Hidden Combat Difficulty?Edit

While using Gibbed's Mass Effect 2 save editor I noticed that you may set your save on a difficulty 1 to 6, with Insanity being 5. Anyone know anything about 6? I don't have time to look into it now, later I'll try it and see if there are noticeable differences (or if the game crashes). Flippantelf 03:32, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Tried it today; created a new character and set the difficulty to 6. I didn't get very far: apparently on this difficulty enemies no longer take damage. Granted, my only test subjects were the LOKI mechs in the Lazarus Research Station, so I don't know if this generalizes to other enemies or to defenses like shields. What I do know is that weapons fire, warp and overload did no damage. Throw worked perfectly fine, though the mechs weren't damaged by the resulting collisions. With one mech I got lucky; throw somehow damaged it, knocked off a few limbs and made it decide to explode. No other mech was the least bit scratched by anything I could do. Luckily I was able to reset the difficulty in game; the difficulty under Gameplay was blank, but the arrow let me set the difficulty back down to Insanity. Couldn't set it back up, but I'm not sure that I want to anyway. Might be worth further experimentation; likely not. Flippantelf 02:38, August 11, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for testing that out. That's really weird. --AnotherRho 23:35, August 19, 2010 (UTC)

Stub? Edit

This article no longer appears to be a stub. I'm going to remove the stub tag, but if I'm wrong in doing so, please say why here. Arbington 03:38, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

You jumped the gun a little but not by much, just a hair really. A lot of content was added to bring this article closer to the Combat article, however two sections were missed, See Also, and Game Options. I have since filled these in, and really all we need are some great screenshots. Lancer1289 05:17, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Ah. You see, I had mixed feelings about removing the stub tag, which is why I put this up on the talk page just in case. Glad to see I wasn't entirely in the wrong, but I'll be a little more adherant to procedure next time. Arbington 05:38, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Well it wasn't about procedure considering we only have two of these pages, just overlooking some sections. :) Both pages should cover the same material, and this was just a case of somethings being overlooked, which will happen. No one's perfect. :) Lancer1289 05:42, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Screenshots Edit

Seeing that I've been in the screenshot mood recently, I'll try to take some shots that apply to this article. Assuming no one else does so in the meantime, I may have a few by the end of the day (um, in my timezone, anyway). Note, however, that they will only be from the PC version (I suspect that the only difference will belong to the "powerwheel" - if even that). --AnotherRho 23:13, August 19, 2010 (UTC)

My only concern is that a couple of the images do contain Commander Shepard, in violation to the canon policy of the site, which dictates that these should only be used to showcase armor (i.e. specifically on the armor pages) or romances. However, neither of them explicitly show any detail other than that Shepard is male (and Caucasian, as can be seen through the helmet visor in one image), so rather than remove them outright, I figure I'll leave them for now, and allow discussion to take place as to their fate and the possible fate of the aforementioned policy. SpartHawg948 09:17, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

Well we are also deciding the fate of the screenshots on the Combat article as well here. Almost all of those images contain Shepard, and only one has a helmet, but you can still tell that Shepard is female. I don't have a problem with the thermal clip image, but the others I do. We need to set something down here that either this is another exception for the no pics of Shepard article, in which case both are default only, or we need to get rid of these pictures altogether. I would vote that we remove the Shepard images for now, however this does need to be sorted out first. Lancer1289 15:56, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

I think we should keep them in until better pictures (ones that agree with the picture policy) can be found. If nothing else, they do demonstrate the features of the UI, HUD and other things that can happen during combat quite well. But I'm just a peon so what do I know? Tanooki1432 16:00, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

I'm of the opinion that for articles about game mechanics and don't discuss story, Shepard pictures are not only fine, but probably a good idea. When explaining how combat and the HUD etc. work, avoiding images of Shepard is only hurting the article. JakePT 17:10, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

I agree with JakePT here. The screenshots should be left as-is, showing the combat exactly as it's presented to the player. This is about as out-of-universe as an article here can get, so I think that another exception to showing Shepard is in order. -- Dammej (talk) 18:17, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

