DUST Search - CPM input request: Logistics & Support.

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

CPM input request: Logistics & Support.

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2687	Posted - 2014.08.12 02:22:00 - [1] - Quote Input and feedback is being sought regarding the state of support play within Dust, and how to improve the experience and effectiveness. When responding to this thread please note your primary role / primary context for use of each item being commented on so that proper context can be applied. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2689	Posted - 2014.08.12 04:02:00 - [2] - Quote Cass Caul wrote: How about you not make **** up. 399.05 shields and 987.75 armor on an Amarr Assault is the max you can dual tank an assault suit. that's 1386.8 Total HP. against Laser Weapons its 1504 Effective HP. You're a hundred off by the rarest weapon profile. -Check the sig. An HP buff is only being requested by people that want to salvage their precious slayer-logis I'd like to request/reiterate that we keep this thread constructive, courteous, and on topic. Please do feel free to call out instances where flawed data is seen, and where/why that data is flawed specifically but let's aim to do so diplomatically and with an eye to conversation. Also, on the note of calling out flawed data, I can state empirically that the final statement of the quoted post Cass Caul wrote: An HP buff is only being requested by people that want to salvage their precious slayer-logis is demonstrably inaccurate. Three data points indicating that; 1. I have never been a 'slayer logi' 2. I have long held, and still hold, that logi survivability is in an inadequate space and needs reworked (all of this is within the context of running a full support fit) 3. I am not the only player numbers 1 & 2 apply to. Precision, especially when it comes to numbers, is useful and welcome, but no amount of precision can create a constructive discourse if we let the environment turn overtly hostile, let's focus on precluding such an event. Thanks, Cross EDIT: Despite my above post quoting Cass it should NOT be misconstrued as a request only applying to Appia, it is a general thread request to all posters. Let us all please keep a focus on constructive presentation and information so that threads like this can be more effective and frequent. The more constructive the thread, the more useful, and the more often the CPM will be able to employ them and bring community input to CCP. Conversely the more hostility and hyperbole the more time and energy will be spent sifting through the dross to get the actual feedback and the less resources remain to do the actual work that benefits the game and the community. To steal an old movie quote help me help you See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2689	Posted - 2014.08.12 04:14:00 - [3] - Quote Apothecary Za'ki wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: 100% lack of confidence in Apothecary Za'ki (poor track record). 100% confidence in Shayz (stellar track record). - 50M SP Scout idk where that lack of confidence came from.. but yes shayz is a good logi and quite a few of his posts have helped me improve little by little. as for your being a scout do you even have logi experance? I believe Adipems scout reference was simply a means of provided the context for feedback that I requested in my OP. And while I can fully understand the desire to respond directly to his post I'd like to request that we refocus the thread back to the primary subject rather than a debate regarding any given players specific credibility. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2715	Posted - 2014.08.12 15:41:00 - [4] - Quote Thank you to everyone who has taken the time to post feedback, it's really great to see this thread picking up momentum. I'd also like to add an additional thinks to I-Shayz-I the quality and format of your post is highly useful and appreciated. Keep it up folks and as inspired by I-Shayz-I if you have feedback on something specific, and there's already a quality thread on the subject, feel free to add a link to that as well (but please keep providing at least a summery directly in this thread). Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2717	Posted - 2014.08.12 16:12:00 - [5] - Quote Apothecary Za'ki wrote: i disagree with your injector rant.. in charlie(or was it delta) they are getting changed.. pro get more WP as standard/mil get less.. OH and lets not forget Pro also Rep80%+ of the persons armor This has been delayed due to an unexpected tech barrier. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2717	Posted - 2014.08.12 16:18:00 - [6] - Quote Apothecary Za'ki wrote: Doc DDD wrote: I didn't read anyones post above me so may be repeating someone else: Logis should have High ehp with crappy recharge/repair rates to take some hits while doing logi work so the logi/slayer role would be less desirable than pure slayer (assault). Logis spamming equipment is still ridiculous, 4 different SETS of hives spammed, go to supply depot, 4 more SETS, go to supply depot, 4 SETS of uplinks, go to supply depot, 4 more SETS of links, and suddenly the enemy team hits a LAG WALL when they get in range of all the spam. Would love to see a hard cap on equipment one player can drop to keep the garbage spam logis from filling rooms/areas with so much equipment that one flux gives the other team an orbital ( if you manage to get close enough to the lag wall to limp arm a flux) Please fix lame spam/glitch 9 uplinks at the highest point of a map, usually 2 feet inside a wall texture where even a flux can't remove it. Don't know if it is fixable but how about you need a 3 meter radius of flat ground surrounding an area for an uplink to 'stick'. 1 flux nade wipes out everything around a supply depo but yes it does get a little laggy at times Perhaps I'm just lucky but even when actively trying to create the equipment lag situation (several full proto logi deploying everything they could around the underground bunker depot) I have yet to encounter this myself which makes me strongly wonder if the equipment/lag correlation isn't either a false positive or more complex than simply 'more equip = more lag'. However, even with my own testing regimes giving a negative result on that correlation, there is clearly still something happening and this serves as a good reminder to investigate further and talk with CCP about it in greater depth. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2717	Posted - 2014.08.12 16:20:00 - [7] - Quote Keep it coming folks, and tell the support players you know to get in here. I want to catch all perspectives, Assaults/Heavy receiving support, Scouts running light-support, new bro logi just starting out, long time logi vets, let's get it all. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2734	Posted - 2014.08.12 21:27:00 - [8] - Quote Apothecary Za'ki wrote: Cross Atu wrote: Apothecary Za'ki wrote: Doc DDD wrote: I didn't read anyones post above me so may be repeating someone else: Logis should have High ehp with crappy recharge/repair rates to take some hits while doing logi work so the logi/slayer role would be less desirable than pure slayer (assault). Logis spamming equipment is still ridiculous, 4 different SETS of hives spammed, go to supply depot, 4 more SETS, go to supply depot, 4 SETS of uplinks, go to supply depot, 4 more SETS of links, and suddenly the enemy team hits a LAG WALL when they get in range of all the spam. Would love to see a hard cap on equipment one player can drop to keep the garbage spam logis from filling rooms/areas with so much equipment that one flux gives the other team an orbital ( if you manage to get close enough to the lag wall to limp arm a flux) Please fix lame spam/glitch 9 uplinks at the highest point of a map, usually 2 feet inside a wall texture where even a flux can't remove it. Don't know if it is fixable but how about you need a 3 meter radius of flat ground surrounding an area for an uplink to 'stick'. 1 flux nade wipes out everything around a supply depo but yes it does get a little laggy at times Perhaps I'm just lucky but even when actively trying to create the equipment lag situation (several full proto logi deploying everything they could around the underground bunker depot) I have yet to encounter this myself which makes me strongly wonder if the equipment/lag correlation isn't either a false positive or more complex than simply 'more equip = more lag'. However, even with my own testing regimes giving a negative result on that correlation, there is clearly still something happening and this serves as a good reminder to investigate further and talk with CCP about it in greater depth. Cheers, Cross perhaps the lag is due to people on one side of the atlantic putting down dozens of deployables and people on the other side beign effective due to ping/latency? Doc DDD wrote: You lag less when you are actually "IN" the area of the spammed equipment, but if you are around 100m away on the opposite team and then approach the area that has been equipment spammed the ps3 starts puking and shaking. Interesting, I'll look into both of these aspects and see if something specific can be nailed down. Thanks guys See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2743	Posted - 2014.08.13 15:44:00 - [9] - Quote Good to see the discussion still going strong, keep it up. Also, let's bring it a bit back round to focusing on each issue and suggestion more fully. Again, debating points, totally valid. Stating meta goals and their supporting or detracting reasons, quite useful. But making declarations such as "X play is stupid", "Y player type sucks", or "Z bit of gear is OP" doesn't really provide anything actionable. If something is bad, UP/OP or even just pisses you off, then sure, call it out but explain clearly and calmly why because simply making the declaration that "a,b,c are terribad and have to go" doesn't actually give me anything additional to work with or present. Thanks for keeping this thread live and hopping o7 Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2744	Posted - 2014.08.13 16:08:00 - [10] - Quote Also, with the latest hotfix if anything has changed your feedback due to the altered context please note that when posting so that we can properly track the effects of the hotfix process regarding this topic. Thanks Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)

Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2745	Posted - 2014.08.13 23:58:00 - [11] - Quote Roger Cordill wrote: So, the title asks for logi and support feedback, yet all people talks about is logistic dropsuits and Scout suits. Bummer, as vehicles do exist,and in some form or another they are support tools, really mainly support tools. Yet they've been turned into a bloody ******* mess. We've had a bit of dropship feedback in here, but you are correct mostly there hasn't been support vehicle talk so far, but by all means anyone who plays support on board a HAV/LAV/DS feel free to speak up. While there certainly is a bit of an infantry focus going on here that should not in any way discourage posting from a vehicle support perspective. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2745	Posted - 2014.08.14 00:00:00 - [12] - Quote el OPERATOR wrote: Orion Sanjeet wrote: However at the moment the difference between a rep logi and a great rep logi is being in squad and saying "By the Power of GraySkull! [insert name] has the POWER!!!". FTFY If there were enough room I would totally make this a sig See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2746	Posted - 2014.08.14 01:25:00 - [13] - Quote SponkSponkSponk wrote: Cross Atu wrote: We've had a bit of dropship feedback in here, but you are correct mostly there hasn't been support vehicle talk so far, but by all means anyone who plays support on board a HAV/LAV/DS feel free to speak up. While there certainly is a bit of an infantry focus going on here that should not in any way discourage posting from a vehicle support perspective. Some of the problem is that there's a paucity of support options available to vehicle users. If I had the option to drive an ambulance around dispensing healing and ammo like a mardi gras parade, I'd jump at the chance. Perhaps if we can get the LLAV back in you'll have that option, or at least more of it See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2748	Posted - 2014.08.19 03:45:00 - [14] - Quote Still seeking input on this topic, and planing to roll up my sleeves for the reading catch up here after my weekend out of town. Keep it coming folks. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2749	Posted - 2014.08.19 05:32:00 - [15] - Quote SponkSponkSponk wrote: Cross Atu wrote: Still seeking input on this topic, and planing to roll up my sleeves for the reading catch up here after my weekend out of town. What are your takeaways so far? I am currently working with my SMB to compile notes on that for discussion with the rest of the CPM and then move toward formulation for something to push to CCP. Once we have some actual action times for upcoming hotfix deployment I'll be posting here what that update (or more likely a link to it). Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2750	Posted - 2014.08.19 09:21:00 - [16] - Quote Hawkings Greenback wrote: Cross Atu wrote: SponkSponkSponk wrote: Cross Atu wrote: Still seeking input on this topic, and planing to roll up my sleeves for the reading catch up here after my weekend out of town. What are your takeaways so far? I am currently working with my SMB to compile notes on that for discussion with the rest of the CPM and then move toward formulation for something to push to CCP. Once we have some actual action times for upcoming hotfix deployment I'll be posting here what that update (or more likely a link to it). Cheers, Cross It's good to see threads like this come up, so yeah thnx for taking the time to try and make a difference. Are CCP being receptive towards things like this? Also It would be good if we could get a Dev response on how they see logi's on the battlefield. Good stuff anyway. CCP (specifically R and Logibro) have been very engaged with the CPM so far and honestly I'm happy to report the biggest constrained we've faced in getting ideas iterated has been more resource/tech than a willingness on their part to be receptive or interactive. I agree a conceptual roadmap, for logis, support in general, or even roles more broadly, would be useful, even if we don't end up with a full description I am hopeful we can at minimum get some form of hotfix level outline before too long (all times are obviously subjective because of the many factors in play but it is high on my list of things I'd like to see moved forward). I'm glad to see the level of participation in this thread and would like to extend my thanks to everyone in the community who has taken the time to constructively articulate concepts related to this theme. Moving forward I will be focusing more heavily on compiling the ideas already present into a comprehensive/actionable "TL;DR" for CCP and the rest of the CPM. Even that being the case, please do not feel as if discussion in this thread must, or even should, cease as I will still have an eye on new developments here (the other will simply be focused on that write up ). Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2767	Posted - 2014.08.20 23:50:00 - [17] - Quote John Demonsbane wrote: That's a very unsatisfying answer, cross! Give us something... What here do you like? Reading the entire thread, compiling answers and doing so along with my other CPM and IRL duties is a somewhat time intensive task, I realize that my prior answer can somewhat amount to "I'm workin' on stuff" but in all honest that is exactly what is going on. I do understand that a lack of definitive information can be unsatisfying, and I totally sympathize with that but the simple truth of the matter is that since every idea or change has an effect on the others and there are often tech considerations that must be accounted for - but which I do not know the details of until conversations can happen with CCP - any answer I give at this point would effectively amount to "that's kind of nifty I wonder if that'll work" which when coupled to the aforementioned questions of what is or is not actionable at this stage wouldn't be worth much more than "I'm workin' on stuff". I will try to get something more meaningful out to you guys soon as I am able, I know waiting on this stuff can get frustrating in short order - as I've done quite a bit of it myself - but realistically it is likely to take awhile yet before I have something to present (just to be clear "awhile" should, if nothing goes awry, be tallied more in days than weeks). Diving back in to the project now Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2768	Posted - 2014.08.21 14:25:00 - [18] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: John Demonsbane wrote: Meee One wrote: Sidenote:I see you're trying to blow off and deflect from any relevant suit buffs to logistics. You can better the support experience dramatically by fixing the suits first. Trying to call it an 'arguement' is a lowbrow strategy trying to get off the subject of buffs for logistics,which are severely needed.Go somewhere else with your 'subterfuge'. lol... slow down there, newb. PIck your targets a little better. Shayz has a lot more cred on the topic than most anyone else. He does have a point though. Buffs to support modules and such are kind of moot if the suit designed to be best with them is still flawed. Although I think shayz meant more along the lines of "support that isn't exclusively logistics suits" which is a valid point. Going to jump in on this one real quick. Shayz, who has been a Logi Bro since the early days of dust, has been in contact with me quite a bit and was extending some of the points made in a conversation he and I had prior, now I won't speak for him or anyone else but here's the upshot on this "Crosses view" if you will, and if you folks think I am insane please feel free to present your case and persuade me otherwise Survival is mandatory. Whatever contexts and time frames one can survive in almost completely define the bounds of potential utility one can provide in any role regardless of suit, role, fit, or infantry/vehicle. Note: HP = Raw Hit Points = "brick" or "buffer" tanking eHP = effective Hit Points = raw HP modified by weapon profiles, fit mobility, damage resistance, eWar profile, regeneration rates, arguably even hacking speed if that is part of your primary on field behavior (kind of a subcategory of speed). These two are not interchangeable and should not be treated as such. While they may serve the same role, saying "improve eHP" or "improve survivability" is not the same as saying "make X more like the sentinel frames" (who for the record have high HP and solid eHP do to their damage resistance, but have a lower eHP rating than their raw HP once one considers things like mobility and eWar). Support play is very too deeply defined as "that stuff you do in the logi suit". The Logistics frame is ideal for support, at least theoretically it is supposed to be, but at no point should all support be considered bounded by the use of the Logistics frame (mCRUs exist for one obvious example). Hacking, the entire equipment line, multiple vehicle fits (especially if we are able to restore logistics vehicles to the game, but even without them) are all support actions if/when focused on as a primary objective. Example 1: If links cannot be defended or maintained within a key area use of a vehicle with a mCRU can become vital, even if uplinks can be maintained there are instances where use of an mCRU will provide more effective support than an uplink (consider being on comms and altering the path of attack by relocating the mCRU spawn location.) Example 2: Fully damped scout with support equipment. This player is running a sub-300 HP fit with a rep tool, needle, hives, scanner (obviously not all of these at once, no more than two possible). This player is not in a fit that will survive direct contact with hot zones (tho flanking could be an effective combat tactic) however being under the radar they can focus on supporting their squad via the equipment they have on board and further support by clearing hostile equipment deploys and hacking hostile assets. They are not failing to play support simply because they are not in a Logistics frame. Indeed in the current state of the same there are certainly times where Scout frames will be more effective at support than their Logistics frame counterparts. The Logistics frame - Even where this frame in a perfect state (whatever that may be, opinions diverge on this subject drastically) support play would still not be defined purely by the suit. Without effective mods/gear to use for those support actions support play will remain hampered no matter what the status of any specific frame or chassis may be. That being said, the logistics frame is not in a good place right now and I am not shy about saying that. Indeed I have been saying it, and presenting the same reasons, for a very long time now. The reasons that I have presented (check my posting history for a full run down if you'd like one, but be warned it is somewhat long) still, to the best of my knowledge, remain unanswered and most of the conversations I have had on the subject, when they get down to discussions of specific fittings and actions, highlight that most players who are firm in their belief that the Logistics suits are fine as is do not have support actions compose the majority of their on field behavior (further many of them are also in the upper segments of the population when it comes to gun game so they have more latitude in how they do things). Character limit reached, and I have work to get back to, feel free to tell me how you think I'm wrong if you think I am. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2768	Posted - 2014.08.21 16:08:00 - [19] - Quote John Demonsbane wrote: You're insane, Cross. Thank you, I'm glad we established that See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2768	Posted - 2014.08.21 16:19:00 - [20] - Quote John Demonsbane wrote: Also, Cross, I'd love to get you to commit to an opinion on one topic (which you can obviously change in the future). One of the bigger and longer running discussions regarding the logi suits, and one I'm particularly interested in, has been the equipment efficacy bonuses. With only three main options put forward recently, it's fairly easy to state a concrete opinion on, unlike more complicated issues like eHP and "survivability" Throw me a bone here and at least tell me what you personally like the sound of: 1) Keep the bonuses as is, one suit, one equipment bonus. 2) Give each suit a bonus to two types of equipment. One primary bonus, one (smaller) secondary bonus. 3) Every suit gets a small bonus to each type of equipment in addition to the current primary bonus. Okay, I am going to qualify this is takes of CPM hat, puts on been a support player since closed beta hat** my personal opinion rather than any locked down recommendation to CCP since I make a point to keep in mind that the two are not synonymous. In order here are my perceptions. 1. I never liked this conceptually or actually. The theory behind the move of "let us make the buffs racial" is something I actually do like, but in a game state where that means "you are now a one trick pony" that doesn't seem to fit the support role very well. "You have 3-4 slots... which you can fill with one type of mod... congrats!" (and people wonder why there is equipment spam ). 2. This, depending on how it is done, could be a positive move, even via lore it could work because the NPC empires have their allies so we could keep some of that 'racial flavor' aspect from above, even in the current limited game state, and still widen the pallet a little bit. 3. While as a long time support player this is obviously appealing to me, it seems a bit too much like "give me everything because I like shiny". And while I do indeed like shiny, I can't objectively say it is the likely to be the best route. I want players to have choices, and neither too tight a constraint, nor giving too wide a set of buffs, actually promotes meaningful choice / emergence in behavior. One note here however, is that the logistics role buff is and should be universal and within the correct context (current under quite a bit of discussion, more word soon... what? I can't give away all my secrets, who would love me then ) could be increased. In fact I have actually supported an increase to this since before it was even added as the role bonus (for those who want to know more on the subject, this means you can find out a lot in my post history ). Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)

Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2772	Posted - 2014.08.22 15:22:00 - [21] - Quote zzZaXxx wrote: I-Shayz-I wrote: Equipment doesn't need more HP Proto equipment just needs a lower profile. Let's reward PLACEMENT rather than spamming in open areas. By hiding your uplink well, it won't show up on scans or passives as long as you're using the best of the best...that's what I want. Low profile equipment. Another good variant they could add! This is something that I asked for long prior the CPM race or elections, thank you both for bringing the idea back to the forefront of my thoughts See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2772	Posted - 2014.08.22 15:24:00 - [22] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Cross, what's your opinion on making Logistics be like scout suits, with their current low health, better suit ewar and faster speed than assaults? I really feel like this keeps them from being "slayerlogis" (although we haven't needed to worry about that in a long time) and gives them a better role for a team. I think a case could be made for having the Logistics suits be the "light" Medium frames while the Assault suits are the "heavy" Medium frames. I would be interested in hearing community debate/input on that specific sub-topic. I do want to emphasize however that both the Medium frames should very much remain Medium to preserve role values, but things to make Logi/Assault more unique from each other and more of a specialization choice seems worth looking at. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2773	Posted - 2014.08.22 15:33:00 - [23] - Quote John Demonsbane wrote: Cross Atu wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Cross, what's your opinion on making Logistics be like scout suits, with their current low health, better suit ewar and faster speed than assaults? I really feel like this keeps them from being "slayerlogis" (although we haven't needed to worry about that in a long time) and gives them a better role for a team. I think a case could be made for having the Logistics suits be the "light" Medium frames while the Assault suits are the "heavy" Medium frames. I would be interested in hearing community debate/input on that specific sub-topic. I do want to emphasize however that both the Medium frames should very much remain Medium to preserve role values, but things to make Logi/Assault more unique from each other and more of a specialization choice seems worth looking at. As I mentioned in my main post in this thread, I favor the option of making them the "light" medium frames. Because reasons. (that I think I put in that post.) These posts? #1 & #2 See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2773	Posted - 2014.08.22 15:35:00 - [24] - Quote TechMechMeds wrote: Cross Atu wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Cross, what's your opinion on making Logistics be like scout suits, with their current low health, better suit ewar and faster speed than assaults? I really feel like this keeps them from being "slayerlogis" (although we haven't needed to worry about that in a long time) and gives them a better role for a team. I think a case could be made for having the Logistics suits be the "light" Medium frames while the Assault suits are the "heavy" Medium frames. I would be interested in hearing community debate/input on that specific sub-topic. I do want to emphasize however that both the Medium frames should very much remain Medium to preserve role values, but things to make Logi/Assault more unique from each other and more of a specialization choice seems worth looking at. No amount of speed is going to keep you alive and supporting your team while in a gunfight with low hp. Enter - more logis hiding in the corner because of squishy suits and high cost equipment. Counter point noted, care to elaborate a bit more for the sake of discussion? The more clearly articulated a community view I can present to CCP the better case can be made for either change. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2778	Posted - 2014.08.22 18:12:00 - [25] - Quote TechMechMeds wrote: Ah cross, CROOOSSS!. If logis get hp buffs, please forward it that it should be relative to the racial philosophies. Ill cry if my logi gets an armour buff and in fact, the hp we have now could do with some addressing. My min logi has more armour than shield base stats. That's something I will say unequivocally, I will be advocating for any/all logistics suit buffs to maintain racial flavor. Maintaining this speaks to diversity and meaningful player choice. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2790	Posted - 2014.08.23 18:39:00 - [26] - Quote Who can tell me the specifics of how protofits calculates eHP? I see that term miss-defined or loosely defined quite a lot and it can be accurately used to mean/contain many things, what is the site using in this case? See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2799	Posted - 2014.09.03 17:12:00 - [27] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Meee One wrote: Stats can be changed via hotfix,so can bonuses. Remember charlie? Assaults got eHP,slots,and a new bonus to grenade fitting. "Necessity" when it's used as he has in that sentence means "we know the problems we just don't care,we like assaults more". So yes,in a single hotfix, CCP can easily buff logistics. At this point they are simply refusing to. Incremental changes. Don't cry because you're not first in line. That very conversation is key to the motive for this thread. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2800	Posted - 2014.09.03 21:25:00 - [28] - Quote Orion Sanjeet wrote: Notice I said "CPMs that still play the game" I would like to propose that CPMs that have logged less than 5 hours in the past 3 months get their tags removed or at least have their vote taken away until they are back up to speed and know the current situation of the game. Side note I know. CPM does much more in the vein of gathering feedback than anything, while yes we do discuss things internally it is not really as if CCP puts ideas in front of the CPM and we vote them up or down, that's simply not how the process works. We are more of a conduit than a legislative body or something of that ilk. Just clarifying that, now back to reading through the thread again Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2801	Posted - 2014.09.04 01:58:00 - [29] - Quote Meee One wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Name me a suit outside logistics that has not been altered since Rattati came along. Only one I can think of is commandos, and I don't count the color change. It's funny how pokey said "incremental changes". He must have forgotten the 150 eHP,extra slots,and grenade bonus assaults just got. None of that is "incremental",when combined it's actually quite extreme. Yet logistics must wait for these "incremental changes"? Lol. Truth is exposed,logistics isn't respected enough to receive the same kind of attention. Incremental changes are a game wide assessment, not a per frame assessment, the CPM is very aware of the need to give support play some attention and has been vocal on the subject. Consider the recent hotfix thread and the narrative regarding injectors, that is only one aspect in the process of course, but proper balance is iterative not sweeping (generally speaking). So, yes, as it has happened the logi pass, as well as the support pass (which overlaps but isn't entirely identical) are still upcoming rather than already done but that does not indicate a lack of attention and at present I have no reason to believe that such changes would not be forthcoming. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2801	Posted - 2014.09.04 01:59:00 - [30] - Quote el OPERATOR wrote: SirManBoy wrote: Thanks for all of your feedback, guys. lol, we're just getting warmed up in here. We still need to : Theorycraft some new base movement stats. Debate their merits. Debate their drawbacks. Theorycraft new stats based on the previous theorycrafted set. Debate the merits of those. Debate the drawbacks of those. Debate the merits between both sets. Be interrupted by some outlandish suggestion like, "Squads of 6 is OP, reduce to squad of 4" Debate the outlandish theory. Theorycraft a different solution to the outlandish theory. Debate the new theorycrafted solution versus the original idea. lather, rinse, repeat By the time this thread is "done" it'll be its own planet in Molden Heath and have districts. I look forward to it, especially the creation and population of Logi Prime once we reach critical mass See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)

Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2801	Posted - 2014.09.04 03:41:00 - [31] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Logistic Suits - DO NOT need more EHP - Logisitics Suits need to be incentivised to use utility modules and not EHP stack - Logistics Role Bonuses should emphasis the role and be unilateral, especially in the case of the Rep tool bonuses, as no one race in EVE dominates remote reps. Please elaborate in detail on points one and two because at present they seem to be in contradiction to each other. Looking forward to your reply Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2801	Posted - 2014.09.04 04:17:00 - [32] - Quote Hawkings Greenback wrote: Cross Atu wrote: Input and feedback is being sought regarding the state of support play within Dust, and how to improve the experience and effectiveness. When responding to this thread please note your primary role / primary context for use of each item being commented on so that proper context can be applied. Cheers, Cross CCP Rattati wrote: MINA Longstrike wrote: I take it all logistics will be looked at separately eventually (When is that by the way? Wasn't it slated for delta alongside commandos?) Aside from that it looks pretty okay. CCP Rattati wrote: Hotfix Delta or later Sidearm rebalance Sniper Rifle review Efficacy bonuses Further slot based PG/CPU updates based on necessity, Scouts, Commandos, Logistics From this i take it there is no necessity to look at the logi/support role in Dust. As 'necessity' deems it ok, that is despite the number of issues raised here in this thread and in others over the last year. Is it that none of these issues can be resolved via hotfixes ? This is more a case of the iterative or incremental approach to balance. CCP Rattati in all my conversations with him has been very dedicated to the idea of doing more effective, measured, balancing rather than the sweeping changes which have happened during much of Dusts history. I can see how in this context the phrasing may be confusing but don't read too much into it, conversations regarding the state of support generally and more specifically equipment and the logistics frame, are ongoing. Indeed this thread is part of that initiative that SMB and I specifically, and the CPM generally, are involved in currently. So please, continue to use this thread and provide feedback. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2808	Posted - 2014.09.18 05:59:00 - [33] - Quote Meee One wrote: Any updates? I've noticed a lack of CPM responses,and 0 Dev responses... (GèÖn++GèÖG£+) I have had an incredibly hectic time IRL lately and so my time has been pretty thin. (Meetings with CCP are on going of course, as are my efforts to gather feedback, but this leaves my time to respond highly limited) With the current hotfix cycle changes are more likely to show up in smaller portions than sweeping blocks. Currently I am revving up to test the new matchmaking during the million clone event (what? I play this game ) after which I will once again be devoting more of my free time, such as it is, to this thread and an updated evaluation on the state of play for support in Dust. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2808	Posted - 2014.09.18 06:03:00 - [34] - Quote bogeyman m wrote: Fox Gaden wrote: This morning when I was picked up twice with a Red standing 20m in front of me in plain sight, I got the idea that there should be a -25 WP penalty if you pick someone up and they die again within 5 seconds. My role in the context of the Support class: Victim! I consider the guy who picked me up twice without clearing the area to be an accomplice to my repeated murder. Maybe if there was a penalty for such negligence people would learn? Mandatory 'request revive' would help prevent this. While request revive would be helpful it is also worth noting that aside from the thoothless KDR stat there is no loss in such situations. Are they frustrating? Yes of course. However no fits or clones are lost until bleed out so the net effect is actually tactically advantageous to your side as a hostile is spending both attention and ammo to repeatedly down a merc who would otherwise have been downed anyway. From a play perspective it needs addressed to keep things fun certainly, but from a tactical perspective a neg reward does not make any sense because the action is actually still contributing positively towards the win. 0.02 ISK Cross ps ~ in essence the request revive before revive is possible would be ideal here See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2812	Posted - 2014.09.18 06:14:00 - [35] - Quote bogeyman m wrote: John Demonsbane wrote: Hawkings Greenback wrote: Thanks for the response and clarification Cross. It seemed weird the way it come across especially in light of this thread and I know sometimes Rattati comes across short and to the point Anyway i've been trying these brick tank logis that everyone says they see and I can honestly say that I ******* hate them. How any body manages to play logi waddling around like a crap heavy with EQ slots is beyond me, i have been getting my arse handed to me ( more than normal ) back to kincats for me before i loose the will to logi. Quick one while i'm here, over the last week I've noticed an annoying trend. Mainly the mass spam of uplinks in just about every conceivable location, by that i mean worse than normal. I was wondering whether this was linked to the increase in WP requirement for OB's and organised squads trying to milk every last WP to get an OB? Unintended side effect or my bad luck in running into uplink spamming squads. Triple SP event. Uplink spam gets ludicrous. You can set your watch to it. Pretty sure that confirms the rewards from Uplink are (slightly) too rich - considering they are a drop and forget equipment. Suggest slightly reducing their rewards from 25 to 20 per spawn to balance out. (Higher tier equipment still benefits for of faster spawn times.) CPM are working on getting spam related problems addressed in a way that won't require dedicated logi to lose earnings (since it is already hard to be self sustaining while running top shelf logi support). I will elaborate later, sorry for the tease (or maybe I'm just evil ) because I am extremely tired and am pretty sure I would kitten up the description if I tried to explain it right now. If I don't give some more info on this subject soonish (say within a few days following the million clone event) feel free to prod me so I remember to get it out to you guys See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2830	Posted - 2014.09.19 03:44:00 - [36] - Quote Zaria Min Deir wrote: Cross Atu wrote: bogeyman m wrote: Fox Gaden wrote: This morning when I was picked up twice with a Red standing 20m in front of me in plain sight, I got the idea that there should be a -25 WP penalty if you pick someone up and they die again within 5 seconds. My role in the context of the Support class: Victim! I consider the guy who picked me up twice without clearing the area to be an accomplice to my repeated murder. Maybe if there was a penalty for such negligence people would learn? Mandatory 'request revive' would help prevent this. While request revive would be helpful it is also worth noting that aside from the thoothless KDR stat there is no loss in such situations. Are they frustrating? Yes of course. However no fits or clones are lost until bleed out so the net effect is actually tactically advantageous to your side as a hostile is spending both attention and ammo to repeatedly down a merc who would otherwise have been downed anyway. From a play perspective it needs addressed to keep things fun certainly, but from a tactical perspective a neg reward does not make any sense because the action is actually still contributing positively towards the win. 0.02 ISK Cross ps ~ in essence the request revive before revive is possible would be ideal here Well, you aren't entirely correct in your assertion here that the enemy gains nothing (tactically) from repeatedly downing the same enemy... Every kill in that situation is 50-60 wp towards that squad's warbarge strike, which, in the right hands, is very much a tactical advantage. Which is nullified or more than made up for by the 60 wp per revive. Now I am in no way advocating careless revives, they are not something I condone however the point remains that tactically they aren't detrimental (though they are mediocre in many cases). Now there are many permutations that can make it more subjective of course, what would either merc be doing otherwise for example, or if any blues are going to flank that red, or if any reds flank the downed merc and logi, etc. but speaking of the behavior itself in a vacuum it is on balance valuable because the guaranteed 60 per revive outweighs 50 (possible 60 on a head shot) of downing the clone. Of course it is a very small margin, and further the wp aren't that meaningful in this context as a few +50 or +60 are a very small portion of 5000. Obviously solving the base problem is still ideal, the point was simply that the teeth of the issue aren't all that meaningful and tend to get a bit overblown on the forums. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2831	Posted - 2014.09.19 16:35:00 - [37] - Quote Zaria Min Deir wrote: Cross Atu wrote: Which is nullified or more than made up for by the 60 wp per revive. Now I am in no way advocating careless revives, they are not something I condone however the point remains that tactically they aren't detrimental (though they are mediocre in many cases). Now there are many permutations that can make it more subjective of course, what would either merc be doing otherwise for example, or if any blues are going to flank that red, or if any reds flank the downed merc and logi, etc. but speaking of the behavior itself in a vacuum it is on balance valuable because the guaranteed 60 per revive outweighs 50 (possible 60 on a head shot) of downing the clone. Of course it is a very small margin, and further the wp aren't that meaningful in this context as a few +50 or +60 are a very small portion of 5000. Obviously solving the base problem is still ideal, the point was simply that the teeth of the issue aren't all that meaningful and tend to get a bit overblown on the forums. Cheers, Cross I am actually pretty much entirely sure you are wrong there. When you revive someone THE FIRST TIME you get the 60 points. If they get killed again within a very short time, and get revived, no WP is awarded for the pick up, even if they are picked up by another player. So, no, the WP from the repeated revives doesn't nullify anything. Depends on how quickly it happens, but yes there is a cool down in place, however if we are looking at a theoretical in which it is only revive-get shot-revive-repeat for very long at all that is either A) people specifically farming the mechanic, or B) almost never going to actually happen. So in those actual situations yes it does tend to cancel out, further even were that not the case it would still generally be minutiae as mentioned, subjective in impact (either pos or neg) as mentioned, and addressed by the proposed solution. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2832	Posted - 2014.09.19 20:55:00 - [38] - Quote Zaria Min Deir wrote: Cross Atu wrote: Zaria Min Deir wrote: Cross Atu wrote: Which is nullified or more than made up for by the 60 wp per revive. Now I am in no way advocating careless revives, they are not something I condone however the point remains that tactically they aren't detrimental (though they are mediocre in many cases). Now there are many permutations that can make it more subjective of course, what would either merc be doing otherwise for example, or if any blues are going to flank that red, or if any reds flank the downed merc and logi, etc. but speaking of the behavior itself in a vacuum it is on balance valuable because the guaranteed 60 per revive outweighs 50 (possible 60 on a head shot) of downing the clone. Of course it is a very small margin, and further the wp aren't that meaningful in this context as a few +50 or +60 are a very small portion of 5000. Obviously solving the base problem is still ideal, the point was simply that the teeth of the issue aren't all that meaningful and tend to get a bit overblown on the forums. Cheers, Cross I am actually pretty much entirely sure you are wrong there. When you revive someone THE FIRST TIME you get the 60 points. If they get killed again within a very short time, and get revived, no WP is awarded for the pick up, even if they are picked up by another player. So, no, the WP from the repeated revives doesn't nullify anything. Depends on how quickly it happens, but yes there is a cool down in place, however if we are looking at a theoretical in which it is only revive-get shot-revive-repeat for very long at all that is either A) people specifically farming the mechanic, or B) almost never going to actually happen. So in those actual situations yes it does tend to cancel out, further even were that not the case it would still generally be minutiae as mentioned, subjective in impact (either pos or neg) as mentioned, and addressed by the proposed solution. Whether it's "minutiae" or not is irrelevant, I was just countering your statement that the repeated reviving of an ally that then keeps getting killed again is an advantage to the team ;) My point was that all of that was covered by my prior post so long as the context of the post itself is applied. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2832	Posted - 2014.09.19 20:58:00 - [39] - Quote el OPERATOR wrote: Sooo.... Logis need speed buffs Logis need eHP buffs Logis need repair/recharge/delay buffs Logis need their sidearms back Logis need to be Dropsuit Command level 5 Logis need scouts to lose that 2nd equipment slot Logis need more/better bonuses to equipment use/costs/limits Logis need strengthening without limiting versatility To werk, ceeceepee! cracks novawhip Oooo, thread summery, nifty (there are some details and debates and such as well of course, but it is nice to get things back on track ) See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2850	Posted - 2014.09.20 22:14:00 - [40] - Quote Zaria Min Deir wrote: My point was that all of that was covered by my prior post so long as the context of the post itself is applied. sigh And my point was, that first, I disagree with your assertion that needlefucking gives a tactical advantage of any kind, and more importantly, follow me here, I was correcting your statement "made up for by the 60 wp per revive". Now the context for this is, I have played a support logi for over 2 years, I have heard all sort of accusations and missapprehensions about logis and logistics tools, mainly from people who don't use them. This particular one: "WP whoring logis go around mindlessly reviving people over and over again to farm them for hundreds of points" - which they'd know is not possible, if they actually used a needle themselves. [/quote] Correct, as I already stated there is a cool down, but it is not a hard cap, much like the cap in place on the wp generated by the repair tool (although the repair tool cap is much more lenient). And if we are applying player knowledge context rather than post context (for the record I was talking the context of the statement/post before) then we are more or less in the same boat as I have been playing support logi (still hate the need to clarify that I run Logi as support) since prior to Codex build in closed beta. Zaria Min Deir wrote: So, I simply don't want that misapprehension to be spread further on the forums, particularly by a CPM member. Now, I am willing to believe you actually were aware of the mechanic (being the CPM member on the forums actually discussing Logistics, I should hope so), and just chose to ignore it to make your point. I was aware of it yes, and that knowledge has nothing to do with being or not being a member of the CPM I also did not ignore it, however it seems I was not explicit enough for your tastes which is fine I acknowledge the concern. In light of how the "slayer logi" situation has been generally misperceived I can understand your concern regarding further misconceptions. Another current misconception, which is actually tied to the "repeated revives work to *** WP" misconception that you pointed out is the notion that using a needle is generally or innately a selfish or tactically invalid act. Zaria Min Deir wrote:** I was simply correcting that part so the peole not familiar with it aren't left with a false understanding of it. And, yeah, that was left pretty unclear by what you said earlier, no matter how you "apply the context" That's all. We done? Great. Go back to the regularly scheduled programming. Alright, you were concerned about a misunderstanding and wanted to make sure it was more clear, that's legit. Although this entire exchanged could have been concluded much more quickly if that had been stated upfront rather than responding with posts (honestly including the above quoted) which falsely assume I am somehow "ignoring" a mechanic. Be that as it may, you are correct this entire sidebar is getting off topic so closing the subject and moving on Breakin Stuff wrote: The original slayer logi epidemic was caused DIRECTLY by the logis originally having the caldari assault bonus to shield extenders, and being able to rock more fittings which allowed a logistics suit to brick up to the level of sentinels at the time. The only way you will get slayer logis now is by repeating the mistake that allowed logis to beat all other suit classes in the ability to fit and stack extenders and plates. Currently logis are squishy. They have a bigger hitbox than scouts. If they want to actually be a logi badass they have to sacrifice tank and weapon for equipment. Buffing speed is not going to make a slayer logi. Making the equipment bonuses better will not make slayers. The slayer logi is a symptom of not balancing EHP. Logis should be using their TEAMMATES as their primary HP buffer. But if we don't give thwm the ability to bricktank again? You will not see a slayer because the current meta is extenders > rechargers and plates > reps. While it's not really true it is the perception. But keeping the logis between assaults and scouts defensively will prevent slayer logis. You can literally buff almost everything else 20% and not have it happen again. Yep, even at the time it was really the Cal Logi (because of the extender skill buff) that was the true slayer. After that the fittings flex combined with the plate buff added some extra tank oomph to the logi but even then fitting a proto support logi did not result in a better assault (comparing similar racial assault fits side by side with the logi), support play never had the same ability to brick tank as slay play in a logi suit which has been one of the long standing issues. Anyway, Breakin you're on point here regarding keeping the logis defense between scouts and assaults. At which point cost to run the role needs looked at but that is an additional kettle of fish. 0.02 ISK Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)

Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2896	Posted - 2014.09.23 21:38:00 - [41] - Quote I have a couple specific questions I would like a re-focus on. 1. Current status of fittings resources (CPU/PG) per race from each player who runs them. In other words where do you see shortfalls and why? Does any aspect seem overly generous and where/why? Please make sure you are responding with regards to suits you can field yourself and bonus points if you include specific fittings and/or mods in your descriptions. 2. Presuming the notion of a secondary (weaker) equipment bonus were being added to the frames, what would you advocate those secondary bonuses be - please list by race and include the reasoning behind your selection - and would such a method, in your view, require the alteration or substitution of any current/primary bonus (if yes which ones, how, and what is the rational behind that). Thanks, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2899	Posted - 2014.09.24 01:49:00 - [42] - Quote John Demonsbane wrote: That was me advocating all logi suits being better with all equipment than all other suits. As such, I'm not going to list a secondary bonus, Cross, because I don't think it's a good idea. As for individual suits fitting power, the Amarr desperately needs more PG. CPU is fine. Both laz0r weapons and uplinks are PG intensive, the Amarr suit is virtually designed NOT to use it's own racial weaponry and equipment. For those who aren't going to go looking, the method John is talking about/advocating can be read here please feel free to pipe up if you are more in support of this method than than the lessor version which was proposed in my question above. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2899	Posted - 2014.09.24 02:27:00 - [43] - Quote John Demonsbane wrote: As for individual suits fitting power, the Amarr desperately needs more PG. CPU is fine. Both laz0r weapons and uplinks are PG intensive, the Amarr suit is virtually designed NOT to use it's own racial weaponry and equipment. Can those with the Amarr logi please speak up here? Are you seeing the same issues? How much PG would be needed to make racially themed fits viable, bonus points for anyone who can give a direct comparison to the overall fittings for other racial logi. (and the amarr assault) Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2900	Posted - 2014.09.24 15:46:00 - [44] - Quote bogeyman m wrote: John Demonsbane wrote: That was me advocating all logi suits being better with all equipment than all other suits. As such, I'm not going to list a secondary bonus, Cross, because I don't think it's a good idea. As for individual suits fitting power, the Amarr desperately needs more PG. CPU is fine. Both laz0r weapons and uplinks are PG intensive, the Amarr suit is virtually designed NOT to use it's own racial weaponry and equipment. The Amarr dropsuit: designed by Minmatar slaves. #payback I need to avoid drinking while reading this thread it seems posts like this a totally a laugh/choking hazard. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2952	Posted - 2014.09.30 15:10:00 - [45] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Armor hives near resupply points makes sense. Reload hives is just whoring. I'd have to slightly disagree, I would say it is primarily a way to farm WP but some of them (at proto level), especially when more than one hive is stacked will feed ammo faster than the depot so for weapons like the MD or for heavy use of nades it can serve an actual purpose is select circumstances. But 9 times out of 10 you'd be right, it is only a method of grinding WP. 0.02 ISK Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2952	Posted - 2014.09.30 15:58:00 - [46] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: As far as logis go I think they should only be able to deploy a single hive or droplink at a time (this goes double for everyone else). With the caveat that the deployables should last significantly longer (if you are wearing a logi suit) and provide commisurately more benefit per unit. This would prevent: Quad armor hive tanking. Deliberate spam lag. Zerg rush lemming link placement. And would encourage loginerds to carry more options than four varieties of droplinks and/or hives. Repair guns? Scanners? Injectors? Limiting deployables will force more careful use than "spam all my hives around a supply depot to easy farm warpoints!" Once we do that, the logis need some survivability/escape/evasion love. A few things here, first being able to deploy only one is in my view bad form and does not actually address most of the concerns, however there is a strikingly similar idea that I support (more on that at the bottom). Armor hive tanking, even proto based hex armor hive tanking, can be overcome without casualties by a couple scouts or a heavy lobi pair. I use these examples because I witnessed both during my play time last night. (In the case of the scouts they were even outnumbered by the 'blue' forces on the hives). I have still not seen any confirmation that deployed gear causes lag. I know many players believe this to be true, and I am not saying I can prove it to be false. But what I am saying is that every test on it I have personally run has shown no direct correlation and I have experienced my worst lag (out side of PC matches) in games where equipment deployment was mild (under 12 pieces total) to non-existent. Non-tactical uplink placement can happen no matter how many uplinks can be deployed, and does not become less likely with a limit of this nature because so much of the uplink spam is from people who are not actually playing support they are playing slayer with either a 'swap and drop' or the use of a burner suit. This limit would decrease the number of links they could deploy but not the practice, because it in no way effects their direct role (slaying). Meanwhile these 'fire and forget' assets would persist for even longer (if not bound to the logi suit) and would become closer to useless (if bound to the logi suit in the current methodology where buffs cease to function upon the death of the squishy logi). People who are actually playing support rarely mono stack equipment (more common with hives than uplinks in my experience). I have tried stacked uplink suits to test the viability of using them throughout a match, they run just over 185 to just over 219k ISK and between 374-554 HP (eWar fit, or brick tanked both including the effects of maxed skills). Now someone with a better gun game than mine could get better results no doubt but regardless of that it is hard to run these setups at a profit without heavy combat avoidance (alone the lines of run when you see red dots) and most Logibros run diverse equipment racks not mono tactics. I agree limiting spam is useful, though most often the culprits aren't actually playing logi (either being in a support fit nor focused on a support role) during most of the match, which I think is worth noting. Agreed that logi frames need some hugs to be viable in the current game state and that pushing that forward at the same time as an equipment revision is a sound path to take. Having said all of that here's the current alteration to the deployed equipment mechanic that I support. example numbers wrote: Current proto uplink: 2 active, 3 carried. 20 spawns per uplink (60 potential spawns in total). New characteristics under this proposal: 2 active, 12 carried. 5 spawns per uplink (60 potential spawns in total) Current proto nanohive: 2 active, 3 carried. 48 clusters per nanohive (144 potential clusters in total). New characteristics under this proposal: 2 active, 12 carried. 12 clusters per nanohive (144 potential clusters in total). This set up maintains current max potential while requiring active play by assigning smaller 'portions' to each deployed hive/link as they would require consistent reapplication to remain functional making support play less 'fire and forget'. This would also result in fewer wasted spawns and clusters for those who already actively play support as they would abandon less of their total payload when their squad moves/lose less when their gear is fluxed/destroyed. The other asset of this proposal is that I am reasonably confident it can be implemented server side solely by altering current item stats and thus is a low dev time solution. 0.02 ISK Cross ps ~ I also currently support the notion of support equipment by and large having higher fittings cost and lower ISK cost than present along with an improvement to the logi role buff further pushing sets of proto equipment into the purview of the support specialist role. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2955	Posted - 2014.09.30 16:48:00 - [47] - Quote It's spreadsheet time. This is the current amalgamated result of feedback gathered here, in game, through e-mail and skype as well as CPM conversations and some on the ground testing (you know, that whole 'played support logi as main role since closed beta' thing) by yours truly. The goal of this proposal is to enhance the fidelity of the logistics support niche, making it a more active role (i.e. less fire and forget/spamable) while promoting some unique advantages (one of these being more flexible racial affinity as that is a frequently stated community desire). In attaining these goals, which per force include better survivability, steps were taken to avoid overly encroaching on other roles in game (for example avoiding the "killer bee" CalLogi days of old). Please provide input on this spreadsheet via this forum thread and when doing so note that it is feedback on the spreadsheet proposal so as not to get any feedback mixed up (this is derived from previously provided community feedback after all ). Also bear in mind that some of these ideas may turn out to be beyond the scope of server only updates and thus could require further revision but I deemed it valuable to discuss the conceptual merits at this point regardless, and have made best efforts to note potential tech constraints which will require review. Finally I would like to reiterate my usual request, that being to keep comments and feedback constructive as while I love a good debate vitriol and hyperbole aren't very actionable and as such do not really contribute to the feedback process. Alright mercs, speak up. Cheers, Cross EDIT: Also, my spelling can be awful sometimes when dyslexia trumps spell check, so feel free to let me know if anything has slipped through and needs correcting. Thanks EDIT2: Thanks to the scouts of the barbershop for making my understanding of eWar upgraded from level 0 to it's current approximate level 3 (your input on the eWar ideas I threw at you was very helpful o7) See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2961	Posted - 2014.09.30 16:59:00 - [48] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: @ Cross - Bad URL Fie! /me fights with google EDIT: Try now. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2961	Posted - 2014.09.30 17:09:00 - [49] - Quote \o/ the google monster having been cowed into submission I now return you to your regularly scheduled spreedsheet See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2967	Posted - 2014.09.30 17:49:00 - [50] - Quote Booby Tuesdays wrote: Will post more in depth later, but my initial takeaways... I would vote for method 2 in regards to the bonus changes. I would vote to split the difference with the changes to deployable and active equipment. Too big of a sweeping change imo. I would vote to half the proposed HP buffs, and further buff the regen. At first I was shocked at losing CPU and Grid, but then I saw the 50% reduction to equipment, but then I saw the 25% increase to actual fitting requirements. We want to make logis better with equipment, not completely take it out of every other suits hands, yes? I think we are making some good progress! Replies in order, and also thanks for the feedback looking forward to the in depth post to come Thanks, vote for method 2 noted - this is one key area I really hope to get a lot of feedback on. The difference between deployable and active equipment? Do you mean the change to fittings costs, because that is applied to "the big four" Links, Rep Tool, Hives, Scanner. Please elaborate on this so I know what specifically you're saying here I'm open to the notion of focusing eHP more heavily on regen than raw HP, care to provide some numbers for your ideal breakdown? (everyone else feel free to jump in on this point as well, yea, nay, degrees, whatever ) Current changes to CPU/PG, role bonus (i.e. equipment fittings cost reduction), and equipment fittings requirement increase are closely interlinked. The current method has the following effects (barring a few edge outliers, as there are a lot of possible fitting configurations. Fits based on the Logi frame that are currently running with all equipment slots filled will have a net gain in total fittings remaining after equipment is fit as compared to present. Fits based on the Logi frame which are NOT currently running full sets of equipment will have a net loss in total fittings remaining after equipment is fit as compared to present. (True even of zero equipment fits). This item further mitigates the potential for 'slayer' builds. The increase in equipment fittings cost (CPU/PG) at the current rate makes ADV equipment from "the big 4" has costly to fit under the proposal as PRO equipment from "the big 4" are in current game state. [b]This also serves to further mitigate spam play/increase the value of active support play by making it a more meaningful investment to field, not a grenade style "fill the slot with something because it's there" choice as is so often true now.[/b[ To reiterate, the only things getting that fittings cost increase would be Uplinks, Hives, Scanner, Repair Tool, the four pieces of equipment currently linked directly to the racial logistics frames. No other equipment is being altered in that manner and the cloak is having its bug resolved so logi will no longer be able to fit it with extra ease. I am interested in more feedback on this point, is a "one step" increase in fittings cost on the four main logistics equipment too steep a price to pay as a trade off for reduced spam and diminished slayer fit viability? Does making those specific pieces of gear harder to fit really take it out of the hands of other frames even with the built in ISK cost reduction? Are there better alternatives to making the logistics role more meaningful that do not require further constraints on use? (because clearly the current baseline of "swap and drop" game play from many mercs is not supporting the utility and definition of the role, rather it is feeding spam play). Cheers Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)

Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2967	Posted - 2014.09.30 17:56:00 - [51] - Quote TechMechMeds wrote: MECHANIC POINTS FOR REPAIRING INSTALLATIONS, CRUS, SUPPLY DEPOTS, TURRETS AND VEHICLES. RENAME THE TRIAGE MECHANIC AS.........MECHANIC. PUT A CAP ON IT SO IT CANT BE FARMED. Regen and speed definitely need a buff. I won't bother repeating anything that has been said anymore than I already have lol. Under the proposal the current triage mechanic would be revised somewhat so that use of repair tool, and injector would provide a consistent earnings WP gained to HP restored ratio. This is important to avoid the current problem where potential earnings actually decrease as quality of gear increases. This change would also offer value to repping scouts and other low armor suits, who in my view should not be punished simply for focusing on a lighter frame build. With the above changes in place mechanic points would follow the same method but the ratio of WP per HP restored would have to be different as installations and vehicles have much higher HP pools and making it more earnings effective to rep the local CRU than to provide reps for any of the mercs spawning from it would be an unfortunate direction to go, no? Hence the wording with regards to the inclusion of mechanic points, which I fully agree should be restored to the game. Question: Are you saying; 1. Good job, the proposed regen and speed buff are spot on 2. Reduce the HP buff, and further increase the regen and speed buffs 3. Keep the HP buff as proposed, but further increase the regen and speed buffs 4. Something else I am overlooking ? Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2972	Posted - 2014.09.30 18:07:00 - [52] - Quote TechMechMeds wrote: Cross Atu wrote: It's spreadsheet time. This is the current amalgamated result of feedback gathered here, in game, through e-mail and skype as well as CPM conversations and some on the ground testing (you know, that whole 'played support logi as main role since closed beta' thing) by yours truly. The goal of this proposal is to enhance the fidelity of the logistics support niche, making it a more active role (i.e. less fire and forget/spamable) while promoting some unique advantages (one of these being more flexible racial affinity as that is a frequently stated community desire). In attaining these goals, which per force include better survivability, steps were taken to avoid overly encroaching on other roles in game (for example avoiding the "killer bee" CalLogi days of old). Please provide input on this spreadsheet via this forum thread and when doing so note that it is feedback on the spreadsheet proposal so as not to get any feedback mixed up (this is derived from previously provided community feedback after all ). Also bear in mind that some of these ideas may turn out to be beyond the scope of server only updates and thus could require further revision but I deemed it valuable to discuss the conceptual merits at this point regardless, and have made best efforts to note potential tech constraints which will require review. Finally I would like to reiterate my usual request, that being to keep comments and feedback constructive as while I love a good debate vitriol and hyperbole aren't very actionable and as such do not really contribute to the feedback process. Alright mercs, speak up. Cheers, Cross EDIT: Also, my spelling can be awful sometimes when dyslexia trumps spell check, so feel free to let me know if anything has slipped through and needs correcting. Thanks EDIT2: Thanks to the scouts of the barbershop for making my understanding of eWar upgraded from level 0 to it's current approximate level 3 (your input on the eWar ideas I threw at you was very helpful o7) EDIT3: Seems the hyperlink isn't working for several people so I'm adding the raw one here in hopes that will work better: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1OMpIZBbCMXXi4nkk-NykpDla7SCBo9nYmfIjV28Dp0w/edit?usp=sharing Its looking good but i think shield recharge should be 20hp/s and on that same note, assaults need at the least to be 25hp/s with min assault getting a buff to 30hp/s and caldari getting a slight buff as well. Just to be clear, I have done nothing in this proposal to alter any attribute of either the Assault or the Scout. Generally speaking further tweaks (buffs or nerfs) to either Assault or Scout are outside the scope of this proposal/balance pass so I'm planing to leave them be unless there is an extremely compelling case provided to the contrary because that adds a huge layer of additional complexity/balance concerns. EDIT: Also, further point of clarification, are you saying you would advocate normalization of shield regen for the logi across all races? Quote: I think we need slightly more speed or a native 1hp/s armour rep rate that goes to 2hp/s at adv and 3hp/s at proto. This would stack with gallente as well. Technically speaking I believe the speed would be easier to implement so of the two I lean that way (trying to make sure the proposal is as close to actionable for CCP as I can manage). That being the case what aspects of speed are you referencing here and what degree of change do you advocate? (I also wouldn't cry if you included your reasons why ) Quote: Im not factoring in brick tanked logis or assaults that use the logi as an assault as there is no point balancing against those types. We did that before and i have seen it done in other games, they just move to the next thing to abuse which gets nerfed and then they move on again leaving the 'proper' players of a role screwed. Avoiding role damage due to this exact phenomon is part of the goal here. The first round of nerfs to logistics survivability were - as I stated then - unwarranted in my view, barring the obvious change to the CalLogi shield extender buff which was needed. Most changes thus far - prior to the hotfix cycle - aimed at preventing logistics suits from being the FotM slayers hurt those playing support in them generally more than those using them for a once off assault fit. Taking steps to maintain fittings flexibility for those running equipment (which support players do) as compared to those using the suit without it, is one of the few means available to counter cries for the sort of role damaging nerfs which have happened in the past. Of course I am in no way claiming omniscience even with all the feedback reading and searching I've done so if there are other ideas on how to counter such trends I am more than open to them. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2972	Posted - 2014.09.30 18:09:00 - [53] - Quote TechMechMeds wrote: Cross Atu wrote: TechMechMeds wrote: MECHANIC POINTS FOR REPAIRING INSTALLATIONS, CRUS, SUPPLY DEPOTS, TURRETS AND VEHICLES. RENAME THE TRIAGE MECHANIC AS.........MECHANIC. PUT A CAP ON IT SO IT CANT BE FARMED. Regen and speed definitely need a buff. I won't bother repeating anything that has been said anymore than I already have lol. Under the proposal the current triage mechanic would be revised somewhat so that use of repair tool, and injector would provide a consistent earnings WP gained to HP restored ratio. This is important to avoid the current problem where potential earnings actually decrease as quality of gear increases. This change would also offer value to repping scouts and other low armor suits, who in my view should not be punished simply for focusing on a lighter frame build. With the above changes in place mechanic points would follow the same method but the ratio of WP per HP restored would have to be different as installations and vehicles have much higher HP pools and making it more earnings effective to rep the local CRU than to provide reps for any of the mercs spawning from it would be an unfortunate direction to go, no? Hence the wording with regards to the inclusion of mechanic points, which I fully agree should be restored to the game. Question: Are you saying; 1. Good job, the proposed regen and speed buff are spot on 2. Reduce the HP buff, and further increase the regen and speed buffs 3. Keep the HP buff as proposed, but further increase the regen and speed buffs 4. Something else I am overlooking ? Cheers, Cross 3, but i think we should get one or the other with speed and regen buffs. Edit: that hp stacks quite a fair bit with level 5 dropsuit armour so now looking at it, we should get one or the other with regen and speed. Thank you for the clarification See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2972	Posted - 2014.09.30 18:12:00 - [54] - Quote I know how that can be o7 See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2974	Posted - 2014.09.30 18:38:00 - [55] - Quote ADAM-OF-EVE wrote: maybe ccp should consider a twist on other games resupply and repair mechanics which do work and do not suffer the same problems as what dust equipment does but with a dust twist. take hives. why can't it be a simple throw a box of ammo down or med pack or in dusts case a small hive which quickly depletes. for the logi this could mean carrying an endless supply of hives which restock over time completely ruling out spam and replacing strategic placement of equipment which cannot move with the flow of battle with more effective fast clearing and purposeful deployments which can. the alternative is make them an active piece of equipment which can go with the logi and restock players within a radius. currently there is only 2 piece of equipment that require actual contact with another player and they are the repair tool and the needle. everything else doesn't require any contact with anyone. they can be used from anywhere at any time. for a logi that is supposed to be supporting the squad or team to have to leave all its equipment behind every time you move is wrong. hives and uplinks are not situational equipment. they are the life blood of any fight. without either the fight is lost. a simple thing like this would remove all spam from the game aside from uplinks. allow logis to essentially take all their equipment with them and use it in a more directed way rather than a throw it down and then see who needs it. this, needle, repair tool,scanner and the logibro never needs to leave his squad mates except to respawn. with carefully set timers and ammo counts per deployment and limits on how many deployed and how many can be used at one time this could increase the overall effectiveness of logis and bring more purpose to their role. This style of game play is what the spreadsheet hopes to move things more towards. I acknowledge there are certain departures from the spreadsheet and what you describe however a full alteration of function as opposed to a change in numeric stats as listed in the sheets proposal, will come with a much higher dev hour cost and I am not confident it can be done without a UI update. While hives reimagined as an active module with a cooldown certainly have virtues worth discussing I think that is more of a Legion change then a Dust one tech wise. How do you think the current proposal holds up to your designs on the subject, even if it faces some obvious constraints? See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2976	Posted - 2014.09.30 19:00:00 - [56] - Quote TechMechMeds wrote: Cross Atu wrote: ADAM-OF-EVE wrote: maybe ccp should consider a twist on other games resupply and repair mechanics which do work and do not suffer the same problems as what dust equipment does but with a dust twist. take hives. why can't it be a simple throw a box of ammo down or med pack or in dusts case a small hive which quickly depletes. for the logi this could mean carrying an endless supply of hives which restock over time completely ruling out spam and replacing strategic placement of equipment which cannot move with the flow of battle with more effective fast clearing and purposeful deployments which can. the alternative is make them an active piece of equipment which can go with the logi and restock players within a radius. currently there is only 2 piece of equipment that require actual contact with another player and they are the repair tool and the needle. everything else doesn't require any contact with anyone. they can be used from anywhere at any time. for a logi that is supposed to be supporting the squad or team to have to leave all its equipment behind every time you move is wrong. hives and uplinks are not situational equipment. they are the life blood of any fight. without either the fight is lost. a simple thing like this would remove all spam from the game aside from uplinks. allow logis to essentially take all their equipment with them and use it in a more directed way rather than a throw it down and then see who needs it. this, needle, repair tool,scanner and the logibro never needs to leave his squad mates except to respawn. with carefully set timers and ammo counts per deployment and limits on how many deployed and how many can be used at one time this could increase the overall effectiveness of logis and bring more purpose to their role. This style of game play is what the spreadsheet hopes to move things more towards. I acknowledge there are certain departures from the spreadsheet and what you describe however a full alteration of function as opposed to a change in numeric stats as listed in the sheets proposal, will come with a much higher dev hour cost and I am not confident it can be done without a UI update. While hives reimagined as an active module with a cooldown certainly have virtues worth discussing I think that is more of a Legion change then a Dust one tech wise. How do you think the current proposal holds up to your designs on the subject, even if it faces some obvious constraints? Nooooooooooooooooooo. in legion then lol. Yeah, I mean I'd be happy to discuss the implications of wider changes like this if or when we get consistent client patches back into Dust but that is all revenue/business based and outside of my sphere as a CPM, so I'm not waiting for it, just working with what's on the table now Quote: Also http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0JYsQ8p3wM8&feature=player_detailpage Thank you for this, totally cracked me up See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2979	Posted - 2014.09.30 19:10:00 - [57] - Quote ADAM-OF-EVE wrote: i didn't notice the spreadsheet. just looked it over. equipment seems ok but the cost reduction on the repair tool isn't enough in my opinion. its the single most expensive piece of equipment a logi can carry yet using it leaves you open do death. i think 40% off or bringing the cost in line with other active equipment would mean more players using the best over the worst to keep costs down That brings up a very good point, and one which I must sheepishly admit I overlooked in the spreadsheet, that being the cost comparison between pieces of equipment. Heretofore I have not touched the comparative costs of equipment but would like to open the floor for that now. I wish to invite everyone to comment on the relative cost and balance within the equipment line, which mods cost too much PG or CPU, which cost too little, where are the perceived gaps between value and function? This is good information to include, mercs I'd like your input. