Eh, I see the pros and cons of the system. But it was still hella retarded that my Infiltrator, the sniper class, could only kill about 5 enemies before I was forced to abandon the nature of the class and go running in with a machine gun like a soldier. And on the other end of the spectrum, by the end of the game I was solely using the machine gun because with its 700 round clip, I never ran out of ammo ever again.
I hope they can find some sort of middle ground between each system for ME3.
Honestly the ammo system was stupid, as soon as I had the AR I only used it, and before I had it I simply wished I had it for all situations. Thermal clips are ridiculously annoying, cooling from overheated made way more sense and was much more fun. Cooling from overheat makes for tension during fights while you take cover, ammo clips makes for frustration after fights were you go "Shit, where are those clips, fucking geth, not dropping any clips. You invented the worthless things" then after some wasted time you find them and go to the next fight with full ammo.
tbloxham on
"That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
0
ChaosHatHop, hop, hop, HA!Trick of the lightRegistered Userregular
The quote tree tells me that you are working on the base assumption that Biowares decisions are predicated on mainstreaming things, not why it is most likely that this is actually the case.
The quote tree also suggests that you are working under the core assumption that "like shooters = bad"
BD is missing the point. Yes, you could balance overheating to work like clips based on shots per second and shit like that, but it's missing the whole point of the affair: infinite ammo is bad for balancing. Also, you're suggesting that the overheat mechanic should work exactly the same as the clip mechanic, but with the meter instead of the non ambiguous shot count? That seems like different just for the sake of being different.
Yes. The game is way, way better because of this. Perfect example: the infiltrator. Because ammo and shots are limited on sniper rifles, the infiltrator is allowed to deal a fuckton of damage out of it and carve a unique sniping niche out of the game relative to any other class that can pick up sniper rifles (or learn to). Even on the very hardest difficulties, with proper ammo mods the infiltrator can one shot most non boss type enemies with a headshot. That simply isn't balanced when you have infinity shots. When you have ten shots and have to pick and call them carefully, then it becomes a gameplay decision to use them, and a very satisfying one. Furthermore, this forces the player to work on the other aspects of the infiltrator's gameplay, namely the up close gunning and retreat tactics conferred by the cloak. Would ANYONE have even bothered doing anything else but headshotting every mob in the game slowly given infinite ammo?
Or the adept, divorced of the godlike pistol option for damage gets more damaging abilities. Push and pull slam enemies into barricades for damage, warp combines with other abilities for massive damage. You couldn't have that with a ridiculous pistol in the last game, because then the adept becomes good at way too many things too fast, crowd control and damage output. This is incidentally why there is a global cooldown on abilities now.
The game is better for the restrictions. A good analogy if you're familiar with it would be looking at Starcraft with infinite resources or Magic: The Gathering with infinite mana. It just becomes ridiculous. Resource management should be a part of games. It forces the player to make real gameplay choices.
If only I didn't want to blind everyone with a wall of lime...
Mordin's death is not a glitch or bug. I believe that when people are surprised with Mordin's death, it's during the "Hold the Line" time where you leave crew behind as you and two squad mates move onward. Tech had their moment in the sun with the tunnel infiltration. A biotic is key for the protective bubble. The Hold the Line sequence is time for your soldier types to do their best.
Basically you want your best DEFENDERS to hold the line. Don't think about offensive solo strikers. Think about the guys that can dig down and hold a position with moxie. You want them to hold the line.
Under the hood, each character has a "hole the line" score, which gets a bonus if the character is loyal. Characters like Mordin, Jack and Tali are squishy and not exoeruenced with bunkering down and holding out for an extended period of time. Characters like Grunt and Zaeed are tanks who thrive on this type of work. The score is tallied for all the team members that are holding the line, and the number of survivors are calculated. If people are to die, the non-loyals squishies go first through the list to the loyal tanks. Alas, I think Mordin is at the head of the death list. Some characters can't survive without help even if they are loyal. Others can survive even if not loyal.
Here are some examples for the group holding the line:
Loyal Mordin by himself: He can't hold the line by himself. He dies.
Non-loyal Grunt by himself: Grunt lives. He hunkers down and gets the job done, and doesn't have to worry about helping any one else.
Loyal Mordin and non-Loyal Grunt: Grunt dies, but Mordin lives. Grunt is able to hold the line but goofs up helping Mordin... he was just too aggressive without his right of passage.
Loyal Mordin and Loyal Grunt: They both live.
