inherit
Scribbles
185
0
31,574
Hanako Ikezawa
22,991
August 2016
hanakoikezawa
|
Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Jan 19, 2017 0:12:53 GMT
The way I see it, if we happen to land on a planet as hostile and inhospitable as Tuchanka, our only job as the Pathfinder is to get the hell out of there as quickly as possible and cross not-Tuchanka off the possible colonies list. Seems to me the Nomad and Tempest are designed to do exactly that. I know the first time I played ME1 I didn't realize right away that I could kill the maws from inside the Mako, so I got the hell out there without bothering to fire a single shot. And, amazingly, I lived every time. I did not live every time I tried to fight them (apparently trying to drive up it while shooting frantically in the air is not a winning strategy...) If I recall in the trilogy, we never used the Normandy for cover fire during extractions. The one time we did get that it was because Joker hobbled his way to airlock and provided it for us with a handheld gun. And in space? I imagine in the time it takes to ready, aim, fire any onboard guns we could hit FTL and be a good light year away, couldn't we? Without suffering damage to our ship. Which might be rather tricky to repair when we've barely established ourselves. Anyway as I've said before I'm not that worried about it. And I'll continue to not worry about it as I play the game and have actual fun. Being a space hippy. And banging people. And whatever else it is people who don't really care about not having guns on our ship apparently play the game to do. The beginning of ME3. Shepard and Anderson are at the waterfront fighting off Cannibals and then the Normandy arrives blasting them all and clearing the area for Shepard to be extracted and Anderson to join other soldiers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
2540
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2017 0:13:16 GMT
LOL. There is just too much awesomeness in this answer. I shouldn't even laugh, because it's true. In case you missed last week's episode, this is Fred the Reaper: I want Fred instead of the Tempest.
|
|
inherit
2137
0
Dec 18, 2021 22:02:27 GMT
1,222
dropzofcrimzon
1,391
November 2016
dropzofcrimzon
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
DropzOfCrimzon
|
Post by dropzofcrimzon on Jan 19, 2017 0:14:32 GMT
my theory is that she is dead and Sam is the digitalization of her intelligence.... EVA Unit 1, is that you? sorry I never watched Evangelion... But if that was the case then....damn
|
|
inherit
2137
0
Dec 18, 2021 22:02:27 GMT
1,222
dropzofcrimzon
1,391
November 2016
dropzofcrimzon
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
DropzOfCrimzon
|
Post by dropzofcrimzon on Jan 19, 2017 0:16:00 GMT
The way I see it, if we happen to land on a planet as hostile and inhospitable as Tuchanka, our only job as the Pathfinder is to get the hell out of there as quickly as possible and cross not-Tuchanka off the possible colonies list. Seems to me the Nomad and Tempest are designed to do exactly that. I know the first time I played ME1 I didn't realize right away that I could kill the maws from inside the Mako, so I got the hell out there without bothering to fire a single shot. And, amazingly, I lived every time. I did not live every time I tried to fight them (apparently trying to drive up it while shooting frantically in the air is not a winning strategy...) If I recall in the trilogy, we never used the Normandy for cover fire during extractions. The one time we did get that it was because Joker hobbled his way to airlock and provided it for us with a handheld gun. And in space? I imagine in the time it takes to ready, aim, fire any onboard guns we could hit FTL and be a good light year away, couldn't we? Without suffering damage to our ship. Which might be rather tricky to repair when we've barely established ourselves. Anyway as I've said before I'm not that worried about it. And I'll continue to not worry about it as I play the game and have actual fun. Being a space hippy. And banging people. And whatever else it is people who don't really care about not having guns on our ship apparently play the game to do. The beginning of ME3. Shepard and Anderson are at the waterfront fighting off Cannibals and then the Normandy arrives blasting them all and clearing the area for Shepard to be extracted and Anderson to join other soldiers. also doesn't Shepard call for an orbital strike from the Normandy on Rannoch?
