Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
983
   |
Posted - 2013.11.18 04:05:00 -
[1] - Quote
This is an excerpt from my upcoming ADS Report Chapter II - Defining Roles on the Battlefield. I see a lot of chatter about this particular issue right now so I figured I'd release this part of the report a little early and gain some additional feedback. Please keep in mind that the report covers additional information for all roles including Assault and Logistics, and will hopefully be ready for release sometime tomorrow evening.
L O G I S T I C S
The Logistics role is one of great controversy within the community and in need of significant reworking. Lets start off by trying to define what the word 'logistics' actually means:
logistics
n.
1. The aspect of military operations that deals with the procurement, distribution, maintenance, and replacement of materiel and personnel.
While many will claim that Logistics should be purely medic, and others claim it is a combat role, the definition of logistics summed into a single word would be 'Support'. The Logistics role provides support in countless facets such as supplying ammunition, providing spawn points, hacking objectives, and offering indirect combat support. They are equipped with numerous gear slots allowing them fulfill this support role and their bonuses should facilitate this further.
Logistics should not be focused on frontal combat like the Assault. However this does not mean that they should avoid combat, merely be more focused around supporting combat units with additional fire when needed. Also, despite popular belief, Logistics does not mean that they should have the best defenses in the game. Logistics should not have weak defenses by any means, but not so much that they can replace direct combat Assaults.
Currently the main issue with Logistics is that a Logistics suit can equip better weapons, do more damage, and have better defenses than Assault and Scout roles. The only major disadvantage is that the Logistics suits in general do no have a sidearm, but this is only a minor setback in comparison to the other advantages. Because of this, the Logistics role is being used for nearly everything, making the other roles obsolete.
The biggest issue is the fact that Logistics have significantly more PG, CPU, and module slots than other suits. The reasoning is that they needed additional PG and CPU in order to run suit defenses as well as equipment. Unfortunately, by simply not equipping equipment, players are able to stack high level modules onto a suit frame that far surpasses Assaults and Scouts.
The emphasis for Logistics should be support and utility, and with that flexibility. As such, I do not feel that removing slots or forcing Logistics to fit equipment is an appropriate choice. However, if all Logistics received a reduction to the PG and CPU cost of equipment, and was paired with a decrease in the amount PG and CPU available to them, it would help solve many of the problems with the Logistics suits right now.
This effectively makes it so Logistics can equip moderate amounts of offense, defense, and speed as well as a full gambit of equipment because the equipment has a reduced resource cost. If the player wanted more attack, defense, or speed, they could reduce the amount of equipment they are using to upgrade to better modules. However, because most of the Logistics Effective CPU/PG comes from the reduced cost of equipment, removing the equipment would only allow a Logistics suit to reach similar levels to an Assault or Scout, but without the bonuses that those roles provide. This setup allows the Logistics suit to be flexible, but still encourages a more support oriented playstyle.
ADS Reports - Defining Racial Themes
|