Note it is possible to get non-loyal henchmen to survive through the end game with the proper group holding the line.
So what is a good strategy? Send back a loyal squishy with the crew, like Mordin or Tali. Leave your defensive bad asses to hold the line (hmmm, Garrus defended a base all by himself to an extended period of time....) and take your loyal offensive favorites with you to the end.
As for saving Kelly and the crew, you just need to make sure you go through the Omega-4 relay right after the crew is taken, and make sure you send a loyal squad mate back as an escort.
Cherrn on
All creature will die and all the things will be broken. That's the law of samurai.
The quote tree tells me that you are working on the base assumption that Biowares decisions are predicated on mainstreaming things, not why it is most likely that this is actually the case.
The quote tree also suggests that you are working under the core assumption that "like shooters = bad"
BD is missing the point. Yes, you could balance overheating to work like clips based on shots per second and shit like that, but it's missing the whole point of the affair: infinite ammo is bad for balancing. Also, you're suggesting that the overheat mechanic should work exactly the same as the clip mechanic, but with the meter instead of the non ambiguous shot count? That seems like different just for the sake of being different.
I wasn't the one who made it part of the lore in ME1.
Mordin's death is not a glitch or bug. I believe that when people are surprised with Mordin's death, it's during the "Hold the Line" time where you leave crew behind as you and two squad mates move onward. Tech had their moment in the sun with the tunnel infiltration. A biotic is key for the protective bubble. The Hold the Line sequence is time for your soldier types to do their best.
Basically you want your best DEFENDERS to hold the line. Don't think about offensive solo strikers. Think about the guys that can dig down and hold a position with moxie. You want them to hold the line.
Under the hood, each character has a "hole the line" score, which gets a bonus if the character is loyal. Characters like Mordin, Jack and Tali are squishy and not exoeruenced with bunkering down and holding out for an extended period of time. Characters like Grunt and Zaeed are tanks who thrive on this type of work. The score is tallied for all the team members that are holding the line, and the number of survivors are calculated. If people are to die, the non-loyals squishies go first through the list to the loyal tanks. Alas, I think Mordin is at the head of the death list. Some characters can't survive without help even if they are loyal. Others can survive even if not loyal.
Here are some examples for the group holding the line:
Loyal Mordin by himself: He can't hold the line by himself. He dies.
Non-loyal Grunt by himself: Grunt lives. He hunkers down and gets the job done, and doesn't have to worry about helping any one else.
Loyal Mordin and non-Loyal Grunt: Grunt dies, but Mordin lives. Grunt is able to hold the line but goofs up helping Mordin... he was just too aggressive without his right of passage.
Loyal Mordin and Loyal Grunt: They both live.
Note it is possible to get non-loyal henchmen to survive through the end game with the proper group holding the line.
So what is a good strategy? Send back a loyal squishy with the crew, like Mordin or Tali. Leave your defensive bad asses to hold the line (hmmm, Garrus defended a base all by himself to an extended period of time....) and take your loyal offensive favorites with you to the end.
As for saving Kelly and the crew, you just need to make sure you go through the Omega-4 relay right after the crew is taken, and make sure you send a loyal squad mate back as an escort.
Already posted, and for the fucking love of christ, spoiler it like the last person who quoted it did.
The quote tree tells me that you are working on the base assumption that Biowares decisions are predicated on mainstreaming things, not why it is most likely that this is actually the case.
The quote tree also suggests that you are working under the core assumption that "like shooters = bad"
BD is missing the point. Yes, you could balance overheating to work like clips based on shots per second and shit like that, but it's missing the whole point of the affair: infinite ammo is bad for balancing. Also, you're suggesting that the overheat mechanic should work exactly the same as the clip mechanic, but with the meter instead of the non ambiguous shot count? That seems like different just for the sake of being different.
I wasn't the one who made it part of the lore in ME1.
Aaand now we're back to why you really care, I'd guess.
The quote tree tells me that you are working on the base assumption that Biowares decisions are predicated on mainstreaming things, not why it is most likely that this is actually the case.
The quote tree also suggests that you are working under the core assumption that "like shooters = bad"
BD is missing the point. Yes, you could balance overheating to work like clips based on shots per second and shit like that, but it's missing the whole point of the affair: infinite ammo is bad for balancing. Also, you're suggesting that the overheat mechanic should work exactly the same as the clip mechanic, but with the meter instead of the non ambiguous shot count? That seems like different just for the sake of being different.
