23 réponses à ce sujet

[EthrenDiak]

Soldiers, by definition, are the combat specialists of Mass Effect. They can use almost every weapon, walk and talk like a tank, and make the Matrix guys look slow. 

That said, why the hell am I holding a pistol instead of a submachine gun? Don't get me wrong, I love pistols, especially the M-3 Predator. However, given a choice between the M-6 Carnifex or the M-9 Tempest, I'd pick the Tempest any day.  It's got a larger clip size, larger ammo reserve, and more effective in-close than the pistol. As a back-up weapon, which is what I believe they were intended for, the SMG would serve far better than the pistol.

Opinions, anyone? 

[cruc1al]

The SMG is not a sidearm. It's much bulkier. It's sensible for a soldier to have a small gun that can be used effectively at a longer range than SMG, and that works quite well against all protection types.

[Adokat]

The Carnifex is significantly better in an anti-armor role than smgs. The smg and assault rifles sort of overlap in their functions, making the smg kind of redundant for a soldier.

[Average Gatsby]

Because your assault rifle already has a shield penetration advantage.



You would likely never use the tempest instead of any of the AR's. The pistol and SMG aren't back up weapons. They are weapons for a specific purpose. The carnifex can kill harbinger faster than the vindicator, because of its armor penetration power. The SMG is the engineer/adept/sentinels shield penetration weapon. There are no "back up" weapons. Even as a soldier, you shouldn't just be using your AR when you have the sniper and shotgun.

[Atmosfear3]

Why would you need an SMG if you have an assault rifle as a soldier?



Besides, the smg and pistol serves two entirely different functions in-game. One is anti-shield, the other is anti-armor.

[Kronner]

SMG is useless when you have AR.

[cruc1al]

Kronner wrote...

SMG is useless when you have AR.

Well at close range a fully upgraded Tempest is probably better at taking down shields than a fully upgraded Vindicator. So if you're not using Vindicator, Tempest would be especially useful in some situations. Of course that all depends on how good you're at keeping the full-auto of tempest steady.

[Average Gatsby]

cruc1al wrote...

Kronner wrote...

SMG is useless when you have AR.

Well at close range a fully upgraded Tempest is probably better at taking down shields than a fully upgraded Vindicator. So if you're not using Vindicator, Tempest would be especially useful in some situations. Of course that all depends on how good you're at keeping the full-auto of tempest steady.

For a soldier that has shotguns though, wouldn't using a shotgun be superior to both? It seems by the time you get into range to be able to full auto the tempest, your in shotgun range.

[cruc1al]

Average Gatsby wrote...

cruc1al wrote...

Kronner wrote...

SMG is useless when you have AR.

Well at close range a fully upgraded Tempest is probably better at taking down shields than a fully upgraded Vindicator. So if you're not using Vindicator, Tempest would be especially useful in some situations. Of course that all depends on how good you're at keeping the full-auto of tempest steady.

For a soldier that has shotguns though, wouldn't using a shotgun be superior to both? It seems by the time you get into range to be able to full auto the tempest, your in shotgun range.

Yep that's probably true.

[implodinggoat]

cruc1al wrote...

The SMG is not a sidearm. It's much bulkier. It's sensible for a soldier to have a small gun that can be used effectively at a longer range than SMG, and that works quite well against all protection types.

1:  The SMG's in Mass Effect are quite small (the Shuriken is the same size as a pistol) and fold up to the size of a pistol.  In addition they equip to the same spot on the player's hip as pistols do.

2:  The Assault Rifle already works equally well against all protection types (more so than the pistol).

As to the pistol being effective at range, it depends on what gun you're using.  If you're using the very innacurate Revenant than having a moderately accurate Carnifex makes sense.  However if you prefer the extremely accurate Vindicator as I do then having a Tempest would be a far better option since the main downsides of the Vindicator are its scarce ammo and its lack of a fully automatic setting, which are both strengths of the Tempest.

Aside from that I'm a soldier damn it! I should be able to use whatever gun I damn well please!

[implodinggoat]

Kronner wrote...

SMG is useless when you have AR.

Not if you use the Vindicator.  Having a fully automatic at your disposal can be useful when you're getting mobbed by a lot of husks or varren, or what not.

Aside from that pulling out a full auto from time to time mixes things up and keeps things fun.  If you really specialize with the Vindicator as I do you rarely get to use a fully auto and after a while you miss being able to just spray and let loose (particularly if you tend to pick the Widow over the Revenant as I do).

[cruc1al]

implodinggoat wrote...

cruc1al wrote...

The SMG is not a sidearm. It's much bulkier. It's sensible for a soldier to have a small gun that can be used effectively at a longer range than SMG, and that works quite well against all protection types.

1:  The SMG's in Mass Effect are quite small (the Shuriken is the same size as a pistol) and fold up to the size of a pistol.  In addition they equip to the same spot on the player's hip as pistols do.

2:  The Assault Rifle already works equally well against all protection types (more so than the pistol).

