|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
Dirt Nap Squad.
8180
   |
Posted - 2014.04.08 10:11:00 -
[1] - Quote
I expected this to happen when CCP said they're going to fix them, not this bull crap they implemented in 1.8.
Anyway, the idea is, you have to charge your scanner, and the longer you charge it the wider your radius, up to the maximum of that scanner, and then you release to see what's inside that radius.
My intentions is to have a fun game for everyone.
If I seem to be biased, I have good hard data to back it up.
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
Dirt Nap Squad.
8180
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 10:18:00 -
[2] - Quote
Broonfondle Majikthies wrote:hmmm... Nah. introduce scanner drones 
Well...
As a Gallente, I would ******* love that, because ya know, Drone master race.
My intentions is to have a fun game for everyone.
If I seem to be biased, I have good hard data to back it up.
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
Dirt Nap Squad.
8182
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 12:54:00 -
[3] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:How to ACTUALLY fix Active Scanners:
1. No need to charge, but make them take a snapshot of a specific arc in the instant the button is pressed. No timer, no scan duration. A "snapshot" like we were promised.
2. In conjunction with this snapshot effect, return the scanning arcs they had pre-1.8 because the current tiny arcs are useless when panning makes the scans glitch out and miss random targets for no reason.
And how to rebalance them in a way that weakens cloaks without needing them to be nerfed:
1. Increase the precision value (yes, this is a nerf) of all Active Scanners and reduce their range by a small margin.
2. Make the Active Scanner skill provide a slight precision buff to their use, and make precision enhancers and range amps work with the Scanner.
This would result in Active Scanning Logis who spend several module slots as well as their equipment slot in order to combat cloaked Scouts doing the same thing.
Scouts using only a cloak would become visible to a well-built scanner Logi, but because it's only a limited arc, you could be careful and approach from an unexpected angle.
I highly approve of this.
My intentions is to have a fun game for everyone.
If I seem to be biased, I have good hard data to back it up.
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
Dirt Nap Squad.
8182
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 12:55:00 -
[4] - Quote
NAV HIV wrote:Cat Merc wrote:I expected this to happen when CCP said they're going to fix them, not this bull crap they implemented in 1.8.
Anyway, the idea is, you have to charge your scanner, and the longer you charge it the wider your radius, up to the maximum of that scanner, and then you release to see what's inside that radius. Use a Range Amplifier, Precision Enhancer and a Good Scanner with a Gal Logi... Rather than just tanking a logi and following a typical lolLogi slayer fittings....
Since when are scouts called logis?
I don't have a single point invested into logis after 1.8 lol.
Scanners are ****.
My intentions is to have a fun game for everyone.
If I seem to be biased, I have good hard data to back it up.
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
Dirt Nap Squad.
8182
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 14:48:00 -
[5] - Quote
Sana Rayya wrote:Let me just leave this here: Active scanner must die - It's nerf o'clock!Cat Merc wrote:It absolutely negates any form of tactic in this game.
Can't flank - Enemy will just cut you down
Can't rush in unexpectibly - Enemy expects it and cuts you down
Can't dance around boxes - Enemy knows exactly where you are
It breaks too many things.
If you put on profile damps then you are just gimped and can't fight against those scanner users anyway.
My anti scanner suit has 100 less HP and regenerates 5hp/s slower.
Compared to the logi that just lolspam his scanner and has scarifices nothing on his suit.
Active scanner MUST be nerfed heavily.
The problem is that the scanner doesn't have the scan radius that is listed.
It's actually much lower, so it's practically useless.
Yeah, it was OP, but the flaylock was too, that doesn't mean it doesn't need a buff.
My intentions is to have a fun game for everyone.
If I seem to be biased, I have good hard data to back it up.
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
Dirt Nap Squad.
8183
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 14:49:00 -
[6] - Quote
Luk Manag wrote:Double the scan angle. 90-¦ to 180-¦, 60-¦ to 120-¦ = a decent comprise.
No, the scan angle right now is broken, it's much lower than it's supposed to be.
My intentions is to have a fun game for everyone.
If I seem to be biased, I have good hard data to back it up.
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
Dirt Nap Squad.
8183
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 14:51:00 -
[7] - Quote
Sana Rayya wrote:Ivan Avogadro wrote:
Thanks for linking a thread from December, back when Active Scanners were actually functioning improperly. Your keen logical insight is a boon to us all. (that was sarcasm. I am explaining that because I didn't think you would pick up on it)
Glad I could help! Honestly, I just find it amusing that one of the biggest proponents of the scanner nerf is unhappy now that the scanner has been nerfed heavily. In 1.8 you can flank, you can rush in unexpectedly, and can dance around boxes - why? Because no one is using active scanners. In doing so you might still get shot in the back of the head by a passive scanning scout, but hey, at least you don't see that "You Have Been Scanned" message 24/7!
I approve of the nerf, but the scanner is mechanically broken right now, the scan radius is much lower than what it's supposed to be.
My intentions is to have a fun game for everyone.
If I seem to be biased, I have good hard data to back it up.
|
Cat Merc
Ahrendee Mercenaries
Dirt Nap Squad.
8189
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 23:51:00 -
[8] - Quote
Sana Rayya wrote:FWIW I just tested the Creodron Flux scanner in game, and it definitely IS giving a 90* scan angle despite the very narrow angle indicated by the radar when you initiate your scan.
So basically the scan angles seem to be working as intended, and the scanner just sucks unless you are rather far away from the enemies you intend to scan.
Hmm, odd, I guess my testing was off.
My intentions is to have a fun game for everyone.
If I seem to be biased, I have good hard data to back it up.
|
|
|
| |
|