But nothing gets "balanced out" when they give you all the ammo clips you need anyhow. So they're just making you go find clips for the sake of inconvenience, because that's how all the other shooters do it.
The quote tree tells me that you are working on the base assumption that Biowares decisions are predicated on mainstreaming things, not why it is most likely that this is actually the case.
The quote tree also suggests that you are working under the core assumption that "like shooters = bad"
BD is missing the point. Yes, you could balance overheating to work like clips based on shots per second and shit like that, but it's missing the whole point of the affair: infinite ammo is bad for balancing. Also, you're suggesting that the overheat mechanic should work exactly the same as the clip mechanic, but with the meter instead of the non ambiguous shot count? That seems like different just for the sake of being different.
I wasn't the one who made it part of the lore in ME1.
Aaand now we're back to why you really care, I'd guess.
Yes, I don't believe I ever claimed otherwise.
BlackDove on
0
ChaosHatHop, hop, hop, HA!Trick of the lightRegistered Userregular
The quote tree tells me that you are working on the base assumption that Biowares decisions are predicated on mainstreaming things, not why it is most likely that this is actually the case.
The quote tree also suggests that you are working under the core assumption that "like shooters = bad"
BD is missing the point. Yes, you could balance overheating to work like clips based on shots per second and shit like that, but it's missing the whole point of the affair: infinite ammo is bad for balancing. Also, you're suggesting that the overheat mechanic should work exactly the same as the clip mechanic, but with the meter instead of the non ambiguous shot count? That seems like different just for the sake of being different.
I wasn't the one who made it part of the lore in ME1.
That line implies that you understand and acknowledge WHY the way it is, but insist that it should be the old way just because it was the way it used to be, which is the height of god damn silly goosery that I don't know what to say.
There's even a plausible in world explanation for why ammo clips make sense. How long did guns take to cooldown from overheat in the old game? Five seconds? A soldier can reload much, MUCH faster than that and be back to shooting. Or, if your complaint is that the soldier could just shoot more carefully without the gun reheating, that's at the cost of shots fired downfield. Or, if your complaint is back to finite ammo, we know exactly why that won't work.
Yes, in universe it would make sense if you could use the overheating system when out of ammo. Mechanically, it's a bad idea.
Having to make decisions about who was important enough for a handcannon or sniper rifle bullet and who wasn't in my Insanity playthrough was infinitely more interesting than just needing to sit back and wait for things to cool off. The lore is enjoyable, but there's no need to be a silly goose about it.
I just wish we didn't have to play round and round the merry go round with tangential silly arguments when you could just say "I care about lore consistency first and foremost and that's just my thing" and we could be done with it.
I just wish we didn't have to play round and round the merry go round with tangential silly arguments when you could just say "I care about lore consistency first and foremost and that's just my thing" and we could be done with it.
The cycle must continue. The arguments are the vanguard of your destruction.
Hylianbunny on
0
ChaosHatHop, hop, hop, HA!Trick of the lightRegistered Userregular
The quote tree tells me that you are working on the base assumption that Biowares decisions are predicated on mainstreaming things, not why it is most likely that this is actually the case.
The quote tree also suggests that you are working under the core assumption that "like shooters = bad"
BD is missing the point. Yes, you could balance overheating to work like clips based on shots per second and shit like that, but it's missing the whole point of the affair: infinite ammo is bad for balancing. Also, you're suggesting that the overheat mechanic should work exactly the same as the clip mechanic, but with the meter instead of the non ambiguous shot count? That seems like different just for the sake of being different.
But nothing gets "balanced out" when they give you all the ammo clips you need anyhow. So they're just making you go find clips for the sake of inconvenience, because that's how all the other shooters do it.
You don't really have all the clips you need. You probably have all the clips you need for a given encounter with the ability to rearm in between them. I know on my infiltrator I was always low/careful with my sniper rifle (and sometimes hand cannon) ammo consumption, handcannon ammo on my adept, and shotgun ammo with my vanguard. You generally have enough ammo to start fights.
This was probably obvious to everyone, but I just noticed it based on the way the game concluded.
The color of the star behind TIM in the last cutscene is based only on your decision to save/destroy the collector base.
I spent both ME1 and ME2 as an 80/20 Renegade, and in ME2 I was probably even worse. That meant giving the "fuck you" to everybody, including Cerberus. So I do what any good Renegade would do, blew that Collector monstrosity sky high and told TIM to fuck off. So at the end, I got the blue sun in the background.
