|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Shutter Fly
Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance
331
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 20:52:00 -
[1] - Quote
BL4CKST4R wrote:JARREL THOMAS wrote:The damp - 5% OB
The precision enhancers +5% OB
Just examples and please dont say that then Gal scouts cant see Cal scouts cause then this should fix it. They are balance as they are, you can't detect a dampened scout and they can't detect you it comes down to your eyeballs. If you made them equal you would always win against a dampened scout. No they aren't, and no you wouldn't.
Precision is innately higher than Scan Profile on all suits and Profile is also reduced by cloaking, so dampening would retain it's advantage, even if the two modules are even. Because of the nature of the the scanning system, one will always have to win out over the other, but currently it takes much less to beat all scans with dampening (2 slots on a Gal Scout w/o cloak) than it takes to reach maximum precision. |
Shutter Fly
Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance
332
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 21:11:00 -
[2] - Quote
Godin Thekiller wrote:Shutter Fly wrote:BL4CKST4R wrote:JARREL THOMAS wrote:The damp - 5% OB
The precision enhancers +5% OB
Just examples and please dont say that then Gal scouts cant see Cal scouts cause then this should fix it. They are balance as they are, you can't detect a dampened scout and they can't detect you it comes down to your eyeballs. If you made them equal you would always win against a dampened scout. No they aren't, and no you wouldn't. Precision is innately higher than Scan Profile on all suits and Profile is also reduced by cloaking, so dampening would retain it's advantage, even if the two modules are even. Because of the nature of the the scanning system, one will always have to win out over the other, but currently it takes much less to beat all scans with dampening (2 slots on a Gal Scout w/o cloak) than it takes to reach minimum precision. Which is the point. To be able to hide, period. Making it to where you have to give up all slots just to hide is silly. ALso, again, you know that the stacking penalty exists, right? So why should a Cal scout have to give up all slots to still be guaranteed not to see the Gal scout that only used two?
I recheck all of my calculations before making any statements, implementing the correct stacking penalties. |
Shutter Fly
Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance
333
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 21:20:00 -
[3] - Quote
Godin Thekiller wrote: Cal Scout wasn't made to scan the Gal scout; it was made to passive scan everyone else, and/or jam everything (SOONtm).
Source? On both statements.
I'm not saying that the Cal scout should ever be able to guaranteed to beat a Gal scout's dampening, but they should be required to at least take comparable measures to counter each other. Something like, a Cal scout with 3 precision should beat a Gal scout with 2 dampeners, but a Gal scout with 3 dampeners beats everything else. That is reasonable, considering 1 damp could be replaced by a cloak for the same effect. |
Shutter Fly
Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance
333
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 21:26:00 -
[4] - Quote
Iron Wolf Saber wrote:Base stats needs to be equalized as well.
and TBH
Sensors 2.0 This.
Ultimately, the whole system needs an overhaul. The current system guarantees that one absolutely has to completely counter the other, which means there will always be one side that is dissatisfied and less effective. |
|
|
|