|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Cross Atu
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
2393
   |
Posted - 2014.06.17 14:50:00 -
[1] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:That everyone's Max Rotation Speeds are exactly the same (heavy or light, plates or no plates).
I wouldn't pop the champagne until he weighs in on this point; I'm beginning to think its a bug.
But while we're on the point, do you guys think that the arse of an 1800HP Gal Sentinel should be his "soft spot" or "weak point"? Or do you think he should be able respond to threats from behind as readily as anyone else?
You guys already know what I think ... what do you think? We know and it sucked to be a heavy when turning speed was lower, I don't remember when that was. I might be coerced into saying maybe turning speed could be affected by plates.
I'd honestly support some turn speed reduction on Heavies over same reduction on plates, as a reduction on plates (unless it's effects scale by frame) would effectively make heavy suits faster because they have fewer low slots in many cases and, while brick tanking can certainly benefit them, they need it least of any suit when it comes to gaining HP/eHP since they already have high native HP and a built in damage reduction.
/Side note: Armor/shield balance continuing is good, however I hope there's a strong eye being kept on making support roles more tactically viable because the trend in changes recently has been diminishing they're already sub-optimal status.
CCP Rattati wrote:I like the deadliness of a heavy hmg as it is right now. If we were to reduce its efficiency in a future hotfix, it would most likely be to heat since that rewards skill and not spray and pray.
Improving the assault is then my preferred counter to heavies, not nerfing heavies, most likely through racial tanking improvements, pure damage output and regen. Just my general thoughts on the subject.
Countering Heavies through improving the assault role seems like a good first step, I'm on board with the idea of Dust 514 being a bit more rock, scissors, paper/incomparable based. That being said making assault suits more tanky seems like it will begin to distort roles and meta balance. Better damage output, and better regen both seem totally within role for the assault but bonuses to tank and damage resistance are hallmarks of the heavy role and in light of your prior statement that the Commando role was staying put in Dust (which I don't object to) it seems highly pertinent that we not push the Assault into even deeper role overlap with the Commando (which a focus on more tanky assaults would almost certainly do).
0.02 ISK
Cross
PS ~ Just for complete clarity, the current development intent is to make Scouts counter Assaults, Assaults counter Heavies, and Heavies counter Scouts, yes? If that's confirmed I have a follow up; where in that are support roles being made combat viable? And how does Vehicle vs Infantry fit into intended function?
Thanks 
Cross Atu for CPM1- An emergent candidate
|
Cross Atu
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
2394
|
Posted - 2014.06.17 15:09:00 -
[2] - Quote
Aeon Amadi wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:That everyone's Max Rotation Speeds are exactly the same (heavy or light, plates or no plates).
I wouldn't pop the champagne until he weighs in on this point; I'm beginning to think its a bug.
But while we're on the point, do you guys think that the arse of an 1800HP Gal Sentinel should be his "soft spot" or "weak point"? Or do you think he should be able respond to threats from behind as readily as anyone else?
You guys already know what I think ... what do you think? We know and it sucked to be a heavy when turning speed was lower, I don't remember when that was. I might be coerced into saying maybe turning speed could be affected by plates. Maybe. Might set off a power imbalance among the racial heavies though. Gotta be kinda careful about that.
And every other racial suits internal balance as well potentially depending on how such a debuff were applied and how it scaled. One of the biggest issues with armor back when plates were deeply broken/nearly useless was the degree of movement cost. That was toned down to make them viable, moving back towards that in a (functionally) racially asymmetric way seems dubious to me. (Although if it's part of a larger macro balance plan and as such is a considered move along side other nerffs and buffs to polish racial balance then that could work. I'm all for racial diversity and balance, but we have to be very careful what thread we pull and how far).
0.02 ISK
Cross
Cross Atu for CPM1- An emergent candidate
|
Cross Atu
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
2395
|
Posted - 2014.06.17 15:26:00 -
[3] - Quote
Adipem Nothi wrote:Jake Diesel wrote:
2. Oh and by the way, ALL heavy dropsuits are "uniquely vulnerable" from behind from a militia grade shotgun.
2. Only the bad ones, I'm afraid.
You mean the Cal suits? 
I jest, but only in part.
The Flux is one of the only functional (potentially) anti-infantry AoE/breaching assets right now.
Flux a Cal Heavy and get in close with a Shotty et al the heavy is likely done. Speaking as someone who rolls around in a proto heavy, not infrequently, I have no problem with that.
"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, But in ourselves"
You see having the tactical set up to hit a distracted (and brick tanked) heavy from behind with a 'one, two, punch' takes setup, skill, and awareness. Such things should, by and large, be rewarded with results. But while this method can work to effect against the Cal the other (more armor based) heavy fits shrug it off to a great degree. If there were locus style grenades which were workable (perhaps the recent changes were enough to provide this at Pro level, we shall see) then it would become viable on armor based suits as well.
I'm interested to see how CCP R's vision of interconnected balance is presented because, as I've been saying since closed beta, it is deeply problematic for the community to attempt to give feedback on issues we're encountering when we're not given a clear roadmap of "as intended" function.
To avoid contention and miscommunication (both of which degrade the actionable usefulness of feedback and can lead to flame wars and hyperbole) we need to be able to answer both of the following questions
- What is the intended purpose of this role?
- How do we get it there?
The problem right now is that, lacking clear vision statements/comprehensive road maps from CCP many feedback threads get bogged down in debating a weird and murky mish-mash of those two questions.
It's very hard to find a method that works when there are fundamental disputes about the intended goal which are going largely unaddressed.
Every role in Dust should be tactically viable! If not there isn't game wide balance.
Now we need to establish an effective way to peruse that goal as a community.
I am not calling anyone out specifically here, but I'm sure we've all seen more than enough "us vs them" debates in what should have been productive balance threads. Hopefully we can move away from that, and toward a higher quality game.
0.02 ISK
Cross
Cross Atu for CPM1- An emergent candidate
|
|
|
| |
|