Lets see what hate I get, lol adapt or die, I did.

I won't give you hate, but I will point out that your position today is the exact opposite of what it was only a few days ago.

You should quote yourself, then argue.
That'd be fun. Fun and appropriate.

Number of threads generated a daily suggests otherwise... And the majority if I was to use such base means wants cloaks deleted.

Also I am not a game designer; nor product owner, I cannot dictate development energy.

Number of threads generated a daily suggests otherwise... And the majority if I was to use such base means wants cloaks deleted.

Also I am not a game designer; nor product owner, I cannot dictate development energy.

Number of threads generated a daily suggests otherwise... And the majority if I was to use such base means wants cloaks deleted.

Also I am not a game designer; nor product owner, I cannot dictate development energy.

Glitches obviously need to be fixed, but glitches are glitches.

Moving while cloaked is easy to see.

Flux grenades should fully drain a cloaks recharge meter thing.

Number of threads generated a daily suggests otherwise... And the majority if I was to use such base means wants cloaks deleted.

Also I am not a game designer; nor product owner, I cannot dictate development energy.

Just because there are a lot of QQ cloak threads dosnt mean they are broken,not working as intended, or OP, the reason for the generation of daily cloak qq threads is due to the proliferation of NEW content ,lots of people want to use it so you see lots of cloaked dudes and lots of qq whiny babies getting murked by new stuff and then create op this, nerf that threads. IGNORE THE QQ CLOAKS ARE FINE

The more you post the more I dislike your decision making. Seriously? Bitching about cloaks on forums equals it needs fixing? The same people were posting multiple threads and in those threads multiple people often disagreed with them. The vocal few on the forums should not always be listened to.

Listen to the few that give solid arguments not the idiots that QQ.

Why don't you do something useful like the guy suggested.

and yet on the heels of the QQ; are the ones WITH Solid arguments.

and Ill extend the advice to you as well why don't you make yourself useful by posting something constructive to the entire conversation.

Sure similar to how new HAVs are...

Sure similar to how new HAVs are...

After talking today with some scouts in my squad i learned that there is no big deference in damage between the militia and the prototype shotgun. You need 3 shots for a heavy with each one of them. The only difference is the target has more health left between the shots. Smart scouts are running the basic one its the best balance between price/damage/CPU/PG.And with more health left between the shots the chance someone else taking their kill is minimal.
Nerfing the shotgun is a must but on a smart way so its not useless.


Consider this for the CPU/PG nerf to the cloak bonus.

Before 1.8 nobody had a problem with SG becouse you needed real skill to get close. The main opinion was he got close enough with SG he earned the kill. After 1.8 it mutch easier to get close enough to use the SG and mor common. That's why the talk about SG is happening now.
Proficency nerf was for most weapons in 1.8. Fact is CCP will nerf the SG like they did with the LR,FL,RR. They count how many times the x weapon made a kill against y weapon.

I have multiple times. Much better then the dribble that you spew out.

I guess my issue is where the heck were these threads asking for input for the four months of tank BS.

I guess my issue is I don't yet see it being OP.

A minor imbalance at best.

Seriously I don't get it.

So if you take that into consideration I think your wrong.

I'm glad you like a horrible idea.

Tanks have to be careful?

What I hear now that you don't see people bitching about is the heavies.

It was wasted.

The more you post the more I dislike your decision making.

I have multiple times. Much better then the dribble that you spew out.

Really?



Stop trying to protect your new favorite toy at any cost and maybe you can seem a bit more reasonable to me and before you accuse me of skimming posts you have posted several dozen times in evidence of doing so yourself; which unfortunately requires me to read your posts.

I find your information nearly useless. You make statements nothing more; do don't get into the nuts and bolts of the conversation in most of your posts. Others delve into the whys, hows and whats and dig deeper with every reply you however are refusing to dig.

This is after all a conversation aimed at arming the cpm with knowledge about the whole nature of cloaks from all sides of the arguments.

Thus yesmen to poor design like yourself are nearly absolutely useless in this discussion.

no its not similar at all, av was too weak to kill a tank quick enough, sort of a problem but not really if you use a tank for av.
there is nothing wrong with cloaks and there are viable counters to it, so, tell me how its similar to havs other than all the QQ whinner threads?

Also why are you the only cpm to have an opinion on this in this thread it dosnt seem like the others care either way, partly because this is a non-issue im sure, why cant you guys come together and dicuss something usefull like how dust needs pve to grow a successfull playerbase and how to get that point across to ccp? You guys are our community reps andi know for a fact that the majority ofthe community wants pve so do something about it instead of pushing non-issues

Great cherry picking. So what about that first one about tanks?! Most of my points have been deal with the real issues, not minor ones at best. Instead, you wander off on your own little tangent and ignore the MANY real issues.

Whatever, you have your little battle. Who cares about vehicle spam, vehicle imbalance, PC ISK printing, the OP logi's that went on for over a year that you never commented on. The OP weapons that have come and gone while you twiddled your thumbs.

Don't remember you ever commenting on those. Way to fight the good fight.

Before 1.8 nobody had a problem with SG becouse you needed real skill to get close.The main opinion was he got close enough with SG he earned the kill. After 1.8 it mutch easier to get close enough to use the SG and mor common. That's why the talk about SG is happening now.
Proficency nerf was for most weapons in 1.8. Fact is CCP will nerf the SG like they did with the LR,FL,RR. They count how many times the x weapon made a kill against y weapon.

@ keno trader - You're pretty much saying what I'm thinking regarding the cloaks usefulness.



This is...like exactly what I'm talking about

Cloaks make it easier for cloaked scouts to get into shotgun range.

Ok.

So, imagine there was an animation delay between decloaking and shooting - wouldn't that ease the situation?

Imagine there was increased shimmer when sprinting (but less shimmer when walking) - wouldn't that ease the situation?

More ways to detect cloaked scouts -wouldn't that ease the situation?

I mean...you kinda said it yourself, that if you were to nerf the shotgun, it would have to be in an intelligent way - I don't understand why any kind of direct nerf to the shotgun itself is intelligent solution to this particular...'problem'.

It's because of this kind of talk I'd rather have cloaks removed at this point - if CCP even listens to a fraction of some of the scoutphobic talk going on in the forums, we're not even going to have the effectiveness of 1.7 (or less) scouts by the end of it.

That's as much an admonishment of CCP as much as anyone else - they have't exactly proven themselves as proficient in this 'rebalance' thing.