ME3 should be pretty interesting. My Renegade Shep has literally alienated everybody.
The quote tree tells me that you are working on the base assumption that Biowares decisions are predicated on mainstreaming things, not why it is most likely that this is actually the case.
The quote tree also suggests that you are working under the core assumption that "like shooters = bad"
BD is missing the point. Yes, you could balance overheating to work like clips based on shots per second and shit like that, but it's missing the whole point of the affair: infinite ammo is bad for balancing. Also, you're suggesting that the overheat mechanic should work exactly the same as the clip mechanic, but with the meter instead of the non ambiguous shot count? That seems like different just for the sake of being different.
But nothing gets "balanced out" when they give you all the ammo clips you need anyhow. So they're just making you go find clips for the sake of inconvenience, because that's how all the other shooters do it.
Are you playing on Normal or Casual? I can see how ammo might be completely effortless there maybe
Bioware dude explaining the ins and outs of the final mission. Interesting info regarding Mordin and defense.
Great post. After you play the Suicide Mission a couple of times and experiment with squad assignments, you begin to infer most of what he wrote.
Except
that in my second play-through the only non-loyal person was Miranda, and she still got offed defending the door despite a "correct" defensive/offensive disposition. I took that to mean that non-loyal teammates are always going to die in the Suicide Mission one way or the other.
The quote tree tells me that you are working on the base assumption that Biowares decisions are predicated on mainstreaming things, not why it is most likely that this is actually the case.
The quote tree also suggests that you are working under the core assumption that "like shooters = bad"
BD is missing the point. Yes, you could balance overheating to work like clips based on shots per second and shit like that, but it's missing the whole point of the affair: infinite ammo is bad for balancing. Also, you're suggesting that the overheat mechanic should work exactly the same as the clip mechanic, but with the meter instead of the non ambiguous shot count? That seems like different just for the sake of being different.
But nothing gets "balanced out" when they give you all the ammo clips you need anyhow. So they're just making you go find clips for the sake of inconvenience, because that's how all the other shooters do it.
Are you playing on Normal or Casual? I can see how ammo might be completely effortless there maybe
This was probably obvious to everyone, but I just noticed it based on the way the game concluded.
The color of the star behind TIM in the last cutscene is based only on your decision to save/destroy the collector base.
I spent both ME1 and ME2 as an 80/20 Renegade, and in ME2 I was probably even worse. That meant giving the "fuck you" to everybody, including Cerberus. So I do what any good Renegade would do, blew that Collector monstrosity sky high and told TIM to fuck off. So at the end, I got the blue sun in the background.
ME3 should be pretty interesting. My Renegade Shep has literally alienated everybody.
The funny thing is
Paragon Shep pretty much alienates everyone, too.
What?
Paragon Shep just alienates The Illusive Man. Everyone on the crew unanimously agree that blowing it up was righteous, bro
Cherrn on
All creature will die and all the things will be broken. That's the law of samurai.
0
GoodKingJayIIIThey wanna get mygold on the ceilingRegistered Userregular
edited February 2010
Do people really find they have ammo problems? Even on Insanity, ammo is never an issue. Sure, I might have to use other guns in the middle of a fight, but afterward I'm always back up to full.
Mechanically, I understand the change based on reasons stated above. I'm a little unhappy with the retcon required to implement it, but you can't have it both ways.
The way I look at it, we've now got a helluva interactive story with solid, tense game play. Battles in ME1 felt like monotonous breaks between the talking. Now I enjoy both.
Do people really find they have ammo problems? Even on Insanity, I do not find myself with ammo problems. Sure, I might have to use other guns in the middle of a fight, but afterward I'm always back up to full.
The only time I ever had problems with ammo on Insanity were at the very end of a long, protracted battle, and all it tended to do was make things more exciting.
Hylianbunny on
0
ChaosHatHop, hop, hop, HA!Trick of the lightRegistered Userregular
The quote tree tells me that you are working on the base assumption that Biowares decisions are predicated on mainstreaming things, not why it is most likely that this is actually the case.
The quote tree also suggests that you are working under the core assumption that "like shooters = bad"
BD is missing the point. Yes, you could balance overheating to work like clips based on shots per second and shit like that, but it's missing the whole point of the affair: infinite ammo is bad for balancing. Also, you're suggesting that the overheat mechanic should work exactly the same as the clip mechanic, but with the meter instead of the non ambiguous shot count? That seems like different just for the sake of being different.
