186 réponses à ce sujet

[tonnactus]

scyphozoa wrote...

I never needed immunity to sprint through ME1, I've done it dozens of times on insanity with just the spectre pistol. That you can sprint at all through ME1, regardless of what skills or method you use, is evidence that ME1 combat is broken.

Bull****.
Get a sniper shot with light scorpion armor=dead.
The same i true for enemies with rocket launchers or charging krogans.

You never played the first game.

Modifié par tonnactus, 26 avril 2010 - 04:59 .

[TJSolo]

scyphozoa wrote...

get defensive if you want, you can beat all of ME1's main story arc in ~5 hours. You can become a spectre in the first 15 minutes of game if you skip dialogue. You can choose not to believe me, i could care less, but dont' tell me i'm going off topic when you can very easily get endgame gear within the first 2 hours (2 is generous, i can beat therum and feros in less than 2 hours, sell all my gear and then afford the spectre pistol.)

item design is part of why ME1 combat is broken.

It is not a matter of defensive, topic. Stay on it instead of trying to muddle it.

If I skip dialogue, 15min spectre. Again you are rambling about player choice not game breaking implementation.
All useless in terms of balance when talking about extremes. There is a speedrun thread showing how fast things can be done if the player opts to.

[TJSolo]

tonnactus wrote...

scyphozoa wrote...

I never needed immunity to sprint through ME1, I've done it dozens of times on insanity with just the spectre pistol. That you can sprint at all through ME1, regardless of what skills or method you use, is evidence that ME1 combat is broken.

Bull****.
Get a sniper shot with light scorpion armor=dead.
The same i true for enemies with rocket launchers or charging krogans.

You never player the first game.

Most people will use crap examples with a hefty portion of selective amnesia. Some that haven't played it will just parrot issues.
ME1, sprint you say?

[cruc1al]

TJSolo wrote...

cruc1al wrote...

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.

1. Didn't mean you couldn't hit with the AR until end game. Meant you get better at hitting with weapons as you progress, but hitting with it early on is ok too. The progression should be similar to what we see with the AR accuracy upgrade in ME2, but a step-wise progression where each level makes it a bit more accurate.

2. Different issue altogether. Not getting XP from kills does not equal too many enemies. Plus I don't think that was ever an issue in ME2.

3. I prefer ME2 biotics, since they're more tactical than just "use biotic on enemy to render helpless" (perhaps simplified a bit but still)

4. fair enough, I've only played through ME1 twice

Modifié par cruc1al, 26 avril 2010 - 05:16 .

[DaVanguard]

cruc1al wrote...

TJSolo wrote...

cruc1al wrote...

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.

1. Didn't mean you couldn't hit with the AR until end game. Meant you get better at hitting AR as you progress, but hitting with it early on is ok too. The progression should be similar to what we see with the AR accuracy upgrade in ME2, but a step-wise progression where each level makes it a bit more accurate.

2. Different issue altogether. Not getting XP from kills does not equal too many enemies. Plus I don't think that was ever an issue in ME2.

3. I prefer ME2 biotics, since they're more tactical than just "use biotic on enemy to render helpless" (perhaps simplified a bit but still)

4. fair enough, I've only played through ME1 twice

about biotics I agree they are more tactical and they make the game more tactical: charge blast a guy with a scimitar then take cover reave open fire with the locus charge an isolated merc...

[cruc1al]

tonnactus wrote...

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.

Never had that problem with my vanguards

tonnactus wrote...

cruc1al wrote...

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.

It's a realistic concept that the player becomes powerful as he progresses, but it isn't good for gameplay imo. If there's no challenge, there's no fun; might not apply to you though.

tonnactus wrote...
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.

Yeah, enemies in ME2 use too few abilities, but I'd rather have few good abilities than many unbalanced ones.

Modifié par cruc1al, 26 avril 2010 - 05:19 .

[cruc1al]

First. Double. Post. Ever.

Modifié par cruc1al, 26 avril 2010 - 05:15 .

[tonnactus]

cruc1al wrote...

Yeah, enemies in ME2 use too few abilities, but I'd rather have few good abilities than many unbalanced ones.

Thats the point.They dont have any good abilies.Warp is easy to avoid.The same is true for incinerate.The tech mines enemies used in Mass Effect are a lot more effective because they hit you instantly.