As to the pistol being effective at range, it depends on what gun you're using.  If you're using the very innacurate Revenant than having a moderately accurate Carnifex makes sense.  However if you prefer the extremely accurate Vindicator as I do then having a Tempest would be a far better option since the main downsides of the Vindicator are its scarce ammo and its lack of a fully automatic setting, which are both strengths of the Tempest.

Aside from that I'm a soldier damn it! I should be able to use whatever gun I damn well please!

What I meant by SMG not being a sidearm was that it's not a backup weapon. It has a very specific use: short range, especially against shields. A backup weapon should be judged on its own merits, not based on how well it fits the rest of your loadout. Ideally you only need to use a backup weapon as a backup when you're unable to use your other weapons. This is exactly what a heavy pistol like predator is good for, since it doesn't sacrifice performance in one situation over performance in another. This might not make sense from a gameplay point of view, but it's still realistic.

Modifié par cruc1al, 25 mars 2010 - 11:26 .

[implodinggoat]

cruc1al wrote...

implodinggoat wrote...

cruc1al wrote...

The SMG is not a sidearm. It's much bulkier. It's sensible for a soldier to have a small gun that can be used effectively at a longer range than SMG, and that works quite well against all protection types.

1:  The SMG's in Mass Effect are quite small (the Shuriken is the same size as a pistol) and fold up to the size of a pistol.  In addition they equip to the same spot on the player's hip as pistols do.

2:  The Assault Rifle already works equally well against all protection types (more so than the pistol).

As to the pistol being effective at range, it depends on what gun you're using.  If you're using the very innacurate Revenant than having a moderately accurate Carnifex makes sense.  However if you prefer the extremely accurate Vindicator as I do then having a Tempest would be a far better option since the main downsides of the Vindicator are its scarce ammo and its lack of a fully automatic setting, which are both strengths of the Tempest.

Aside from that I'm a soldier damn it! I should be able to use whatever gun I damn well please!

What I meant by SMG not being a sidearm was that it's not a backup weapon. It has a very specific use: short range, especially against shields. A backup weapon should be judged on its own merits, not based on how well it fits the rest of your loadout. Ideally you only need to use a backup weapon as a backup when you're unable to use your other weapons. This is exactly what a heavy pistol like predator is good for, since it doesn't sacrifice performance in one situation over performance in another. This might not make sense from a gameplay point of view, but it's still realistic.

In the real world yes; but this is a videogame.   Real soldiers don't run around with 5 weapons strapped to them they generally equip with their main armament (an assault rifle, or sniper rifle for example) and a sidearm which is intended to be used in emergencies if their gun jams or runs out of ammo (or possibly if a sniper is ambushed at a range where his rifle is ineffective).   However; this is a videogame where your weapons never jam and where the battlefield is littered with ammunition for whatever weapon you might be carrying.

Aside from that the compatibility with one's weapon loadout is a very legitimate concern for soldiers in the real world.  Indeed, an SMG is often implemented as a sidearm for modern soldiers carrying more specialized weapons (sniper rifles, missile launchers, shotguns, etc.).

But aside from that this is a videogame and all that matters in a videogame is that the weapon is fun and useful to the player.   By those standards, the SMG is sometimes a better choice than the pistol, particularly for a player using the Vindicator (while the pistol is more effective for the other Assault Rifles).

I just think the game should give you the option to use an SMG or a pistol as your side arm so that the player could choose which they prefer.   I think the  best solution would be to simply allow a soldier to equip either a pistol or an SMG to the slot where they currently equip their pistol as opposed to adding an additional weapon slot.  If this were the case you could still use the pistol if you wanted; but I would still be able to play on my terms and have access to the Tempest as my side arm.

[Tlazolteotl]

Everyone else has a pistol and an SMG, though. It's the soldier that's weird.

[EthrenDiak]

When I play as a Soldier, the only time I use my Pistol is on the first level, or when my Sniper Rifle and Assault Rifle are almost out of ammo. Also, because of the ease with which I can headshot during Adrenaline Rush, I almost always use the Vindicator.  

That's why I'd prefer an SMG to a Pistol, and why I consider it a backup weapon. 

I realize that, as it stands, the SMG is meant to be the main armament for most of the other classes, serving in lieu of the Assault Rifle. However, I believe that it is sufficently different enough (and the playstyles)  that the SMG would compliment the Soldiers', arsenals better than the Pistol. 

Hopefully, that clears up my OP. Otherwise, just ignore my babbling. 

[casedawgz]

cruc1al wrote...

Average Gatsby wrote...

cruc1al wrote...

Kronner wrote...

SMG is useless when you have AR.

Well at close range a fully upgraded Tempest is probably better at taking down shields than a fully upgraded Vindicator. So if you're not using Vindicator, Tempest would be especially useful in some situations. Of course that all depends on how good you're at keeping the full-auto of tempest steady.

For a soldier that has shotguns though, wouldn't using a shotgun be superior to both? It seems by the time you get into range to be able to full auto the tempest, your in shotgun range.

Yep that's probably true.

IDK, shotguns seem to suck in ME2. I ran a soldier through Insanity and can count on one hand the number of shotgun kills I made. Even on my Vanguard, I tend to favor the Tempest in CQC over the shotty.