But nothing gets "balanced out" when they give you all the ammo clips you need anyhow. So they're just making you go find clips for the sake of inconvenience, because that's how all the other shooters do it.
Are you playing on Normal or Casual? I can see how ammo might be completely effortless there maybe
I dunno, I'm only playing on veteran with my vanguard and I'm still low on shotgun ammo all the time. And I can't imagine infiltrators being better on ammo since the sniper is a headshot all the time.
Off the top of my head, the only class that wouldn't really have ammo problems is the soldiers, and that seems a lot more like a class perk than anything else.
The quote tree tells me that you are working on the base assumption that Biowares decisions are predicated on mainstreaming things, not why it is most likely that this is actually the case.
The quote tree also suggests that you are working under the core assumption that "like shooters = bad"
BD is missing the point. Yes, you could balance overheating to work like clips based on shots per second and shit like that, but it's missing the whole point of the affair: infinite ammo is bad for balancing. Also, you're suggesting that the overheat mechanic should work exactly the same as the clip mechanic, but with the meter instead of the non ambiguous shot count? That seems like different just for the sake of being different.
I wasn't the one who made it part of the lore in ME1.
That line implies that you understand and acknowledge WHY the way it is, but insist that it should be the old way just because it was the way it used to be, which is the height of god damn silly goosery that I don't know what to say.
There's even a plausible in world explanation for why ammo clips make sense. How long did guns take to cooldown from overheat in the old game? Five seconds? A soldier can reload much, MUCH faster than that and be back to shooting. Or, if your complaint is that the soldier could just shoot more carefully without the gun reheating, that's at the cost of shots fired downfield. Or, if your complaint is back to finite ammo, we know exactly why that won't work.
Yes, in universe it would make sense if you could use the overheating system when out of ammo. Mechanically, it's a bad idea.
There isn't, and it crosses with events, just like I said in the spoiler that started all of this.
Also note: The reason I'm ignoring your posts is because you're factually wrong about everything, due to the fact that balance itself has nothing to do with finite or infinite ammo. Battles can be balanced whichever way possible, and while everything you're saying is true, it also doesn't apply whatsoever to the discussion of differing gameplay systems.
Ammo or no ammo has nothing to do with effectiveness of weapons or general progression through combat in a more satisfying manner. Simply balancing the overload system can yield the exact same results, even with the "infinite" system.
I'm arguing something else entirely here, unrelated to how or why you think ammo rules so much.
I get it, ME2 is a better game. Yes, I think so too. Not related to the ammo topic though.
But nothing gets "balanced out" when they give you all the ammo clips you need anyhow. So they're just making you go find clips for the sake of inconvenience, because that's how all the other shooters do it.
Except that they don't give you all the ammo clips you need, the ammo system forces you to conserve low-ammo weapons like the mantis and carnifex. This is especially true on the higher difficulty levels, when you also have to worry about running out of cover to pick up ammo more.
Do people really find they have ammo problems? Even on Insanity, I do not find myself with ammo problems. Sure, I might have to use other guns in the middle of a fight, but afterward I'm always back up to full.
I'm fine with this
it doesn't need to be a survival horror, here's six bullets thing
just enough that sitting in the rear with a Widow and killing every motherfucker in the room is not a completely viable strategy
Do people really find they have ammo problems? Even on Insanity, ammo is never an issue. Sure, I might have to use other guns in the middle of a fight, but afterward I'm always back up to full.
Mechanically, I understand the change based on reasons stated above. I'm a little unhappy with the retcon required to implement it, but you can't have it both ways.
The way I look at it, we've now got a helluva interactive story with solid, tense game play. Battles in ME1 felt like monotonous breaks between the talking. Now I enjoy both.
I don't have ammo problems, so much as ammo inconvenience. I hate having to scrounge around between fights to restock. It messes with my flow.
TomInKorea on
0
FairchildRabbit used short words that were easy to understand, like "Hello Pooh, how about Lunch ?"Registered Userregular
Paragon Shep just alienates The Illusive Man. Everyone on the crew unanimously agree that blowing it up was righteous, bro
Durn tootin'. Everyone except
the Illusive Man loved my Paragon at the end. Even that goofy volus whom I saved from attacking the Breasticar. I just know that guy is going to show up as a squad member in ME3.