|
|
inherit
Lightning Conductor
170
0
3,653
hammerstorm
1,656
August 2016
hammerstorm
Bottom
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
Hammerst0rm
|
Post by hammerstorm on Jan 19, 2017 0:17:32 GMT
The way I see it, if we happen to land on a planet as hostile and inhospitable as Tuchanka, our only job as the Pathfinder is to get the hell out of there as quickly as possible and cross not-Tuchanka off the possible colonies list. Seems to me the Nomad and Tempest are designed to do exactly that. I know the first time I played ME1 I didn't realize right away that I could kill the maws from inside the Mako, so I got the hell out there without bothering to fire a single shot. And, amazingly, I lived every time. I did not live every time I tried to fight them (apparently trying to drive up it while shooting frantically in the air is not a winning strategy...) If I recall in the trilogy, we never used the Normandy for cover fire during extractions. The one time we did get that it was because Joker hobbled his way to airlock and provided it for us with a handheld gun. And in space? I imagine in the time it takes to ready, aim, fire any onboard guns we could hit FTL and be a good light year away, couldn't we? Without suffering damage to our ship. Which might be rather tricky to repair when we've barely established ourselves. Anyway as I've said before I'm not that worried about it. And I'll continue to not worry about it as I play the game and have actual fun. Being a space hippy. And banging people. And whatever else it is people who don't really care about not having guns on our ship apparently play the game to do. The beginning of ME3. Shepard and Anderson are at the waterfront fighting off Cannibals and then the Normandy arrives blasting them all and clearing the area for Shepard to be extracted and Anderson to join other soldiers. Is that what he is trying to do? Heh, I always killed all the Cannibals before that. Does that mean that I don't need to kill them?
|
|
inherit
Scribbles
185
0
31,574
Hanako Ikezawa
22,991
August 2016
hanakoikezawa
|
Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Jan 19, 2017 0:18:21 GMT
The beginning of ME3. Shepard and Anderson are at the waterfront fighting off Cannibals and then the Normandy arrives blasting them all and clearing the area for Shepard to be extracted and Anderson to join other soldiers. also doesn't Shepard call for an orbital strike from the Normandy on Rannoch? Yep. After clearing the area, they use the targeting laser to paint the Reaper transmitter for the Normandy to hit, only for it to turn out to be an actual Reaper.
|
|
inherit
2137
0
Dec 18, 2021 22:02:27 GMT
1,222
dropzofcrimzon
1,391
November 2016
dropzofcrimzon
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
DropzOfCrimzon
|
Post by dropzofcrimzon on Jan 19, 2017 0:22:54 GMT
also doesn't Shepard call for an orbital strike from the Normandy on Rannoch? Yep. After clearing the area, they use the targeting laser to paint the Reaper transmitter for the Normandy to hit, only for it to turn out to be an actual Reaper. dont they strike the reaper too after?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
2540
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2017 0:25:38 GMT
my theory is that she is dead and Sam is the digitalization of her intelligence.... EVA Unit 1, is that you? Imagine Sam reminding us to brush our teeth, or telling our squad awkward stories about our childhood. Embarrassing us in front of them. That's so creepy it's not even funny. Stop it!
|
|
inherit
Scribbles
185
0
31,574
Hanako Ikezawa
22,991
August 2016
hanakoikezawa
|
Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Jan 19, 2017 0:27:59 GMT
The beginning of ME3. Shepard and Anderson are at the waterfront fighting off Cannibals and then the Normandy arrives blasting them all and clearing the area for Shepard to be extracted and Anderson to join other soldiers. Is that what he is trying to do? Heh, I always killed all the Cannibals before that. Does that mean that I don't need to kill them? The Cannibals are on infinite spawn, until you run out of ammo and trigger the cutscene starting with the Normandy shooting at them. Yep. After clearing the area, they use the targeting laser to paint the Reaper transmitter for the Normandy to hit, only for it to turn out to be an actual Reaper. dont they strike the reaper too after? Well, that was the Quarian fleet after but the Normandy probably participated as well.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
1818
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2017 0:32:35 GMT
There have been quite a few suggestions made ranging from intentional design decisions/restrictions to oversights. If you've missed them, that's on you. You'd need a pretty big bomber fleet and army to conquer Tuchanka. By the time you removed all krogan resistance, there'd be even less habitable planet left. The AI does not appear to be geared up for that kind of conquest. pasquale are you daft? I don't think so. Are you? Or a conscious design choice, for which several reasons have been offered. I'll not repeat them - if you're interested, read the thread. I'm not a mind reader, and can only interpret what you wrote as what you intended to convey. You're the one who mentioned Tuchanka, so I asked why Ryder would land on such a planet. They should not be landing on any settled, inhabited world without first making contact and obtaining permission. I don't expect to have Ryder landing on random planets just because... The characters should have valid reasons for doing what they're doing. Planets that are especially perilous might be places they should avoid, anyway. A Mako-style turret / pulse cannon may help in some environments, but there are also places where the Mako (or an armed Nomad) would not provide enough firepower. I mean, sure, you can say that some weaponry is better than none, but at what point do you have enough? No matter how much firepower you put on the vehicles, you can still find yourself overwhelmed by superior forces. --------------------------------------- Yes, I'd prefer to have armaments on at least the Nomad, if not also the Tempest. We don't know what the AI is bringing in terms of warships or strike team forces. All we know thus far is that the Nomad and Tempest are not armed. But from the outset, the AI is not for the faint of heart or risk-averse. To spend 600 years in cryo-sleep traveling in a ship with an experimental drive on auto-pilot to get to another galaxy about which you know precious little is already rolling the dice. I'm surprised that the lack of weaponry on the Tempest & Nomad is getting so much ire from so many.