[X-Frame]

I am absolutely astonished that anyone prefers ME1's combat. Like really, that is like preferring a typewriter over a modern computer.

[cruc1al]

tonnactus wrote...

cruc1al wrote...

Yeah, enemies in ME2 use too few abilities, but I'd rather have few good abilities than many unbalanced ones.

Thats the point.They dont have any good abilies.Warp is easy to avoid.The same is true for incinerate.The tech mines enemies used in Mass Effect are a lot more effective because they hit you instantly.

Even though they might be easy to avoid, they're still a nuisance because you have to watch out for them. Especially drones. On insanity, if any of those abilities manage to knock you out of cover and you catch yourself in a crossfire, you're pretty much done. In ME1, tech abilities were ok, but enemy biotics were way OP in comparison to tech. Shepard got thrown around so easily and there was nothing you could do about it, no way to avoid the many seconds of inability to do anything. Except a pre-emptive strike with damping.

[Tirigon]

Dudeman315 wrote...

4)try playing ME2 on insanity they regen to full in the time it takes to reload--it's about a wash

I did. 1 hit with incendiary ammo or incinerate or warp fixes that, though. And once you have a Krogan´s armor down he´s harmless anyways as you can knock him down, freeze, pull etc..

[Tirigon]

[quote]tonnactus wrote...

[quote]Tirigon wrote...
1) Not hitting with assault rifles until you had endgame weapons because of the only 1 accuracy
[/quote]
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...
[/quote]

What? Sniper rifles are (at least with training) the best early game weapons. I used them all the time until I could afford the more accurate assault rifles and level 2 overkill.

[quote]2) Too many enemies when doing side missions on early levels.[/quote]
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??
[Quote]
I was referring to ME1 with too many, not to 2

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

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.[/quote]
What about permadisabling a geth-colossus with Liara + Adept and lift maxed?
Or disabling 5 enemies long enough to kill them with singularity?
Or instakilling charging krogan with throw off a cliff?


[Quote]
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
[/quote]
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.
[/quote]
Not really. I played Mass Effect 1 on insanity as adept and used warp all the time. Later in the game it got better, but the first battlemaster at level 12 or so was like 20 tries and more than 1 hour to take down

Modifié par Tirigon, 26 avril 2010 - 06:00 .

[tonnactus]

cruc1al wrote...


Even though they might be easy to avoid, they're still a nuisance because you have to watch out for them. Especially drones.

Overload and warp them,dead.

In ME1, tech abilities were ok, but enemy biotics were way OP in comparison to tech. Shepard got thrown around so easily and there was nothing you could do about it, no way to avoid the many seconds of inability to do anything. Except a pre-emptive strike with damping.

Combat exoskeletons,damping and cover,fallback in a other room and biotics of your teammates.The only problem was the paragon mission where you should keep the scientists alive.

[cruc1al]

tonnactus wrote...

cruc1al wrote...


Even though they might be easy to avoid, they're still a nuisance because you have to watch out for them. Especially drones.

Overload and warp them,dead.

Yep. Sometimes you don't have the cooldown though, or you don't notice the drone, or you're already low on health, and even if you can easily take it down it requires your attention. They're balanced, that's the point.

[Blk_Mage_Ctype]

"ME1 with ME2 combat?"



DO WANT!!!

Make it for PS3!!!

[Homey C-Dawg]

I think some people may be forgetting that ME1's combat was not pure shooter combat like ME2's is. ME1 is inferior to ME2 as a shooter, it's just a fact. ME1, as a shooter/RPG hybrid, it more about what buffs your using on your gun and such (<--more RPG) rather than just shooting skills and timing (<--more shooter). Some RPG aspects remain in ME2 as a game, but the combat is pure shooter imo.



Therefore, it's rather natural that many RPG fans will prefer ME1 combat, as it was more RPGish. Naturally, the crowd that loves shooters will prefer ME2 combat, as it is almost pure shooter combat.

[Tirigon]

@ Homey: Well, the way I see it is that, for combat, at least when done like in ME, is just better as shooter.



if it was done like in DAO only with futuristic weapons that would be different, but as it is the ME1 combat is just "a little of both, but neither part good".

[Homey C-Dawg]

Tirigon wrote...

@ Homey: Well, the way I see it is that, for combat, at least when done like in ME, is just better as shooter.

if it was done like in DAO only with futuristic weapons that would be different, but as it is the ME1 combat is just "a little of both, but neither part good".