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2979	Posted - 2014.09.30 19:44:00 - [58] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: @ Cross I'm really liking this spreadsheet; solid content, superb presentation. o7 Thanks, and thank you again for your efforts with that math tab helping me get my head around the eWar. Quote: A few requests for clarification: On Proximity Mines - In addition to the proposed increase in carrying capacity, the Demolitions Skill change appears to apply an unmitigated +25% to damage. Is this intentional? On Remote Explosives - On what grounds are we extending RE arming sequence again? What specific length in delay do you intend to propose? On Deployables Reimagined - Assuming this concept were implemented, roughly how many charge sniper rifle rounds would one compact nanohive dispense? M1 Locus grenades? 1. Yes it is a straight up buff to proximity mines, they are usually only useful (barring being combined with REs or other forms of AV) in stacks of 3 or more, considering their playloads (max carried and max deployed) that makes their current use case exceptionally narrow, when was the last time anyone ran proxies in a single equipment slot on a non-depot swap suit? 2. Specific length is undetermined but intended to be minor (would like barber feedback on that actually). As to the lengthening of the arming timer (again for the thread I'll reiterate that it is not the triggering timer) it is due to continued RE prevalence as a Locus Grenade style asset. REs have a diverse set of applications which is as it should be however when they prove to be generally more effective - as a diverse asset - within the role of an existing singular asset, that is problematic. REs as AV, or as traps, or to drop round a corner to lure the unwary are great applications, but when REs can be used to grenade toss at a group of mercs for multiple fast action kills (as has happened in several of my Delta matches as recently as last night), that seems to be exceeding their use case/role because the only way for grenades to be effective in that context would be to buff them until they are meaningfully better at those attacks than REs and that starts to take us back into the days of contact nade spam. 3. The compact nanohive is a bit of an exception, due to its status as a single carried single deployed item it would remain unchanged by the Deployables Reimagined aspect of the spreadsheet and would retain current functionality. As to how many rounds of charged sniper ammo that current value is, I honestly do not know off the top of my head, same for M1 Locus et al. Total number of X ammo resupplied under the proposal, the max payload, remains unchanged, it is only the portions per hive in each version that are altered therefore any hive without more than one will remain the same. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2980	Posted - 2014.09.30 20:36:00 - [59] - Quote Booby Tuesdays wrote: My bad, by deployable I mean carried. Again, I would split the difference. Something along the lines of 6 carried, 2 active, 10 spawns for links. 6 carried, 2 active, 24 clusters per hive. No instapop, but also more strategic versus drop and forget. The other question is what happens to special equipment such as Gauged Hives? Would you still be able to carry and deploy more of them versus their cheaper counterparts? Gotcah Yes special cases such as the Gauged Hives would still provide their benefits Ishukone Gauged Nanohive wrote: Current Max Active 3 Max Carried 4 Clusters per hive 48 Proposed Max Active 3 Max Carried 16 Clusters per hive 12 The max active is staying the same as current the current value in all cases as part of the goal of this proposed change is to reduce the "spamability" of deployed equipment. As to splitting the difference, I am not vehemently opposed to that however I would suggest that, since these are imminently hotfixible values (as I understand it) we start with the smallest/most fact cycle method and scale back as/if needed once support players have had a chance to test them in "real world" contexts and CCP has had the chance to gather metrics. Does that seem reasonable or am I perhaps missing something? Booby Tuesdays wrote: I'm all for slight HP buffs, but with max skills Logis will be quite tankable again with those numbers. I think Min at 125, 175. Amarr at 120, 240. Gal at 110, 220. Cal at 220, 110. Each race still gets a buff, just slightly less so to compensate for Core Skills. I would be willing to go even less than this as well. Say a flat 30 HP buff to each suit. I have tried to focus on minimal wide spectrum buffs rather than more substantial specific buffs in the initial document. That being said I am not against a more regen heavy ratio with lower buffer values if that is the community preference. Both are, I believe, viable, so I will be keenly watching the feedback with regards to this aspect. Cross Atu wrote: Current changes to CPU/PG, role bonus (i.e. equipment fittings cost reduction), and equipment fittings requirement increase are closely interlinked. The current method has the following effects (barring a few edge outliers, as there are a lot of possible fitting configurations. Booby Tuesdays wrote: I love that this big change is also a big incentive to put equipment in every slot. Again, my concern is that the other suits will no longer be able to carry meaningful equipment, especially with the proposed radical change to carried and active equipment. How is a Basic Hive going to help my Min Commando hold a point with my Swarms if it pops after 1 clip? This incentive to place better equipment on your suit would be an indirect nerf to all other suits. I'm all for forcing Logis to fill all their equipment slots, I just don't think these changes are the solution. A step in the right direction, yes. The overall net change for other classes amounts to "can now fit advanced at the prior fittings cost of proto" with respects to the big four. Outside of the big for there is no fittings implication for other classes. I know I am in a sense recovering ground here but is fitting proto rep tool/hive/link/scanner at their current CPU/PG cost really endemically vital to the role of any other class? At some level this is certainly a substantive restriction there is no doubt, however if the logistics role is to be support, and that support is focused primarily on the big four, but the use/need for those items can already be filled (as it is now) even without the racial bonuses from the logistics suits (barring to some extent the repair tool) then what method is there for defining a substantive mechanic for the support role? If Assaults could damp almost as well as scouts but with better dps and more tank, why run scout? If Commandos could move almost as fast as Assaults but make their racial light weapons better in each case then why run Assault? If Assaults, Scouts, and Commandos can run equipment such that it means the majority of their support needs are fulfilled without a logistics frame currently/actively on the field (swap 'n' drop does not count) then why run one? Just to be clear I am not trying to be rhetorical here, if there is an aspect of this I am overlooking please illuminate *[sic] character limit* See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2980	Posted - 2014.09.30 21:08:00 - [60] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Thanks for the clarification, Cross. Last but not least, the +25% non-Logi EQ tax is steep. From a Scout's POV, this change will make it very difficult to fit decent EQ alongside cloak. This will affect all Scouts (not just Logi Scouts) and will impact low-level Scouts especially hard. I'd urge caution on this point. Direct buffs to the Logi I can get definitely get behind, but I don't know that it's necessary, appropriate or safe to kick other classes in the balls. Frames are closer than ever to balance, and an indirect nerf on this scale could have unintended consequences. My two cents. o7 The table is improperly labeled (my fault), the +25% change is only applied to links, rep tool, hives, and active scanners. All other equipment types remain unchanged in their fittings values <-- Bold added to try and clear up the misconception my labeling fail has created within this thread. With that clarified does your stance on how this effects scouts/other roles alter? Because those four pieces of equipment are (in my view) pretty definitively support items (not more general case items like the RE). Also the step up in costs is a shift which should put proposed ADV at roughly current PRO fittings levels, does that meta step have a large enough impact when applied to those four pieces of support equipment to qualify as kicking other roles in the balls? (As per usual, these are actual not rhetorical questions, I have this up for feedback so people can present new data to be included o7) See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)

Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2982	Posted - 2014.09.30 21:35:00 - [61] - Quote Booby Tuesdays wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: Thanks for the clarification, Cross. Last but not least, the +25% non-Logi EQ tax is steep. From a Scout's POV, this change will make it very difficult to fit decent EQ alongside cloak. This will affect all Scouts (not just Logi Scouts) and will impact low-level Scouts especially hard. I'd urge caution on this point. Direct buffs to the Logi I can get definitely get behind, but I don't know that it's necessary, appropriate or safe to kick other classes in the balls. Frames are closer than ever to balance, and an indirect nerf on this scale could have unintended consequences. My two cents. o7 This is pretty much exactly what I was failing to explain properly. I want equipment to be better in a logi's hands, and inferior in anothers, but I don't want the equipment to be useless to the point of not being able to fit anything. There are plenty of times that I will be carrying the ammo, links, and reps, but a squadmate will have the scanner on an Assault or Scout suit. With this proposal, that Assault or Scout would maybe be able to carry a basic scanner. My question remains the same however, if under the current status of the game those support needs can be readily met without the presence of a logistics fame in squad what incentives can make said frame of adequate value to field? Assuming 6 equipment slots in a squad that covers most needs/configurations even discounting depot swap, and while the concept of "just buff the logi use of the gear" is solid in theory there is a certain level of how that needs to be crack for that to be a viable path. How does one buff the active scanner above current levels to make the various types of it worth fielding without also breaking the scout role? How does one buff uplinks without magnifying their frequently spammed status without also taking steps to make them harder to use? (the Amarr buff not applying if the merc is currently dead or in another suit also renders that racial buff a frequent non-factor but changing it to be persistent after death/swap would allow for a lot of swap-spam without actual use of the frame during game play). Repair Tool, currently the most effective and meaningful racially buffed logistics equipment suffers from inverse scaling (potential WP goes down as efficacy of gear goes up) but discounting that it is also capped on earnings so the buffed status only means hitting cooldown faster and a further buff would simply result in more unrewarded active time on the field. Stepping away from earnings entirely, even the repair tool as the strongest current logi use case is often seen as tactically superior on a scout frame despite the minmitar bonus (this statement is made from both feedback and my own observations in PC, FW, and pubs). Scouts and Assault are both, and even under the proposal will remain, more combat viable than a logistics frame, how then do alter reps so that a logi with reps is more worthwhile to field than a more combat viable frame with slightly weaker reps? Nanohives, possibly the best case IMO for an increased buff as opposed to a restriction as I think the repeated nerfs to them have been a bit heavy handed. That having been said there are a few major flaws to a logi based hive buff 1. Their bonus works the same as the Amarr, and if it did not there would be little/no incentive to stay in the CalLogi once those hives are down. 2. CCP has been unwilling to rebuff hives due to their metrics, and I do not know if those have changed enough for this to be something they would even consider. 3. In many use cases outside of repper hives, a hive is as likely to be destroyed as fully consumed, even so many logi (if they do not spam) have hives remaining on their suit when they are killed. In the case of repper hives they are already quite potent at present. In both cases I am at a loss for how to buff their function/value in a way that is potent enough to warrant it as a role defining mod while not being brokenly OP. In each case I am completely open to options and alternatives but the question at present devolves to this; If logistics frames are going to be combat weaker than Heavies, Commandos, Scouts and Assaults, how much of a limitation of the other classes ability to self support is required/balanced to allow for a meaningful and competitive role? In many cases logi (when fully support fit) need their counterparts in the other roles or they are not going to survive long, is it over the top for the reciprocal of 'other roles will need logi or not be supported very well' over the top/unfair? 