|
|
inherit
Lightning Conductor
170
0
3,653
hammerstorm
1,656
August 2016
hammerstorm
Bottom
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
Hammerst0rm
|
Post by hammerstorm on Jan 19, 2017 0:40:09 GMT
Is that what he is trying to do? Heh, I always killed all the Cannibals before that. Does that mean that I don't need to kill them? The Cannibals are on infinite spawn, until you run out of ammo and trigger the cutscene starting with the Normandy shooting at them. No, they are multiply waves, but you can kill them before running out of ammo. IF you run out of ammo the Normandy apparently saves you otherwise Joker only bomb dead cannibals.
|
|
keiji
N2
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 73 Likes: 81
inherit
2739
0
81
keiji
73
January 2017
keiji
Mass Effect Trilogy, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by keiji on Jan 19, 2017 0:41:22 GMT
Yes, I'd prefer to have armaments on at least the Nomad, if not also the Tempest. We don't know what the AI is bringing in terms of warships or strike team forces. All we know thus far is that the Nomad and Tempest are not armed. But from the outset, the AI is not for the faint of heart or risk-averse. To spend 600 years in cryo-sleep traveling in a ship with an experimental drive on auto-pilot to get to another galaxy about which you know precious little is already rolling the dice. I'm surprised that the lack of weaponry on the Tempest & Nomad is getting so much ire from so many. I told you man, on the Ark there is probably a big sentence written for ennemy's ships like : "Come at me bro, no space fight bullshit, just a face to face with a gun".
|
|
inherit
2151
0
Dec 20, 2016 21:34:27 GMT
4,309
fialka
1,112
Nov 21, 2016 14:39:12 GMT
November 2016
fialka
|
Post by fialka on Jan 19, 2017 0:42:04 GMT
The beginning of ME3. Shepard and Anderson are at the waterfront fighting off Cannibals and then the Normandy arrives blasting them all and clearing the area for Shepard to be extracted and Anderson to join other soldiers. Is that what he is trying to do? Heh, I always killed all the Cannibals before that. Does that mean that I don't need to kill them? Haha... Same here. Didn't realize not doing so was an option. Not that I'd be patient enough to wait or anything... Okay, so thinking on it more there are some examples of the Normandy helping us out in combat scenarios. But all the ones I can think of are in ME3. Where we are in a war that was frankly beyond the comprehension of anyone other than Shepard and those close to her. And other than in the intro, in every other situation where the Normandy provides combat support it was in a situation where Shepard and co. intentionally landed in a battle zone. A research vessel has no business doing that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
1818
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2017 0:42:21 GMT
I don't recall ever seeing any codex entries or other in-world lore having to do with the usual process followed in colonization. We did see a number of colonies in TMW with minimal (if any) defenses. IIRC, part of the ME2 mission on Horizon involved initiating the newly installed GARDIAN laser systems. The colony had been founded in 2168, and it was just getting these defenses in 2185. The colonists on Feros formed their own militia to protect themselves. Etc. Pray tell, what happened to those colonies that had no defenses? Oh right, they were wiped out. Whoever built those colonies were illogical and didn't have the well-being of their people in mind, just like I said. Horizon was only getting those weapons because the Alliance forced them to, having intel that it would soon be hit by the Collectors. Before that, the colonists of Horizon hoped that their small size(stealth) would keep them safe. Again, how did that turn out for them? It resulted in half their colony being turned into goo for the proto-Reaper. Feros had other defenses to start with, in the form of a private security company. They were just not enough to face off the Geth since at the time nothing was so led to those forces being wiped out. As for the Feros militia, are you referring to ME1 or ME3? If the former, they did that because they were all that was left. If the latter, they did that because they wanted to help stop the Reapers and due to their connection to each other via Thorian spores they made an effective unit. You didn't actually address the point I was trying to raise. In a previous post, you had said, "The 'they' I was referring to was referring to an in-universe perspective in the sense that in-universe nobody would see the decisions the AI has made to be logical since they know that alien life is a real thing and can be a threat so would not send civilians without a means of fighting back. We know this because we've seen this mindset prevalent throughout the trilogy."The in-universe perspective I've seen in several cases is that colonizing planets with minimal to no defenses is just business as usual, at least in the Milky Way. As near as I can tell, colonization has been done by various groups and organizations with various goals and overall success rates. I don't see any in-universe rule that says you can't place a colony without x defensive structure.