I agree ME1 didn't get it right. It seemed to me that ME1 didn't know whether it wanted to be a shooter or RPG, whereas ME2 knew it wanted to be a shooter. I think they can successfully combine the two into something unique and fun for ME3. Whether they will or not remains to be seen.

[tonnactus]

Tirigon wrote...

@ Homey: Well, the way I see it is that, for combat, at least when done like in ME, is just better as shooter.

if it was done like in DAO only with futuristic weapons that would be different, but as it is the ME1 combat is just "a little of both, but neither part good".

I miss reasons.Weapons without ammo,only overheat. Futuristic.Biotics.Futuristic.
Now we have almost the junk that every other shooter has.Ammo and cover boxes instead using  a tree/stones for cover(nothing is more immersion breaking then these boxes on korlus etc) and overheating weapons.

Modifié par tonnactus, 26 avril 2010 - 07:54 .

[tonnactus]

[quote]Tirigon wrote...

What about permadisabling a geth-colossus with Liara + Adept and lift maxed?
[/quote]
So why this a problem?I could also take a team with tali,garrus and an engineer/infiltrator and permasabotage him. So was tech overpowered in Mass Effect?

[quote]
Or disabling 5 enemies long enough to kill them with singularity?
[quote]
I could still do this now.They just dont fly in the air after their protection is gone.Also this is the sense of a crowd control ability.There is nothing wrong about that.Or should adepts only be inferior soldiers???

Or instakilling charging krogan with throw off a cliff?

[quote]
 Later in the game it got better, but the first battlemaster at level 12 or so was like 20 tries and more than 1 hour to take down

[/quote]

Then you made something terribly wrong.

[Tirigon]

tonnactus wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

@ Homey: Well, the way I see it is that, for combat, at least when done like in ME, is just better as shooter.

if it was done like in DAO only with futuristic weapons that would be different, but as it is the ME1 combat is just "a little of both, but neither part good".

I miss reasons.Weapons without ammo,only overheat. Futuristic.Biotics.Futuristic.
Now we have almost the junk that every other shooter has.Ammo and cover boxes instead using  a tree/stones for cover and overheating weapons.

I was referring to the combat mechanics. Like, when you shoot you have to aim like in a shooter, but you need accuracy rating and skill in that weapon to hit. Imo that sucks.

I want it in one of the extremes: Either the player´s skill and a little bit of luck (since in reality not every shot hits where you aimed), but really only a little, determine your chance to hit (like in every shooter I know) or it´s all about accuracy rating. But then aiming shouldn´t be required but happen like archery in DAO

[TJSolo]

tonnactus wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

@ Homey: Well, the way I see it is that, for combat, at least when done like in ME, is just better as shooter.

if it was done like in DAO only with futuristic weapons that would be different, but as it is the ME1 combat is just "a little of both, but neither part good".

I miss reasons.Weapons without ammo,only overheat. Futuristic.Biotics.Futuristic.
Now we have almost the junk that every other shooter has.Ammo and cover boxes instead using  a tree/stones for cover and overheating weapons.

People are not able to differentiate using guns for combat versus the shooter genre. Then deem every game that implements gun combat must conform to current favorite mechanics.

[Tirigon]

tonnactus wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

What about permadisabling a geth-colossus with Liara + Adept and lift maxed?

So why this a problem?I could also take a team with tali,garrus and an engineer/infiltrator and permasabotage him. So was tech overpowered in Mass Effect?

Maybe. Did never try engineer, I played Adept and soldier, so I can´t tell.

Or disabling 5 enemies long enough to kill them with singularity?

I could still do this now.They just dont fly in the air after their protection is gone.Also this is the sense of a crowd control ability.There is nothing wrong about that.Or should adepts only be inferior soldiers???

You can´t disable a whole enemy team with a single biotic in ME2.  Most biotics (like Pull, throw etc...) don´t work at all unless the defenses are down.

Modifié par Tirigon, 26 avril 2010 - 07:57 .

[Tirigon]

TJSolo wrote...


People are not able to differentiate using guns for combat versus the shooter genre. Then deem every game that implements gun combat must conform to current favorite mechanics.

No, actually I don´t even like Shooters - at least not the likes of Call of Duty, Counterstrike etc...

But I rather have a good shooter than a bad hybrid.