0.02 ISK Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2983	Posted - 2014.09.30 23:00:00 - [62] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: breaks my commando suits where my gear is so PG/CPU tight my options are needle or rep tool. Which Rep tool (it will not effect the needle fit whatsoever) and how integral to your role would you say that rep tool is? I am not contenting this will have a net impact of zero on current fittings. It will obviously have a net impact on current fittings and that impact will obviously be a constraining one, but for example moving from a Six Kin Triage Repair Tool to a BDR-8 Triage Repair Tool did not strike me as role breaking for a role which is not primarily support focused. Am a wrong? Is that 8/HPs enough of a gulf as to be role breaking? (If so please elaborate as to why ) See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2984	Posted - 2014.09.30 23:30:00 - [63] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Cross Atu wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: Thanks for the clarification, Cross. Last but not least, the +25% non-Logi EQ tax is steep. From a Scout's POV, this change will make it very difficult to fit decent EQ alongside cloak. This will affect all Scouts (not just Logi Scouts) and will impact low-level Scouts especially hard. I'd urge caution on this point. Direct buffs to the Logi I can get definitely get behind, but I don't know that it's necessary, appropriate or safe to kick other classes in the balls. Frames are closer than ever to balance, and an indirect nerf on this scale could have unintended consequences. My two cents. o7 The table is improperly labeled (my fault), the +25% change is only applied to links, rep tool, hives, and active scanners. All other equipment types remain unchanged in their fittings values <-- Bold added to try and clear up the misconception my labeling fail has created within this thread. With that clarified does your stance on how this effects scouts/other roles alter? Because those four pieces of equipment are (in my view) pretty definitively support items (not more general case items like the RE). Also the step up in costs is a shift which should put proposed ADV at roughly current PRO fittings levels, does that meta step have a large enough impact when applied to those four pieces of support equipment to qualify as kicking other roles in the balls? (As per usual, these are actual not rhetorical questions, I have this up for feedback so people can present new data to be included o7) I can't speak for any other frames, so I'll restrict my response to Scoutly functions ... Hives - Common to sniper, counter sniper, AV loadouts. Uplinks - Common to rush, infiltration, exfiltration loadouts. Scanners - Common to reconnaissance loadouts. Valid uses and I am in no way trying to prevent them from existing, the question in large part however is a matter of degree (which is the aspect the proposal seeks to address). Examples, as per your above: Hives - Transition from Ishkone to K-2, net loss 48 clusters (down to 96 from 144) Uplinks - Transition from Viziam Flux to N-11/A Flux, net loss 5 spawns and a 29.30% longer spawn rate (at 8% base) than the Viziams -21.30% (all effecting the 15 sec base) that's a net shift of ~4.4 sec I believe, no? Scanners - Transition from Duvolle Quantum to A-45 Quantum, Cooldown improved by 10 sec, Target Visibility down by 5.00 sec, Scan precision 8 dB negative shift. Are those performance gaps sever enough to destroy their use in Scoutly functions? Adipem Nothi wrote: The loadouts above perform battlefield functions physically and functionally removed from those of embedded logistics; I agree that they're using the same EQ that Logis use, but they're using it differently. For example ... When FC says "I need an Uplink behind Echo", a Scout is dispatched as he has best odds of delivering that Uplink. When FC says "Push Echo", Slayers and Slayer Support come in on that Uplink and push the objective; Slayer Support reinforces friendly foothold with his own Uplinks. In this scenario, I see two units using the same equipment, but I do not see overlapping roles or functions. I see squad play; I do not see Scout Logis. I concur that the presence of such is non-problematic and wish to firmly reiterate that I am not seeking to eliminate any such, I was off the view however that a single meta step down grade in gear quality (or upgrade in cost) would not be so burdensome as break those roles, while it would conversely allow the specialized logi some way to stand out a bit more. If this degree of change is truly destructive to the role please elaborate as to how and why so that a more workable solution can be reached. o7 continued in pt 2 See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2984	Posted - 2014.09.30 23:33:00 - [64] - Quote pt 2 Adipem Nothi wrote: On Scout Logi: Why not mimic the cloak? Make rep tools and/or needles very resource intensive; give Logis an innate PG/CPU discount. Breaks the Scout Logi; doesn't break anything else. What do you think? Currently racial logistics paradigms as defined by CCP are; Cal - Hives Amarr - Links Gal - Scans Min - Reps Now, while a case can be made for not doing things this way, indeed I made such a case prior to this method being adopted, I cannot guarantee how willing CCP would be do to a ground up overhaul on the nature of racial logistics bonuses and as such have been trying to 'color within the lines' to a great degree with my proposal. Leaving that aside for the moment to address the idea directly here is what I see as a long time support player. Pros Strong link to rep/revive for all logi, and thus strong role definition. Access to reps for all logi, which would be a net upgrade for 3/4 racial types as compared to current (general comment, as not all players in each race would want to adopt the new playstyle) Uniqueness of function - key to defining any role Hurdles or drawbacks Injectors have little room for an actual buff (we already have 100% injectors for sale) leaving only a discount on fittings. They are currently one of the 'lighter' bits of equipment to fit thus the net effect would be fewer non-logi suits running needles, in a meta where logi mortality is already their gravest concern. Requires new racial buffs across the boards. - I'm not strictly opposed to this by any means, but it would require a substantial enough change that none of the three community derived proposals in the spreadsheet are workable. Role Bonus - If the role bonus is changed from the current -25% to all equipment to a higher reduction applied only to repair tool/injector even with increased cost on those items that is likely to be a net nerf to overall logi fittings as the net savings would have to be high enough to counter balance the now unmodified cost of any other equipment being run. Further it would eliminate or cripple use of most non-medic centric logi (or even 'off brand' medic centric logi like needle + rep hive Cals). Now all of that being said this idea, focusing on giving all Logi reps as a core element and then giving them non-equipment centric bonuses as the racial, has merit and I'm more than happy to explore it, but it does open the door much wider to combat capable logi, and unlike the proposed method does not include built in mechanics to stop pure slayer builds run on logistics frames (which is not to say there may not be ideas for how to do that in this context, simply that I haven't come up with one during the time it took to type up this reply ) Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2984	Posted - 2014.09.30 23:42:00 - [65] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Very basic. PG/cpu is too tight for more than STD/MLT I tend to opt for repping people while my armor rep modules get to work. Nine times out of ten the logis aren't repping. Current numbers MLT - 22 CPU 5 PG STD - 15 CPU 5 PG Numbers under +25% proposal MLT - 28 CPU 6 PG STD - 20 CPU 6 PG So if you can fit the MLT then you could fit the STD under the proposal (unless your PG is 100% used up already). This being the case, considering your tight fittings, would you say that this 5 CPU 1 PG increase in cost on the STD Tool is role breaking for your Commando? Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2984	Posted - 2014.10.01 00:06:00 - [66] - Quote WeapondigitX V7 wrote: To buff logi nanohives you could: make the logi's get a skill bonus towards non repping hives which increases the range of the hives to roughly 30m. However add the disadvantage where the further allies are from the nanohives (the centre of radius of effect), the larger they will be penalized by having less ammo restored. Add the additional effects where the further allies are from the nanohive the less the nanohive will be drained and the relationship between clusters of nanites lost per ammo round given to allies will change in proportion to distance. more distance = less clusters of nanites lost per ammo round given. this will mean that players will want to stay at the edge of the nanohive radius to get max volume of benefit over a defined period of time with smallest loss of nanite clusters. that method of thinking will briefly change during battle sometimes to needing to be closer to nanohive to keep up with changing ammunition demands over a defined period of time when the enemy is attacking with many enemy clones at once. then allies will likely change back to original behavior when enemy is not attacking in large numbers. this will allow logis to have a larger area of effect than other scouts or assaults using nanohives. This is very dynamic, and (though I hate how often I end up saying this ) it sounds like a method worth considering for Legion but AFAIK would require recoding the behavior of the nanohives (i.e. client / patch level alteration) rather than changing the values of currently existing behavior (i.e. server / hotfix level alteration, which is where we currently sit development wise). I know how hard and even frustrating it can be to simultaneously think outside the box for innovation and side the box for possible function but that is the context we find ourselves in when seeking role balance currently within Dust 514. 0.02 ISK Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2984	Posted - 2014.10.01 00:07:00 - [67] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: I think the question that needs to be asked here is: "Should Non-Logistics suits be able to fit Proto equipment without sacrificing anything else?" Agreed. If answered "no" the conclusion is rather straight forward. If answered "yes" the follow up question becomes "what mechanical metric should be used to define the support/logistics role if not equipment?" 0.02 ISK Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2987	Posted - 2014.10.01 00:52:00 - [68] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: @ Cross / Pokey I'm willing to bet that if you check the numbers, you'll find that proto Scouts aren't typically running proto equipment. In the cases where they are, they are likely running a single-purpose fit and making big sacrifices elsewhere to do so (e.g. my Uplink runner has no primary weapon and no grenade). I'm level 5 in Hives, Uplinks, Remotes, Active Scanners. I can count on two hands the number of times I've used proto hives or remotes. And I don't plan to. They're too expensive and too tough to fit. It seems much more likely to me we're talking about downgrading from ADV EQ to STD and in the case of low-level Scouts, STD EQ to an empty slot. Edit: As far as Active Scanners go, PRO are the only ones worth using; if I couldn't fit a prototype scanner, I very likely wouldn't run my forward recon fit. Hummm... stares at drawing board kicks it a few times to shake inspiration loose There's got to be an angle to approach this from... EDIT: What about a tiered approach to that upscale? If instead of a blanket increase to 'the big 4' at all levels it was something like STD - 10% ADV - 15% PRO - 25% or STD - 5% ADV - 10% PRO - 20% The above numbers are illustrative as much as anything as I haven't plugged them in at all, but how tight are these fittings, would a method such as the above listed provide more viable wiggle room? See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2996	Posted - 2014.10.01 18:18:00 - [69] - Quote Booby Tuesdays wrote: Cross Atu wrote: My question remains the same however, if under the current status of the game those support needs can be readily met without the presence of a logistics fame in squad what incentives can make said frame of adequate value to field? Ok, so what I am gathering is that from this angle of attack is if a squad or solo player wants good equipment, they will need a Logi by their side. Even a full squad with basic and advanced equipment wouldn't be as effective as a squad with a single Logi. This concept works in theory. What about when a Commando, a suit made for running alone, can only carry basic or advanced equipment, even on a Proto suit. I can barely fit Proto rep hives on my Min Commando currently, while using LP store Specialist weapons, and a mix of Proto and Adv modules. With this new concept of equipment, I would just need to spawn my Logi suit first, drop some goodies, and then switch to my Commando with inferior equipment to defend an objective. Not a huge deal, but aren't we trying to get away from that playstyle? Drop and swap suits playstyle? Or should that be a thing, since I am specced into both, should I not be able to reap the benefits of both? How about the Scout uplink runner that plays a key tactical role as well? Drop and swap would be diminished under the proposal due to the reduction in payload per deployed item (clusters in the case of nanohives). Being specced into more than one suit already does not grant the benefits of both suits simultaneously. The advantage there is being able to adapt to the situation, not having every tool for use all at once. I have proto sentential and proto min scout but that does not give my assault or logi more eHP nor faster hacking speed. Currently the only role that can more directly be filled by a quick swap to another suit is support logistics and that undercuts the idea of those actions being legitimately the focus for role. Everyone wants to be self-sufficient, if given the option for 2 Light Weapons which suit would not take it? They grant flexibility and more ability to run solo. If given the option for Sentinel eHP, who would not take it? they can take more punishment and run solo better. If given scout eWar potential or mobility, who would not take it? They can define the terms of their engagements and thus run solo more. When given more HP and fittings options, the Assaults certainly took it. It allows them to further hone their dps and survivability and thus run solo more. Even when people choose to run as a squad they want to be as self sufficient as possible, which is totally understandable, but where is the role for a support class in a world where ever other role sustains all their optimal needs (because running proto gear is totally a question of being optimal) by themselves? I have asked this question before and will reiterate it now; Does it damage the role of the commando not to have prototype repair hives at the current fitting costs? Does the role of the commando require that level of reps, and that they be provided without external support or it loses its specialist niche? Does the Thales sniper (be that in a Gal Sent, CalMannod, or Scout) need prototype resupply hives at the current fittings cost without any external team support? Would running advanced or paying more in CPU/PG damage his role? Does the infiltration uplink scout require prototype uplinks at the present fittings cost to do his job? Does that at most 4.4 sec difference in spawn time for his squad truly make him in-viable? I run a bit of everything but I do not claim to be an expert in everything by any means, why is why I ask these questions. If there is specific reason why other roles need to have proto equipment at the present costs, and need to have it not come from a logi but from themselves otherwise they lose their specialist role then please elaborate those reasons. Again, not rhetorical, I am actually asking these questions and honestly seeking answers. Why and in what cases is it needful to other specialist roles to have direct (i.e. non-logi) use of prototype support equipment at the present CPU/PG costs? Followup question, in those cases where it is needful, what value does a dedicated support specialist offer to that other role which that role cannot directly supply for themselves? continued in pt2 See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2998	Posted - 2014.10.01 18:53:00 - [70] - Quote pt 2 Booby Tuesdays wrote: If we are making equipment even worse, except in a Logi's hands, shouldn't each Logi then get a boost to all equipment? What is the point of running Logi if one or more of your equipment is just as garbage as a non-logi squadmates? That brings us back around to the whole, "a blanket buff to all equipment for Logis just homogenizes the role too much" argument that I agree with. If we give a blanket buff, then how do we differentiate between the races again? I agree with the logic of the equipment changes in theory, I just am failing to see how they will work in practice... Perhaps I need more coffee. Mmmm... Coffee.... Making equipment prototype equipment a valuable premium (is this not what prototype gear is/was slated to be prior to the PC passive ISK faucet?) even without added skill buffs is part of the point. If anything below prototype is "garbage" then that is an issue that needs to be addressed in its own right. ADV RR, CR, ScR, FG, HMG, NK, Bolt Pistols, etc. kill people all the time during