|
|
inherit
1033
0
Member is Online
36,276
colfoley
18,881
Aug 17, 2016 10:19:37 GMT
August 2016
colfoley
|
Post by colfoley on Jan 19, 2017 0:45:32 GMT
You know I just realized this is the only way they probably could have given our characters something to struggle against.
In the original Mass Effect series you had a massive near galaxy wide organization, and multiple species governments beyond that, huge ships, huge dreadnaughts, millions of people to throw at any problem...so for that, to give them struggle, they had to invent a galaxy wide uber threat. Now we have the scope lessened to only one cluster. IE, even many of our bad guys might be limited to that one cluster, so the scope is much smaller. What we can do is much smaller. And thus to make the threat reasonable we can't come in their guns blazing (because otherwise the game might turn into a tail of 'Conquistadors R Us) we are given a set of limitations (logical limitations) in order to make the threat that much larger, and when we over come that threat, our satisfaction much greater. We are again the under dogs.
|
|
inherit
2151
0
Dec 20, 2016 21:34:27 GMT
4,309
fialka
1,112
Nov 21, 2016 14:39:12 GMT
November 2016
fialka
|
Post by fialka on Jan 19, 2017 0:49:21 GMT
The Cannibals are on infinite spawn, until you run out of ammo and trigger the cutscene starting with the Normandy shooting at them. No, they are multiply waves, but you can kill them before running out of ammo. IF you run out of ammo the Normandy apparently saves you otherwise Joker only bomb dead cannibals. Yeah the last time I played ME3 (about a month ago) I was playing an adept and barely bothered to use my gun. I definitely had ammo left, all the cannibals were dead, and I sat there for a good minute wondering if the game had bugged out before Joker came in with his dramatic 'rescue.' I was like, "Um... Glad you could finally make it?" Now that I know I can just use up my ammo I'll do that... I fought those things for a really long time before they finally stopped!
|
|
inherit
2137
0
Dec 18, 2021 22:02:27 GMT
1,222
dropzofcrimzon
1,391
November 2016
dropzofcrimzon
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
DropzOfCrimzon
|
Post by dropzofcrimzon on Jan 19, 2017 0:51:04 GMT
I don't think so. Are you? Or a conscious design choice, for which several reasons have been offered. I'll not repeat them - if you're interested, read the thread. I'm not a mind reader, and can only interpret what you wrote as what you intended to convey. You're the one who mentioned Tuchanka, so I asked why Ryder would land on such a planet. They should not be landing on any settled, inhabited world without first making contact and obtaining permission. I don't expect to have Ryder landing on random planets just because... The characters should have valid reasons for doing what they're doing. Planets that are especially perilous might be places they should avoid, anyway. A Mako-style turret / pulse cannon may help in some environments, but there are also places where the Mako (or an armed Nomad) would not provide enough firepower. I mean, sure, you can say that some weaponry is better than none, but at what point do you have enough? No matter how much firepower you put on the vehicles, you can still find yourself overwhelmed by superior forces. --------------------------------------- Yes, I'd prefer to have armaments on at least the Nomad, if not also the Tempest. We don't know what the AI is bringing in terms of warships or strike team forces. All we know thus far is that the Nomad and Tempest are not armed. But from the outset, the AI is not for the faint of heart or risk-averse. To spend 600 years in cryo-sleep traveling in a ship with an experimental drive on auto-pilot to get to another galaxy about which you know precious little is already rolling the dice. I'm surprised that the lack of weaponry on the Tempest & Nomad is getting so much ire from so many. Pasquale no COHERENT explanation has been given for endangering ths members of the expedition by denying weaponry, sorry, you are free to go dig them up if you like but nothing I have seen is even remotely convincing. Dude...I repeat have you seen footage of the bloody fiend? That thing is legitimately the size of a minibus, take several grenades to the face and flame thrower jets and keeps going until it bites Ryder's head off. Ryder is apparently there gathering resources. Sure, the turret on the make would not kill off kal ros but dammit it os still better than goin in weaponless considering it IS powerful enough to take down a geth colossus. Which is saying something