I agree with the view that Shepard may be necessary in "combat" shots. For two examples: it is impossible to show the HUD (which consists of the entire screen, aiming reticule included) without showing Shepard; and combat necessarily includes Shepard and not just squadmates or enemies. To neglect Shepard altogether in combat shots is to misrepresent the gameplay. - - That being said, I tried (in taking all my combat shots) to avoid showing any identifying marks on Shepard (e.g., equipping the breathing mask, and often also the capacitor chestplate, which even makes it difficult to distinguish male from female Sheps). Incidentally, some of the shots (as of now) are female, some male, and the one from Zaeed's loyalty mission is the default Shepard. The point in mentioning these latter facts is to illustrate the following thought: the policy could be emended to permit images of Shepard for combat articles, BUT without straying from the spirit of the policy; Shepard's head, face, and skin, can be easily covered. In any case: we can't represent the game's combat correctly if we remove Shepard from combat.

As an aside, I'll see if I can add a false glare to the only shot wherein you can see a hint of Shepard's (default) face, and update the upload. Should be easy enough. --AnotherRho 18:45, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. So long as the images here and on the Combat page don't show any detail or that if they do it's of the default male or female Shepard, and so long as this 'game mechanics' argument doesn't get abused to allow for pictures of Shep where they are not warranted, I suppose I can live with it. It does seem reasonable enough, and to have garnered the support of some pretty on-the-ball people. :) SpartHawg948 19:20, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

Yes either default or nothing sounds good. However we do need to get two of those images replaced on the Combat page because after studying them, the first two images aren't the default, espeically the female second one. The third is fine as there is a helmet, but the first two need to be replaced. Lancer1289 19:29, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that female Shep in the Power wheel shot (on the ME combat page) does not look "default". I could supply a shot to replace the first (a generic combat photo for ME 1) within the next week, but I don't have the XBox version from which one could supply an XBox power-wheel image. Maybe there's an official or public shot of such? --AnotherRho 19:54, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

Second Wind? Bug? What was this? Edit

Strangest thing just happened, and this seemed too well-choreographed to be a fluke or bug to me, but I'll let this be discussed.

I was playing on Insanity difficulty with my Vanguard, and was wrapping up Dossier: The Warlord and fighting Jedore. I was struggling with the waves of Krogan, and in a last ditch effort went to Biotic Charge one. I unloaded on him, but that stupid YMIR Mech and the Krogan's shotgun took me down. My health hit 0 (The Krogan and YMIR were still active, and the Krogan right on top of me). I saw Shepard appear to fall down on one knee in a defeated stance, then shake it off and get back up. I popped a medi-gel and finished the Krogan, then regained the upper hand in the battle.

My question is, what the hell just happened? I freakin' DIED, no doubt about it. Shepard just shook it off and got back up for a second fight? I'd have gotten a screenshot if I hadn't been so shocked by recovering from almost certain death. Has anyone else had this happen? ~Novawolf 05:01, October 30, 2010 (UTC)

Beats me. So far as I know, Shepard doesn't ever loose his/her balance in ME2 (unlike ME). But maybe I'm wrong, or you just got knocked back. I'm surprised in any case that you were able to use medi-gel if your health was that low, surrounded by enemies, on Insanity. --AnotherRho 22:51, October 30, 2010 (UTC)

Interestingly, it just happened again. This time I'm almost completely positive that I hit 0 health, fell onto one knee, and got back up again. This time during Miranda's loyalty mission in the cargo loading zone. I'm gonna start forcing death and seeing if I can intentionally trigger it to get a screencap. ~ Novawolf 02:29, November 3, 2010 (UTC)

Armour vs. Armor Edit

While we do have a spelling policy, I believe that in this article there needs to be some type of exception. Given this article is entirely about gameplay, and in gameplay it is always referred to as "armor", never "armour", and given that Mass Effect is written in American English, using "armor", which is in the bars for enemy health, armor, and barriers/shields, "armour" might be a little confusing in this article. I'm not saying we should do this for every article, but I do thing that just "armor" should be used in this article. Just for a quick stat: "armor": used 20 times, "armour": used 3 times including a heading which in all honesty makes it 2, "Health, Armour, Shields and Barriers", where the heading under it that deals with armour says "Armor". Thoughts? Again, I'm not arguing for every article, just this one. Lancer1289 17:44, March 27, 2011 (UTC)

I don't see any compelling reason to keep it as armour- but neither do I see a compelling reason to change it to armor. The guidance given by veteran editor Tullis was something to the effect of 'keep it consistent within a paragraph.' This seems a sound policy, and I feel the article currently meets that criteria.

