp enemies?--fail to see the point here
3)ok so we can agree(although I personally didn't think they were that overpowered in ME1)
4)try playing ME2 on insanity they regen to full in the time it takes to reload--it's about a wash

1) agreed, accuracy (crosshair size, recoil etc) should be a matter of character level. Damage shouldn't.
2) i don't see the point of xp from kills
3) yep
4) on ME2 incinerate, cryo blast, and incendiary and and cryo ammo (among possibly other things) stop health regen, whereas there was nothing in ME1 to stop health regen afaik

1) If you can't hit with the AR until end game then the class you started does not have AR training. RTFM about that issue. 
2.) Too many enemies. Did you find the planet with husks and get spanked? Enemies will be around with varying numbers, so use tactics(you know that word some people only want associated with cover combat)
3. Biotics is part of what differentiates combat in ME from other TPS games. It was good in ME1 but BW didn't take into account how some gamers would use it and then biotics got screwed in ME2.
4. Read the ingame descriptors about powers and mods. BOTH games have access to items to stop regen.

[tonnactus]

Tirigon wrote...



1) Not hitting with assault rifles until you had endgame weapons because of the only 1 accuracy

I could hit enemies even with the early lancer.So you definetly made something wrong.With aim and burst fire this was possible from the beginning.Also overkill exist that help with that.
I only agree with sniper rifles.
Shotguns and pistols were accurate,and shotguns have a bigger  range then just 1-2 meters...

2) Too many enemies when doing side missions on early levels.

What??Only freedoms progress doesnt have a lot of enemies,but how on earth mordins recruiting mission have less enemies then eden prime or therum??

3) Very overpowered Biotics (though, the nerf they got in ME2 was too extreme; something in between 1 and 2 would be perfect)

There is a reason why the illusive man put billions in Gillian Anderson.Because they give you a big edge in a fight.Soldiers/Infiltrators have immunity,so they could take rockets from heavy turrets.That and bastion stasis where overpowered,nothing else.

4) Some enemies (especially Krogan with their reg) had too much health, so you did effectively 5 minuts fire at them nonstop without killing them

Never used warp and poison/inferno ammo i guess.That killed them fast,even on insanity.But krogans,especially battlemasters with barriers that could regenerate still need a lot time to kill  them.Even more then in Mass Effect.

[TJSolo]

bjdbwea wrote...

SmokeyNinjas wrote...

I really don't get how anyone could think ME had better combat then ME2 when in ME you can just lock down whole battles with Biotics, lame<_<

Which of course you can't do in ME 1 for quite some time, only after you gained some levels. Both games are easy on later levels, but ME 1 at least provides a challenge in the beginning. You do NOT have the powerful biotics, you don't easily hit anything if you don't spend the points, a single hit can kill Shepard, and so on. (I'm talking about both games on the highest difficulty of course.)

Also using locking down battles to the point enemies are not have to respond is entirely player choice. If a player deems it to be overpowered and a distortion to the gameplay, it is perfectly acceptable for that player not to use that tactic. I am not sure why there are people that get optional and mandatory confused.

[tonnactus]

cruc1al wrote...


In ME2, the quicker you advance the less enemies you'll encounter. Aggressive gameplay is rewarded.

And sometimes not when enemies spawns behind you and finish you of.Happens a lot with a vanguard.

Whereas ME1 forced you to be defensive first, and when you got to a high enough level, the whole thing became a joke.

It was alsways the concept of an rpgs that heroes become a lot stronger then enemies at the end.There is nothing wrong with it when the game have atleast some challenging bosses.
The bosses in Mass Effect where not that difficult,but atleast biotics used more then only warp.Throw at shepardt and lift to remove cover.Stasis.
And now???


Tech enemies in Mass Effect: Overload,Damping,Neural Shock,Sabotage.
And now: Drone and incinerate.

Oh yes,that is great combat.

[SmokeyNinjas]

bjdbwea wrote...

SmokeyNinjas wrote...

I really don't get how anyone could think ME had better combat then ME2 when in ME you can just lock down whole battles with Biotics, lame<_<

Which of course you can't do in ME 1 for quite some time, only after you gained some levels. Both games are easy on later levels, but ME 1 at least provides a challenge in the beginning. You do NOT have the powerful biotics, you don't easily hit anything if you don't spend the points, a single hit can kill Shepard, and so on. (I'm talking about both games on the highest difficulty of course.)