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
1818
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2017 1:55:44 GMT
I don't think so. Are you? Or a conscious design choice, for which several reasons have been offered. I'll not repeat them - if you're interested, read the thread. I'm not a mind reader, and can only interpret what you wrote as what you intended to convey. You're the one who mentioned Tuchanka, so I asked why Ryder would land on such a planet. They should not be landing on any settled, inhabited world without first making contact and obtaining permission. I don't expect to have Ryder landing on random planets just because... The characters should have valid reasons for doing what they're doing. Planets that are especially perilous might be places they should avoid, anyway. A Mako-style turret / pulse cannon may help in some environments, but there are also places where the Mako (or an armed Nomad) would not provide enough firepower. I mean, sure, you can say that some weaponry is better than none, but at what point do you have enough? No matter how much firepower you put on the vehicles, you can still find yourself overwhelmed by superior forces. --------------------------------------- Yes, I'd prefer to have armaments on at least the Nomad, if not also the Tempest. We don't know what the AI is bringing in terms of warships or strike team forces. All we know thus far is that the Nomad and Tempest are not armed. But from the outset, the AI is not for the faint of heart or risk-averse. To spend 600 years in cryo-sleep traveling in a ship with an experimental drive on auto-pilot to get to another galaxy about which you know precious little is already rolling the dice. I'm surprised that the lack of weaponry on the Tempest & Nomad is getting so much ire from so many. Pasquale no COHERENT explanation has been given for endangering ths members of the expedition by denying weaponry, sorry, you are free to go dig them up if you like but nothing I have seen is even remotely convincing. That's strange - every one I've read has been eminently coherent, and generally very well-written. That you've not found any of them convincing is another matter - but all of this is subject to personal opinion. One of the reasons offered is design considerations. I am by no means any sort of vehicle engineer, but I'll attempt to describe one possible example of a form that could take. Let's say that you can build an extremely quick, agile, maneuverable, comfortable, lightweight exploration transport vehicle that offers excellent environmental protection, plenty of storage space, and can travel long distances without the need for refueling. This vehicle has individual suspension for each of its 6 wheels, but does not include any built-in weaponry. If you want to include a turret, you'll need a stiffer, heavier suspension to absorb the recoil and provide stability. If the vehicle is going to stand and fight (instead of flee), you'll also need to include heavy armor plating. Designing the vehicle to accommodate on-board weaponry will result in it being much heavier, much slower, with less storage space, harder to maneuver, and less range per re-fuel. Choosing the former over the latter is not illogical. It depends upon your priorities and what you expect to be doing with the vehicle, just as a Ferrari, Humvee, and semi-truck each have characteristics that are better suited for different purposes. But the actual reason - which has also been discussed in this thread - is, in all likelihood, that BioWare simply chose not to include vehicular combat in the game. Or... you might do well to just jump in the Nomad and vamoose. Turn on your jet-pack booties and fly. It's been mentioned by others that there weren't any places in ME1 where you really had to kill a Thresher Maw. If you're concerned about safety, fleeing might be a more rational choice. Discretion is the better part of valor, after all.
|
|
inherit
2701
0
Feb 15, 2023 19:19:48 GMT
5,874
sgtreed24
1,947
January 2017
sgtreed24
Bottom
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
SgtReed24
STB Sgt Reed
Over 9000
um, 17?
|
Post by sgtreed24 on Jan 19, 2017 2:20:37 GMT
Sometimes I feel like I understand the Reapers. They were right, how can organics that do these kind of things have any hope of salvation? /thread.