I am troubled by one of your cited reasons, however. Part of your argument is that "Mass Effect is written in American English," necessitating that we use the same language that's in-game (armor). This reason has been cited many many times in the past for other spelling-related changes to an article, and it's never been acceptable. If we make the exception here, we'd be incredibly hypocritical reverting/disallowing changes from UK english to US english in the future. As you yourself so often argue: exceptions to a rule weaken it. I don't agree with that statement in general, but in this case it would certainly be true, especially if we accept your argument that it should be changed because that's the spelling that the game uses. If we accept that criteria as being sufficient, then all spelling-related changes can and should be allowed for that same reason. -- Dammej (talk) 23:49, March 27, 2011 (UTC)

However the problem is it isn't consistent. Armor is used in every other paragraph in that section, and is the name of a section under it. Check it for yourself. In that section, "armour" 2 times, "armor" 10 times. 5:1, kind of says something doesn't it and considering that is the only time it is used in the whole article.

I frankly can't see why you are so troubled, which you seem to be a lot lately with me. And while yes I do say that exceptions do weaken a rule, sometimes there is a good reason for making one, which so far I haven't seen one good reason for making the previous exceptions. This one however I do see a good reason for making one. "Armor" is what is used in the game, on stats, in the menus, and on enemy health bars among other places. Also note there is a good reason we don't have articles called "Rage Armour", which is written int the policy, which is somewhat what I'm tying into. The article is currently inconsistent with spelling, which is never an issue, this article, which deals solely with gameplay, IMO doesn't reflect gameplay as much as it should. Your entire last part of your comment takes mine, and completely throws it out of context. I stated quite clearly, "I'm not saying we should do this for every article, but I do thing that just "armor" should be used in this article" and "Again, I'm not arguing for every article, just this one", which is exactly what I meant to say. I am not arguing to change UK to US spelling everywhere else, on the other side of the universe to be exact, just the two instances in this article because of what the article is about and what it covers. While it is true that ME is written in US English, we accept both spelling, which I enforce and will continue to do so, but again there are times when "armour" isn't appropriate, and I truely believe that in this article, it is one of those circumstances. Also pointing out there are instances of "armour" in articles that actually have "Armor" in a title and yet I'm not arguing to change those. Lancer1289 00:23, March 28, 2011 (UTC)

Please understand that I don't, in principle, disagree with changing 'armour' to 'armor' in this article. My entire first paragraph was devoted to saying, in essence, "I'm neutral on this issue". I only take issue with one particular facet of your argument, which I feel sets a dangerous precedent. I already expressed my feelings on that above, so I won't restate. I'll merely point out that it doesn't matter that you say "I'm not saying we should do this for every article, but I do thing that just 'armor' should be used in this article." If we accept the 'The game uses US English' argument as a reasonable exception to the rule in this instance, we must accept it as a reasonable exception to the rule in all cases, lest we be hypocritical.

I'm not unsympathetic to your other stated reasons, I just don't feel strongly enough either way to make an argument. I do feel strongly about allowing for exceptions for poor reasons though, so I needed to make my concerns known.

My feelings re: the comparison between this article, and your provided example of "Rage armo(u)r." In that case, we are given an item in game whose proper name is "Rage Armor." We would be reinterpreting canon by renaming it to the UK spelling: a nono. This doesn't appear to be the case here. We're describing things that can be worn by others in general. They can wear armo(u)r. They might wear Kestrel Armor. There's a subtle, but important difference there.

