Take the 2-minute tour ×
Arqade is a question and answer site for passionate videogamers on all platforms. It's 100% free, no registration required.

In Mass Effect 2, some weapons did more damage to a certain type of defence (shields, barriers or armour). Is the same true in Mass Effect 3?

share|improve this question
    
Short answer: probably. –  MBraedley Mar 6 '12 at 13:06
1  
One of the loading screen tips implied fast firing weapons did better against shields/biotics, and slow firing were better vs. armor. –  Raven Dreamer Mar 6 '12 at 13:13
    
add comment

2 Answers 2

up vote 5 down vote accepted

Yes, it would appear it works like it did in ME2. It might not be right to say "they do more damage" since it's not clear that they get an actual damage bonus, but rather that they are more effective due to the way the barrier/shield/armor mechanics work.

  • Rapid fire weapons are good against shields and barriers.
  • Slower-firing weapons that do heavy damage are good against armor.

enter image description here

enter image description here

share|improve this answer
add comment

It's not the same. Weapons no longer have percent bonuses. Instead, armor (and only armor) reduces the damage of each hit by a fixed amount depending on difficulty (50 on Insanity/gold, less on lower difficulties). This makes it so low damage weapons are significantly worse against armor than high-damage weapons. In general, the rapid-fire weapons have low damage, and slow-fire weapons have high damage (with the exception of shotguns, which have a low fire rate, but fire multiple low damage pellets per shot).

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.