|
|
inherit
2137
0
Dec 18, 2021 22:02:27 GMT
1,222
dropzofcrimzon
1,391
November 2016
dropzofcrimzon
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
DropzOfCrimzon
|
Post by dropzofcrimzon on Jan 19, 2017 2:22:28 GMT
Pasquale no COHERENT explanation has been given for endangering ths members of the expedition by denying weaponry, sorry, you are free to go dig them up if you like but nothing I have seen is even remotely convincing. That's strange - every one I've read has been eminently coherent, and generally very well-written. That you've not found any of them convincing is another matter - but all of this is subject to personal opinion. One of the reasons offered is design considerations. I am by no means any sort of vehicle engineer, but I'll attempt to describe one possible example of a form that could take. Let's say that you can build an extremely quick, agile, maneuverable, comfortable, lightweight exploration transport vehicle that offers excellent environmental protection, plenty of storage space, and can travel long distances without the need for refueling. This vehicle has individual suspension for each of its 6 wheels, but does not include any built-in weaponry. If you want to include a turret, you'll need a stiffer, heavier suspension to absorb the recoil and provide stability. If the vehicle is going to stand and fight (instead of flee), you'll also need to include heavy armor plating. Designing the vehicle to accommodate on-board weaponry will result in it being much heavier, much slower, with less storage space, harder to maneuver, and less range per re-fuel. Choosing the former over the latter is not illogical. It depends upon your priorities and what you expect to be doing with the vehicle, just as a Ferrari, Humvee, and semi-truck each have characteristics that are better suited for different purposes. But the actual reason - which has also been discussed in this thread - is, in all likelihood, that BioWare simply chose not to include vehicular combat in the game. Or... you might do well to just jump in the Nomad and vamoose. Turn on your jet-pack booties and fly. It's been mentioned by others that there weren't any places in ME1 where you really had to kill a Thresher Maw. If you're concerned about safety, fleeing might be a more rational choice. Discretion is the better part of valor, after all. sure, it would make the vehicle likely smaller, that is assuming that it would be even a dramatic decrease in speed but dammit I would take it and so would anyone going onto uncharted dangerous planets because having the chance to blow up an incoming threat beats having only two possible options when confronted which are in this case hiding or running away....or if cornered to DIE, hopefully quickly but I have the feeling that ryder would still be alive when the local fauna started to eat his entrails. Of course if you tell me the nomad is made of vibranium and adamantium and it can ram a reaper destroyer to death then sure, I am ok with having no cannon.
|
|
melbella
N7
Trouble-shooting Space Diva
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Origin: melbella
Prime Posts: 2186
Prime Likes: 5778
Posts: 8,327 Likes: 25,724
inherit
214
0
25,724
melbella
Trouble-shooting Space Diva
8,327
August 2016
melbella
Bottom
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
melbella
2186
5778
|
Post by melbella on Jan 19, 2017 2:59:47 GMT
I'm not sure which is worse: that this thread grew by 10 pages since yesterday, or that I read all most of them.
|
|
dmc1001
N7
Biotic Booty
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Origin: ferroboy
Prime Posts: 77
Posts: 9,941 Likes: 17,684
inherit
Biotic Booty
1031
0
Apr 19, 2024 16:40:05 GMT
17,684
dmc1001
9,941
August 2016
dmc1001
Top
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
ferroboy
77
|
Post by dmc1001 on Jan 19, 2017 3:42:27 GMT
Not exactly a weapon but there is a defense for the Nomad: shield blast. If the shields go down, there is a discharge of an area effect shockwave that will send nearby enemies flying.
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Jan 19, 2017 4:32:59 GMT
Let's say that you can build an extremely quick, agile, maneuverable, comfortable, lightweight exploration transport vehicle that offers excellent environmental protection, plenty of storage space, and can travel long distances without the need for refueling. Ahem... Well, except maybe for the cargo space thing. Although it does seat at least three comfortably and can carry multiple packages of... whatever the hell we were picking up in those missions. You'll of course note the missile cannon prominently on display. Naysayers may wish to take note. Then of course there's the eponymous "mass effect" useful for when you want to make mass physics your bitch, so all this "a turret would be too heavy" stuff really doesn't fly. And on that note, I don't recall anyone being picky about the size of the armaments on either vehicle. We're not saying they'd pack Thanix canons and dreadnaught sized mass accelerators on these things. But something in between said munitions and harsh language would be nice. And what any sane, non BioWare-"artsy" person would do.
|
|
inherit
2484
0
May 18, 2017 23:40:59 GMT
135
johnnynocturne
51
Dec 26, 2016 18:20:14 GMT
December 2016
johnnynocturne
|
Post by johnnynocturne on Jan 19, 2017 4:37:31 GMT
Hammerhead represent!
|
|
dmc1001
N7
Biotic Booty
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Origin: ferroboy
Prime Posts: 77
Posts: 9,941 Likes: 17,684
inherit
Biotic Booty
1031
0
Apr 19, 2024 16:40:05 GMT
17,684
dmc1001
9,941
August 2016
dmc1001
Top
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
ferroboy
77
|
Post by dmc1001 on Jan 19, 2017 5:15:14 GMT
I hated the Hammerhead with a passion. Not sorry it was replaced by Cortez and a "brick" shuttle.
|
|