Do people really find they have ammo problems? Even on Insanity, I do not find myself with ammo problems. Sure, I might have to use other guns in the middle of a fight, but afterward I'm always back up to full.
I'm fine with this
it doesn't need to be a survival horror, here's six bullets thing
just enough that sitting in the rear with a Widow and killing every motherfucker in the room is not a completely viable strategy
Yeah, this is exactly right. People are getting the fact that they don't run out of ammo confused with thinking it has no effect on how the game is played. This is wrong, you may not think about it but the ammo system does force you to use different weapons, that's all it needs to do.
If it wasn't the way it is, there'd be no reason to not use the Carnifex or Mantis/Widow all the time.
I dunno, I'm only playing on veteran with my vanguard and I'm still low on shotgun ammo all the time. And I can't imagine infiltrators being better on ammo since the sniper is a headshot all the time.
Off the top of my head, the only class that wouldn't really have ammo problems is the soldiers, and that seems a lot more like a class perk than anything else.
There's your problem, sub machine guns fo life son!
Preacher on
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
What's a good quick way to get more renegade options? I am trying to
get Morinth on my crew, but I didn't have enough P/R to say the right options. So I am restarting and going elsewhere to get those options available when I come back.
Massless, frictionless weapons overheating doesn't make sense, but guess what
it's a video game, some things are done because it is a game
Next you're going to tell me that an element that magically reduces mass to zero and locally increases the speed of light is unrealistic and unscientific.
Do people really find they have ammo problems? Even on Insanity, I do not find myself with ammo problems. Sure, I might have to use other guns in the middle of a fight, but afterward I'm always back up to full.
I'm fine with this
it doesn't need to be a survival horror, here's six bullets thing
just enough that sitting in the rear with a Widow and killing every motherfucker in the room is not a completely viable strategy
Yeah, this is exactly right. People are getting the fact that they don't run out of ammo confused with thinking it has no effect on how the game is played. This is wrong, you may not think about it but the ammo system does force you to use different weapons, that's all it needs to do.
If it wasn't the way it is, there'd be no reason to not use the Carnifex or Mantis/Widow all the time.
If anything, the reason you use different weapons is because of the new Barrier/Shields/Armor/Health system, not ammo.
Ammo clips are bad, but the biggest wtf in this game has to be
near ending spoilers
your ENTIRE team goes on a mission the game doesn't even attempt to explain what it's about and your crew gets captured. I usually only take 2 other people, why did everyone have to come with me that one time?
It wasn't just a random mission, it was what your next mission is going to be. You just never get there.
You need to take the shuttle because the ship needs to work out some details, so Miranda loads everyone up so you can make a boots on the ground decision of who comes with you.
Then while you're in transit, the Normandy is taken over and Joker sounds out the notice to your shuttle and you come back before you go ont hat mission.
DrunkMc on
0
KlykaDO you have anySPARE BATTERIES?Registered Userregular
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
edited February 2010
Yeah. I don't have ammo problems so much as "sometimes my pistol/shotgun/sniper rifle run out of ammo so I have to switch to my Machine pistol/SMG because it never runs out of ammo".
So...nothing big, just an inconvience. I haven't played Soldier so I can't comment on Assault Rifle.
Posts
Honestly the ammo system was stupid, as soon as I had the AR I only used it, and before I had it I simply wished I had it for all situations. Thermal clips are ridiculously annoying, cooling from overheated made way more sense and was much more fun. Cooling from overheat makes for tension during fights while you take cover, ammo clips makes for frustration after fights were you go "Shit, where are those clips, fucking geth, not dropping any clips. You invented the worthless things" then after some wasted time you find them and go to the next fight with full ammo.
BD is missing the point. Yes, you could balance overheating to work like clips based on shots per second and shit like that, but it's missing the whole point of the affair: infinite ammo is bad for balancing. Also, you're suggesting that the overheat mechanic should work exactly the same as the clip mechanic, but with the meter instead of the non ambiguous shot count? That seems like different just for the sake of being different.
If only I didn't want to blind everyone with a wall of lime...
I wasn't the one who made it part of the lore in ME1.
Already posted, and for the fucking love of christ, spoiler it like the last person who quoted it did.
Aaand now we're back to why you really care, I'd guess.
White FC: 0819 3350 1787
But nothing gets "balanced out" when they give you all the ammo clips you need anyhow. So they're just making you go find clips for the sake of inconvenience, because that's how all the other shooters do it.