Finally, re: "you seem to be a lot with me lately": I am intentionally being contrary, yes. But only because I feel these types of things need more discussion than a simple statement of intentions, followed by several nods of agreement with no counterpoint presented. Please understand that I don't do it to spite you, but to improve the discussion and, ultimately, the wiki. -- Dammej (talk) 03:01, March 28, 2011 (UTC)

You do realize I put this on the talk page for a reason? You make it sound like I just put this here with the intention to do it anyway, which isn't even close to the case. I am not trying to set a precedent, however I must also point out there one big instance we use armor in place of armour. The {{AdversariesME2}} template uses armor instead of armour. From what I understand, it is because that is how the bar is labeled in the game on the enemy health meter. This also brings up another point and another reason I just thought of. Because this article is dealing with the defense in particular, i.e. "armor" not general "armour", and what it is venerable to, I believe this is a cause where the canon spelling, i.e. "armor", that is used in the game menus and on enemy health bars needs to take precedence. Lancer1289 04:05, March 28, 2011 (UTC)

I don't understand your reaction: you put your reasons on the talk page and asked for opinions. I've given mine. I've even attempted to clarify those reasons when I was misinterpreted. Why do you continue to assume that I'm acting out of malice? I never once accused you of attempting to ram through this change without discussion. I voiced my concerns with what I considered to be a weak argument. That's all. I don't understand why you're interpreting my comments in the worst possible light. It is never my intention to slander you. I assure you that any interpretation of my words in which I appear to be speaking ill of you is in error.

You did not comment about my concerns in your most recent comment, so I don't know how you've reacted to them. I hope that you have seen my point RE: "Mass Effect is written in American English." As this was my only interest in the discussion, if there's no further comment on that point in particular, I would kindly like to terminate this conversation. -- Dammej (talk) 04:26, March 28, 2011 (UTC)

I thought I did address your concerns in the statement that "I am not trying to set a precedent", and in a few statements from other comments, but I'll expand. The fact that we accept both types of spelling will not change because of this, nor should it. While we do acknowledge the game uses US spelling in more than a few places, there are other times where it honestly doesn't matter. This article is reflecting gameplay elements that deal with things users see on the screen, and should reflect what they see when they are looking at a health bar, which is why I think the section entitled "Armor" is named that way despite the fact that the section itself is in UK spelling. Armor is also the word that is used when looking at Grunt's status screen on the menu, as it is also referring to the defense he uses instead of shields or barriers like the rest of the squad. It isn't referring to the fact that he is wearing "armor" or "armour" as either would be acceptable in that circumstance, but the specific defense used, which in the menu and on health bars, is referred to as "armor" not "armour". This is why I do feel that "armor" should be used in both circumstances in this article, while in every other place, it is acceptable to use either spelling as it is more of a general reference, rather than referring to the specific defense that is used in the game. Lancer1289 04:41, March 28, 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) With respect, no one ever tries to set a precedent. It just happens. By making an exception, you are going to set a precedent. This is inherent in making an exception to a rule. You cannot escape it.

Exceptions to rules are fine, as long as the criteria for making those exceptions is well-defined. This must be the case so that, in the future, when someone points to this instance of an exception to the rule being made, we can state with no vagueness or room for misinterpretation why the exception was made. This is why I'm so adamant that we steer away from the "Mass Effect is written in American English" argument: because it is incredibly vague and ultimately leads to an argument for American English being used exclusively on the wiki. I'm not against that shift in policy per se, but I also don't want to see the current policy eroded away without proper discourse on the matter (like say a policy discussion forum).

If your argument is that 'armor' is somehow a proper term which should only be re-written on the wiki exactly as it appears in the game, that's a much different argument, US vs UK spelling notwithstanding. It may have merit (I haven't made up my mind about it yet), and it doesn't immediately cause world-ending alarm bells to go off on my end. -- Dammej (talk) 05:25, March 28, 2011 (UTC)

Pictures needed ? Edit

Why is the tag picture wanted still present on this article full of images ? Could we remove it ?--DeldiRe 14:02, April 3, 2013 (UTC)

we needed someone with an xbox and with decent screencapping skills to take pictures of the power wheel. also in ME3 for that matter. T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 14:09, April 3, 2013 (UTC)