Hmm didn't the post i quoted in the first place already state ME1 forced
you to be defensive at the start & became a joke when you got to
higher levels

[Xpheyel]

Can someone enlighten me as to what other tactics work well in ME1 that makes games feel different to them? 

So far I've done Engineer (Normal), Infiltrator (Hardcore), and Soldier (Hardcore), started an Adept (Insanity) but haven't got very far. All my games feel kind of samey. I just Lift/Singularity a group of enemies, throw some tech powers, and shoot them. I pretty much eschew attaching to any cover in favor of FPS-like tactics (move in an out of enemy LOS, usually crouching). In short, everything feels like the final ME2 fight, drilling a target while shooting a guy *over* cover but not actually attaching to it.

The whole cover system in ME1 strikes me as bizarre. Whats the point of limiting your mobility, screwing up your aim, and letting the game decide how much of you is in enemy LOS? And then the AI is just going to charge through your position anyway unless it's an uncharted world mission where they won't path out of the main room. 

Infiltrator was a bit better because sometimes the Sniper Rifle could pick a guy off before he had a chance to Immunity/Heal or move out of LOS or could clip a guy in the foot and kill him that way. I was really indifferent to both shotties and ARs on my Soldier. I just made myself use them for the achievements but didn't feel like they conferred any advantage or substantially changed my play (shoot all the floating guys). 

Most of the powers also don't feel much different when I'm using them vs. the squad using them. I suspect ME2's Engineer has the same problem but I haven't tried it yet. At least the curveballs, singularity, and the different evolutions of Warp could make an Adept Shepard feel different from having an Adept on the squad.

---

One thing I'll say about both games is the game is really is too complacent about being sniped/drilled. In ME1 they charged you they'd be dead before getting there, unable to path to you, or if they were Krogan/Destroyers, ended up floating. Geth Hunters and occasionally a well-placed Vanguard/Harbinger can be trouble to take down on insanity before they reach your position but most of the mooks, as has been noted, have that shooting gallery behavior and will let themselves get sniped to death. 

Modifié par Xpheyel, 26 avril 2010 - 04:41 .

[TJSolo]

scyphozoa wrote...

I don't see why people say biotics are nerfd? Because they aren't overpowered like they were in ME1?

because you have to lower an enemies shields before you can fully use most skills? by that definition, tech skills got as much as a nerf as biotics since you cannot use a lot of tech skills without first stripping shields.

i don't understand how or why people complain about this, if you don't want to strip shields then play on veteran or lower. don't be surprised or upset when you can't breeze through insanity just by spamming singularity (like you could in me1)

Nerf'd is a term used when a power is a game is reduced for any reason.
It is about sing and it's lowered radius, part of what really needed to be fixed in ME1.
Then there are points about how every defense in ME2 provides at the very least protection from the physical aspect of biotics.
When said defenses are dropped people have said it would be more efficient to finish the kill with gunfire instead of biotics due to global cooldowns.

Tech skills got a new power called Incinerate which is a fire damage power. The defenses in the game don't counter fear like countering biotic physical attacks.
Also Engs have a permanent aggro pet in Combat Drone. 
Hybrid classes got a mix of the good non-physical powers.
Engineers got a large boost in CD.
Adepts instead of using powers more have to rely on guns more or be content with Warp being their reason for being in the fight.

[tonnactus]

scyphozoa wrote...
don't be surprised or upset when you can't breeze through insanity just by spamming singularity (like you could in me1)

Lol.Thats exactly what most adepts do on insanity because singularity is the only crowd control ability that worked on shielded and armored enemies.

[TJSolo]

scyphozoa wrote...

how can anyone support ME1 combat when all you need to beat ME1 on insanity is the first Spectre pistol. As soon as you get that pistol, regardless of game difficulty, you can rambo-sprint through all of ME1.

You can choose not to use this pistol, but the fact is that dozens of endgame guns allow you to Rambo-Sprint through all of ME1. If you find this fun, that is your opinion, but I personally consider this evidence that ME1 combat was broken, and in most cases, very boring.

The day you start a new ME game with end game gear, would be the day your point is valid.

ME1s combat is designed to be played in and out of cover. Rambo style is one of those funny memes to insult combat mechanics that is not relative to the concept of ME1s combat.