Yes, I don't believe I ever claimed otherwise.
That line implies that you understand and acknowledge WHY the way it is, but insist that it should be the old way just because it was the way it used to be, which is the height of god damn silly goosery that I don't know what to say.
There's even a plausible in world explanation for why ammo clips make sense. How long did guns take to cooldown from overheat in the old game? Five seconds? A soldier can reload much, MUCH faster than that and be back to shooting. Or, if your complaint is that the soldier could just shoot more carefully without the gun reheating, that's at the cost of shots fired downfield. Or, if your complaint is back to finite ammo, we know exactly why that won't work.
Yes, in universe it would make sense if you could use the overheating system when out of ammo. Mechanically, it's a bad idea.
White FC: 0819 3350 1787
The cycle must continue. The arguments are the vanguard of your destruction.
You don't really have all the clips you need. You probably have all the clips you need for a given encounter with the ability to rearm in between them. I know on my infiltrator I was always low/careful with my sniper rifle (and sometimes hand cannon) ammo consumption, handcannon ammo on my adept, and shotgun ammo with my vanguard. You generally have enough ammo to start fights.
The funny thing is
Are you playing on Normal or Casual? I can see how ammo might be completely effortless there maybe
White FC: 0819 3350 1787
Except
What?
Mechanically, I understand the change based on reasons stated above. I'm a little unhappy with the retcon required to implement it, but you can't have it both ways.
The way I look at it, we've now got a helluva interactive story with solid, tense game play. Battles in ME1 felt like monotonous breaks between the talking. Now I enjoy both.
PSN: Threeve703
Ah, yes, "air quotes".
The only time I ever had problems with ammo on Insanity were at the very end of a long, protracted battle, and all it tended to do was make things more exciting.
I dunno, I'm only playing on veteran with my vanguard and I'm still low on shotgun ammo all the time. And I can't imagine infiltrators being better on ammo since the sniper is a headshot all the time.
Off the top of my head, the only class that wouldn't really have ammo problems is the soldiers, and that seems a lot more like a class perk than anything else.
There isn't, and it crosses with events, just like I said in the spoiler that started all of this.
Also note: The reason I'm ignoring your posts is because you're factually wrong about everything, due to the fact that balance itself has nothing to do with finite or infinite ammo. Battles can be balanced whichever way possible, and while everything you're saying is true, it also doesn't apply whatsoever to the discussion of differing gameplay systems.
Ammo or no ammo has nothing to do with effectiveness of weapons or general progression through combat in a more satisfying manner. Simply balancing the overload system can yield the exact same results, even with the "infinite" system.
I'm arguing something else entirely here, unrelated to how or why you think ammo rules so much.
I get it, ME2 is a better game. Yes, I think so too. Not related to the ammo topic though.
I'm really tempted to save the council because of that stupid thing.
Except that they don't give you all the ammo clips you need, the ammo system forces you to conserve low-ammo weapons like the mantis and carnifex. This is especially true on the higher difficulty levels, when you also have to worry about running out of cover to pick up ammo more.
it doesn't need to be a survival horror, here's six bullets thing
just enough that sitting in the rear with a Widow and killing every motherfucker in the room is not a completely viable strategy
I don't have ammo problems, so much as ammo inconvenience. I hate having to scrounge around between fights to restock. It messes with my flow.
Yeah, this is exactly right. People are getting the fact that they don't run out of ammo confused with thinking it has no effect on how the game is played. This is wrong, you may not think about it but the ammo system does force you to use different weapons, that's all it needs to do.
If it wasn't the way it is, there'd be no reason to not use the Carnifex or Mantis/Widow all the time.
There's your problem, sub machine guns fo life son!
pleasepaypreacher.net
Next you're going to tell me that an element that magically reduces mass to zero and locally increases the speed of light is unrealistic and unscientific.
White FC: 0819 3350 1787
If anything, the reason you use different weapons is because of the new Barrier/Shields/Armor/Health system, not ammo.
It wasn't just a random mission, it was what your next mission is going to be. You just never get there.
You need to take the shuttle because the ship needs to work out some details, so Miranda loads everyone up so you can make a boots on the ground decision of who comes with you.
Then while you're in transit, the Normandy is taken over and Joker sounds out the notice to your shuttle and you come back before you go ont hat mission.
ahhh,yes, """"
So...nothing big, just an inconvience. I haven't played Soldier so I can't comment on Assault Rifle.