|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Onesimus Tarsus
703rd
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
1885
   |
Posted - 2014.04.11 18:39:00 -
[1] - Quote
Ziiro Celeste wrote:People don't realize that a scout's worst nightmare is a squad that sticks together and cannot be broken up. Scouts tend to go after the stragglers in the pack...the ones that can't quite keep up. The moment we see six guys that are inseparable, well we are hard pressed to do anything about them.
Yeah RE's my take out a couple of them, or surprise may net you a few of them as well, but more often than not, they will mob you and take you out before you can GTFO.
So, except for all the times you're killing them, you're not killing them. Got it.
1.8 (!) forum warrior. SMG wielder. Mama's boy.
703rd for life! (or at least, for now).
|
Onesimus Tarsus
703rd
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
1885
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 18:57:00 -
[2] - Quote
Yan Darn wrote:Onesimus Tarsus wrote:Ziiro Celeste wrote:People don't realize that a scout's worst nightmare is a squad that sticks together and cannot be broken up. Scouts tend to go after the stragglers in the pack...the ones that can't quite keep up. The moment we see six guys that are inseparable, well we are hard pressed to do anything about them.
Yeah RE's my take out a couple of them, or surprise may net you a few of them as well, but more often than not, they will mob you and take you out before you can GTFO. So, except for all the times you're killing them, you're not killing them. Got it. I read it that scouts (especially any without a rifle) are at a loss in general in the usual stand and deliver firefights, but at a general advantage against a single or otherwise pre-occupied enemy (which every frame is btw - scouts just specialise in capitalising on those situations). QQing because we are better at specific tactics than others is kinda QQing about role differences in general...
Broken roles, yes. Cloaking is a cheater bar answer in search of some great unfairness question that doesn't exist. Many people have already stated that their general scouty awesomeness was already carrying them without cloaks. Then no one should mind at all if cloaks are removed.
1.8 (!) forum warrior. SMG wielder. Mama's boy.
703rd for life! (or at least, for now).
|
Onesimus Tarsus
703rd
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
1886
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 19:27:00 -
[3] - Quote
pagl1u M wrote:Some days ago I played a match without using cloak, I killed some players from their back with my shotgun, received an hatemail about me being a fotm cause I used the "OP cloak".... I wasnt using it XD
See? Unneeded cloak. Remove it.
1.8 (!) forum warrior. SMG wielder. Mama's boy.
703rd for life! (or at least, for now).
|
Onesimus Tarsus
703rd
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
1887
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 19:36:00 -
[4] - Quote
Dexter307 wrote:Onesimus Tarsus wrote:Yan Darn wrote:Onesimus Tarsus wrote:Ziiro Celeste wrote:People don't realize that a scout's worst nightmare is a squad that sticks together and cannot be broken up. Scouts tend to go after the stragglers in the pack...the ones that can't quite keep up. The moment we see six guys that are inseparable, well we are hard pressed to do anything about them.
Yeah RE's my take out a couple of them, or surprise may net you a few of them as well, but more often than not, they will mob you and take you out before you can GTFO. So, except for all the times you're killing them, you're not killing them. Got it. I read it that scouts (especially any without a rifle) are at a loss in general in the usual stand and deliver firefights, but at a general advantage against a single or otherwise pre-occupied enemy (which every frame is btw - scouts just specialise in capitalising on those situations). QQing because we are better at specific tactics than others is kinda QQing about role differences in general... Broken roles, yes. Cloaking is a cheater bar answer in search of some great unfairness question that doesn't exist. Many people have already stated that their general scouty awesomeness was already carrying them without cloaks. Then no one should mind at all if cloaks are removed. You can say that about anything "I could already use item x so it dosent need a buff" Its said about anything that ever gets a buff in any video game ever. If the cloak is changed the only thing that should be changed is a short delay after switch from cloak to a weapon before you can shoot (.5s to 1s)
Why not 3 seconds? Why not 10?
1.8 (!) forum warrior. SMG wielder. Mama's boy.
703rd for life! (or at least, for now).
|
Onesimus Tarsus
703rd
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
1887
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 19:54:00 -
[5] - Quote
Dexter307 wrote:Onesimus Tarsus wrote:Dexter307 wrote:Onesimus Tarsus wrote:
Broken roles, yes. Cloaking is a cheater bar answer in search of some great unfairness question that doesn't exist. Many people have already stated that their general scouty awesomeness was already carrying them without cloaks. Then no one should mind at all if cloaks are removed.
You can say that about anything "I could already use item x so it dosent need a buff" Its said about anything that ever gets a buff in any video game ever. If the cloak is changed the only thing that should be changed is a short delay after switch from cloak to a weapon before you can shoot (.5s to 1s) Why not 3 seconds? Why not 10? Why not make shield extenders give you 200 hp? Why not make armor plates speed you up? Because that would damage the whole point of the what its supposed to do. It should let you sneak up on people and shoot them in the back, a short delay would simply stop you from decloaking in front of someone. To long of a delay and it has no use.
Three seconds isn't that long. Reloads take about that long.
1.8 (!) forum warrior. SMG wielder. Mama's boy.
703rd for life! (or at least, for now).
|
|
|
| |
|