[cruc1al]

implodinggoat wrote...

Aside from that the compatibility with one's weapon loadout is a very legitimate concern for soldiers in the real world.  Indeed, an SMG is often implemented as a sidearm for modern soldiers carrying more specialized weapons (sniper rifles, missile launchers, shotguns, etc.).

If you have an SMG as a sidearm, it's not a backup weapon. It's your primary weapon in some situations. It's not like if your sniper rifle or missile launcher surprisingly 'jams' or something that you switch to SMG. In a situation where you would actually use a sniper rifle or a missile launcher, an SMG is useless. That's not to say the pistol wouldn't be useless, but in such a loadout the pistol wouldn't be a backup weapon either, but a primary weapon in a situation where the sniper/missile is not useful. Of course since an SMG is better at close quarters than the pistol, you'd have the SMG as a side arm. I wouldn't be surprised though if snipers or such carried both an SMG and a pistol.

Modifié par cruc1al, 26 mars 2010 - 02:57 .

[cruc1al]

On topic however, I think the heavy pistol (carnifex) is more useful for the soldier than an smg would be, because it's your best anti-armor weapon at close range.

[d3c0yBoY]

Close range = AR with Eviscerator
*1 shot mobs most of the time, if not, throw a melee to finish the job, vanguard style.

Mid range = Assault Rifle

Long Range = Viper
*If you have the Revenant, you could actually snipe with control burst.

Modifié par d3c0yBoY, 26 mars 2010 - 03:03 .

[Doctor_Jackstraw]

it WOULD be neat if soldiers had smg and pistol in the same slot when picking a loadout. (Pistol OR smg) 5 weapons is probably a coding limitation...

[implodinggoat]

casedawgz wrote...

IDK, shotguns seem to suck in ME2. I ran a soldier through Insanity and can count on one hand the number of shotgun kills I made. Even on my Vanguard, I tend to favor the Tempest in CQC over the shotty.

Shotguns do a ton of damage although you have to get really close to use them which is easy for the Vanguard; but doesn't compliment the soldier's style as well.  In ME1 the shotty had a much better range on it; but in ME2 its range is so limited it functions more like a melee weapon.  The Eviscerator's better range makes it much more viable for the soldier although I still use the shotgun far less frequently than my assault rifle or my sniper rifle.   That said if you're getting overrun and you're not willing and/or able to make a tactical retreat it can be devestating against any enemy who gets too close for comfort.   Learning when to use the shotty is particularly important if you specialize with the Vindicator since it's ammo is so limited and its semi automatic fire makes it less effective at close range.  Having a Vindicator and an SMG would still be nice though since the SMG is effective in situations where you need to lay down fire and don't have time to carefully aim the Vindicator.   

If you're rolling with the Revenant though the shotgun is pretty useless since the time it takes to switch to the shotty is time you could be using to empty a couple dozen rounds into anyone close to you.   The Revenant also renders the SMG redundant since its innaccuracy makes it behave like a devestatingly powerful Tempest SMG.  The pistol on the other hand actually becomes useful when you're sporting the Revenant since its nice to have a fairly accurate scopeless weapon to compliment your Revenant.

[implodinggoat]

Doctor_Jackstraw wrote...

it WOULD be neat if soldiers had smg and pistol in the same slot when picking a loadout. (Pistol OR smg) 5 weapons is probably a coding limitation...

More of an interface limitation since they would have to add room to the weapon wheel.  Putting them in the same slot shouldn't be a problem though, particularly since pistols and SMGs both equip to the same spot on the player's hip.

[implodinggoat]

cruc1al wrote...

implodinggoat wrote...

Aside from that the compatibility with one's weapon loadout is a very legitimate concern for soldiers in the real world.  Indeed, an SMG is often implemented as a sidearm for modern soldiers carrying more specialized weapons (sniper rifles, missile launchers, shotguns, etc.).

If you have an SMG as a sidearm, it's not a backup weapon. It's your primary weapon in some situations. It's not like if your sniper rifle or missile launcher surprisingly 'jams' or something that you switch to SMG. In a situation where you would actually use a sniper rifle or a missile launcher, an SMG is useless. That's not to say the pistol wouldn't be useless, but in such a loadout the pistol wouldn't be a backup weapon either, but a primary weapon in a situation where the sniper/missile is not useful. Of course since an SMG is better at close quarters than the pistol, you'd have the SMG as a side arm. I wouldn't be surprised though if snipers or such carried both an SMG and a pistol.

A sniper or heavy weapon specialist (or a soldier working with a shotgun) probably would carry both since a pistol doesn't add a lot of weight.  In contemporary combat a pistol is really considered a weapon that you will hopefully never use since its there mainly as a backup for your main weapon (likewise for a combat knife although it also has less violent and more utilitarian uses).   In particular the Italian made 9mm Beretta that American troops and NATO troops now carry is clearly not meant to be used in combat since it lacks the power to effectively take down multiple targets (as opposed to the far superior American made Colt .45 that it replaced; but I digress).