Modifié par TJSolo, 26 avril 2010 - 04:31 .

[tonnactus]

scyphozoa wrote...

how can anyone support ME1 combat when all you need to beat ME1 on insanity is the first Spectre pistol.

And now?What soldiers need to beat this game?Adrenaline rush and revenant/widow.Infiltrators:Widow and cloak.
The other weapons are good enough too.
Other classes only needs the locust,that is accurate and effective even against armor.

Modifié par tonnactus, 26 avril 2010 - 04:36 .

[SmokeyNinjas]

TJSolo wrote...

bjdbwea wrote...

SmokeyNinjas wrote...

I really don't get how anyone could think ME had better combat then ME2 when in ME you can just lock down whole battles with Biotics, lame<_<

Which of course you can't do in ME 1 for quite some time, only after you gained some levels. Both games are easy on later levels, but ME 1 at least provides a challenge in the beginning. You do NOT have the powerful biotics, you don't easily hit anything if you don't spend the points, a single hit can kill Shepard, and so on. (I'm talking about both games on the highest difficulty of course.)

Also using locking down battles to the point enemies are not have to respond is entirely player choice. If a player deems it to be overpowered and a distortion to the gameplay, it is perfectly acceptable for that player not to use that tactic. I am not sure why there are people that get optional and mandatory confused.

Who said it was mandatory to lock down battles?
My post clearly states you CAN not must but CAN lock down whole battles with biotics which IMO is lame. 

[tonnactus]

scyphozoa wrote...

You can afford the ME1 spectre pistol in the first ~2 hours of gametime. I can power through Therum and Feros and buy the spectre pistol with great ease, even on insanity.

What is the difference now?The evi is nearly as good as the claymore(even better if there wasnt a reload trick).The vindicator is a rifle with great damage and accuracy and soldiers get them very early.The locust is all classes like the adept and engineer need for the rest of game.

They dont called spectre weapons,thats all.

[tonnactus]

none of the guns you listed allow you to Rambo-sprint through insanity the way that ME1 guns did.

Guns dont allow any rambo sprint in Mass Effect. Immunity combined with a good set of armor allowed that, thats it.
I begin to doubt that you played the first game.At least at high difficulties.

Modifié par tonnactus, 26 avril 2010 - 04:46 .

[Lake88]

I think we should see if BW can come up with a super-awesome-fantastic combat system in ME3 first, then post a 'ME1 with ME3 combat' thread

[TJSolo]

scyphozoa wrote...

You can afford the ME1 spectre pistol in the first ~2 hours of gametime. I can power through Therum and Feros and buy the spectre pistol with great ease, even on insanity.

That is part of why ME1 combat is broken, because both the inventory and item design in ME1 were broken. Item design in ME1 was terrible and because of that, the inventory system used to manage it was terrible. Had the items the player could access been better scaled to the DPS/difficulty of the mobs throughout the game, ME1 might be more balanced and challenging. Because the items are not scaled for the game's difficulty, you end up with what should be endgame DPS weapons within the first 2 hours of gameplay.

Imaginery numbers, 2hrs. This means Eden Prime, The Citadel, and Noveria have been finished, you would need more than that. So how many sidequests are you now going to say you did in order to accomplish your notion.

So instead of discussing combat you now need to mire the topic with every other issues you can think off. I can't continue down the path you are trying to go. 
Topic:ME1 combat and ME2 combat.

[TJSolo]

scyphozoa wrote...

Why are you equating good weapons in ME2 with unbalanced weapons from ME1?

In ME2 you cannot rambo-sprint with any weapon in the entire game. The only exception to this is Cain, which is the last HW you get. Even then it is heavy restricted by ammo.

Good guns in ME2 are not = to the unbalanced guns in ME1.

Weapons are different from the fight mechanic.
No matter the gun I have in ME1 I can run around and fight.
No matter the gun I have in ME2, I will be mostly pinned to cover.
Both playstyles are by design.

If you want to confine balance to only mattering after the ME1 end game guns are obtained, then the same sentiement can be had about ME2.
In ME1 with my fully upgraded spectre shotgun and pistol I plowed down enemies faster then when I did not have them.
In ME2 with my fully upgraded Widow and ... I plowed down enemies faster then when I did not have it.

ME1 combat was as broken as you allowed it to be. There was nothing technically broken about it.