my matches if it is worthless (i.e. of insufficient added value to be worth fitting) to run a piece of equipment that is below prototype then equipment needs a statistical overhaul. But even if that were (or is) the case that would substantiate the notion that a logi running proto without racial buffs to enhance it further (just role buffs to enhance ability to fit it) would then have more of a defined specialist role when compared to the current baselines. So in my view it does not correlate to a racially homogenizing blanket buff to all equipment. However let us examine that notion, how would one effectively apply such a buff in a meaningful way? Even cutting and pasting every current racial buff on to every logi frame (a very heavy wide spectrum change) would not really attain substantially positive results. These buffs already exist and they do not drive players commonly use those support roles through an entire match. Would such a sweeping buff cause the skills be used more? Sure, because now the Gal who already fits an uplink would just have that uplink work a bit better, now the Amarr who has a repair tool would get a little more function out of it etc. So buff the effect of the racial bonuses, don't alter fittings right? Well that brings the question of how. Uplinks - Is it more common to have a proto uplink destroyed or to burn through all 25-25 of its spawns? And spawn in time is capped at 3 sec, so how would further buffing this racial work? Nanohives - Much like above, is it more common to have them destroyed or fully consumed? Consumption happens faster than uplinks especially if people are spamming nades/REs or using repper hives. We could increase the cluster bonus still further, but in a world where those who want them have proto hives which do essentially the same thing just for not quite as long (and don't need them at all if they die) is that extra helping of hives going to create a meaningful role/purpose on the field? Meaningful enough that people will ask for/seek out the use of that fit as they do with other non-support roles currently? Scanners - The scanning system is very absolute right now, you win or you lose there isn't really an in between. With that in mind we cannot further buff scan precision. We could buff range perhaps, or angle, but too much of those moves us back toward the 360 spin scans which were nefed out of existence. We could further buff duration, this would add some chance to earn more WP at least, but even if we buffed all of these there would still be higher precision 360 degree passive scans, so how often is this fit going to be specifically valuable or sought out compared to those passives? Repair Tool - Currently most viable, and ironically holds the greatest possible room for buffs. If buffed heavily this could reach the level where it can fully counter a single source of incoming fire (non-alpha of course) making it more like the reps in EVE. This is a notion I have presented on and off since closed beta as a possible alternative to the current system/troubles, but it has never gained much traction or even comment. In short, how does one make support roles better at using equipment to an extent where other players will want them on the field (i.e. they will have a meaningful role to fill) in the current game state while not making their use of equipment brokenly overpowered? (Again, actual questions, not rhetorical). 0.02 ISK Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)

Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2999	Posted - 2014.10.01 19:11:00 - [71] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Cross Atu wrote: ... If there is specific reason why other roles need to have proto equipment at the present costs, and need to have it not come from a logi but from themselves otherwise they lose their specialist role then please elaborate those reasons. Fit for slaying, the new-and-improved Logi will be nearly as good as the Assault at frontline asskicking. Give that Logi superior gear -- while subtracting from everyone else's -- and we likely tilt the scale in their favor. Factor in squad synergy, and we have a strong possibility that Nyain San will be running six of these at a time. One of the key aspects of the proposal was trying to make sure "fit for slaying" in any comparable way to Assaults, Commandos et al was not one of the effects. "Fit for getting to cover in a hot zone" is more the aim, which requires more survivability than is currently present but put a Scrambler on the Amarr Assault and the Amarr Logi (with mirrored loadouts) and the Assault uses it better hands down, same story with the Commando. These changes should not, if done properly, make the logistics frames "an assault with a couple extra equipment slots" and avoiding that is part of the reason for having this conversation, making sure other roles are not infringed upon. Adipem Nothi wrote: I can think of no reason why they wouldn't: Similar tank. Similar gank. Superior gear. Superior squadplay. If we want a guaranteed and valuable, Logi-exclusive support function, why not simply make needles and reppers infeasible to run on other fits? In addition, of course, to the proposed base stat and bonus improvements. I really wish some of my other questions on this front had not gotten lost in the shuffle because I would very much like your feedback on whether prototype uplinks (as are used on your posted fits) are necessary for the infiltrator and exfiltrator roles you describe. I also remain curious about alternate racial bonuses, as would be needed in light of making logistics rep/revive centric as you suggest. As I posted when you raised this idea prior, I am not opposed to the notion, and in some ways quite like it, but there are some challenges to be overcome if it is to be made viable. Thus far (unless I have missed it) there haven't really been solutions/alternatives proposed to those challenges. I am not trying to be obtuse, it is simply that if the change I have cobbled together through feedback and study is problematic then I need to know very specifically how/why and may very well need others contributing their thoughts to come up with alternate solutions. Adipem Nothi wrote: -------------------- I believe I've contributed my two cents and now run risk of repeating myself ... on a subject that I admittedly know very little about :-). I take my leave and defer freely to the experts. Thank you again Cross, Pokey, Tuesday, others for permitting my participation. o7 I hope you swing back this way because, as stated above, there are specific questions I would very much like your input on. I further hope that my debating an idea is not misconstrued as being closed to the possibility of changing things (ultimately it is not my call anyway, I present the feedback and CCP decides) nor to the notion of alternatives. I simply enjoy both giving and receiving rigorous challenges to ideas in the hopes that the best option will be found. Regardless thank you for contributing and for doing so in a constructive manner. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2999	Posted - 2014.10.01 19:15:00 - [72] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Booby Tuesdays wrote: Ok, so what I am gathering is that from this angle of attack is if a squad or solo player wants good equipment, they will need a Logi by their side. To take this thought one step further ... what might be accomplished by a squad of six Logis each with 1000+ HP, a proto fine rifle, and vastly superior equipment? This is in part something that I am trying to avoid by normalizing the logistics suit CPU/PG at an average level lower than current standards. The details of how much is too much are things that I seek to hone in on through feedback in this thread. For while I am not completely incapable of math I am certainly not the most adept mathematician out there by any stretch of the imagination See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3002	Posted - 2014.10.01 19:29:00 - [73] - Quote Booby Tuesdays wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: In my opinion, a better question is ... If this proposal were passed as is, would 6 Slayer Logis out-slay 6 Assaults? PS: I like your corp name, by the way. A great book :-) Do you feel that would happen because of the improvement of the Logi's bonus? Or because of the increase in resource cost for equipment? I think the concern here is if Logis get a boost to eHP, as well as a better fitting bonus, that leaves more room for tank and gank modules, as well as having the best equipment. This was the initial reason Logis were the go to suit for a bit. I apologies for being a bit nit picky here (I kind of hate it when people do that on forums) but for the sake of clearlity this one needs pointed to. eHP is not the same as HP HP = Raw value of buffer tank eHP = *Effective* Hit Points, and depending on the use case things like mobility, eWar, etc can apply here. Things like HP regeneration and damage reduction certainly do apply here. The concern over total eHP and dps output is one of the key reasons for the suggested change in equipment fittings values along with the reduction to average logistics base fittings resources (stats on suit). While I freely admit the specific numbers may need tweaked (again, not the best math guy, hopping feedback here will help find the 'sweet spot' with the numbers) the goal is to give logi more eHP while keeping their total HP well shy of Assaults etc. The increase to HP that is suggested is aimed at being just enough to give the player time to sprint back into cover, because without that the regeneration is functionally meaningless. (These cases are assuming they aren't caught out in a wide open space or caught without any stamina, because in those cases they die). The better fitting bonus is also a part of the reason for the "big four" cost increase, if the four racially bound pieces of key support equipment cost more then, combined with the reduction to base CPU/PG stats, the increase role bonus nets a mild gain in fittings for most - but not all - support loadouts presuming those fits run full equipment. The net effect on 'slayer' oriented suits, those suits which do not run full equipment loadouts, is a reduction in total fittings available. Again if the numbers are weak somewhere it is my hope that feedback can help ferret that out and refine them so that they properly support the intent outlined above. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3002	Posted - 2014.10.01 19:48:00 - [74] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: In my opinion, a better question is ... If this proposal were passed as is, would 6 Slayer Logis out-slay 6 Assaults? Do you feel that would happen because of the improvement of the Logi's bonus? Or because of the increase in resource cost for equipment? I see this proposal as having three parts: Part A involves direct buffs to Logi base statistics. Part B involves improvements to Logi gear-based bonuses. Part C involves changes to EQ which will impact all classes. In my estimation ... ... passing A or B would likely be fine; some risk of undercorrection. ... passing A and B would likely be fine; some risk of overcorrection. ... passing C would set into motion unknowns; risk of introducing new imbalance. ... passing A,B,C would likely be too much; high risk of Logi out-assaulting Assault. There's alot of good in this proposal, but there are also many moving parts. Any reason why not to iterate? Okay so, clearly, I am still catching up on this thread and have only just now read this post. I am noting this because my prior posts will not have taken this breakdown into account, so grain of salt for those. Alright, on to the main event. My concern with the absence of "C" is that it may cause a net overbuff to the logistics, that being said if the feeling from players (especially those who spend more time in roles outside the support logi) is that we should push pause on "C" (the change to fittings cost of "the big four") then I am not opposed to tabling that aspect until we see how the other aspects play out. I was simply hesitant to do so because of the rife community concern over "slayer logi". The second aspect of "C" was to provide a partial address (along with other measures) to the frequent cries from the community for reduction of spam, particularly as it pertains to uplinks. Since uplinks are vital to the function of an entire race within the logistics line most proposals to limit their use are functionally crippling to a substantial sub-set of support logi. As such the notion was that making uplinks universally harder to fit, and thus deploy, would be a better solution than the many recurring proposals which take much harder line stances regarding limitations. The same is generally true for nanohives though to a lessor degree. The rep tool is already preeminent among logi buffs/uses at present so a "stealth buff" to it by scaling up costs on hives/links but not the repper seemed ill advised and the active scanner followed suit for more unified internal class balance / to deepen the specialist role of each race. To reiterate, I am not opposed to suspending this CPU/PG increase aspect until after the other changes are in game and we see where they fall, but I would still advocate this much more fully/actively than the majority of other "anti-spam" proposals that I have read thus far. A & B are pretty spot on assessments I would say, with a couple of touch ups. A is a net increase to base stats, the decrease to average base CPU/PG should not be overlooked. B while a buff is aimed at increased diversity of applicable skills (hopefully while avoiding homogenizing the races). I note these two things not because the quoted descriptions are inaccurate, but rather to clearly specificy the goals these changes are aimed at, since feedback and refinement are meant to be ongoing at this juncture. Thanks again for your participation. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3002	Posted - 2014.10.01 19:50:00 - [75] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Commando doesn't sufer not having proto gear. It suffers because you cannot fit prox mines or REs and have to use a needle or ep gun. Lack of optuons after solid module and weapon fit What are the fitting constraints (CPU or PG) in each case and by how much? Addressing that completely is likely biting off more than I can chew all at once but I would like to continue to educate myself more deeply. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3002	Posted - 2014.10.01 20:10:00 - [76] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: If you're concerned about an overbuff without C you could consider buffing the Logi bonus by what the effective buff would be had C happened, though that does cause issues with the items that would have been unaffected by C... And it is that last thing which is a problem, well the main one. When figuring this out the following aspects were considered Changes to base PG/CPU Net loss of PG/CPU when Level 5 skills are considered (every point of base also causes a loss of the amount gained through skills) Margin between "full support" (every slot filled) and "full slayer" (zero slots filled) logistics frames. As has been noted without requiring the equipment slots be filled for a viable fit there is very little which can be done to eliminate this gap completely, however reducing the base PG/CPU while increasing the bonus can narrow the margin. Current equipment fittings costs (viewed in full sets, as well as current theoretical minimums and maximums - all that "no one would actually run this" stuff just to establish outliers) Availability and cost of equipment also, unsurprisingly, has implications for the balance of equipment related skill buffs (the Demolitions Skill/Proxy/RE/Minmatar in Method #3 interaction is a highlight of that). Simply put, scaling A & B not to include C will likely alter them substantially enough that they would no longer be very indicative of how things might function with or without a C type aspect present. Considering the concerns raised in this thread however I am currently (more feedback please!) leaning toward a "Apply A & B with the understanding that further refinements and the possible addition of C are pending as and if needed". I hate the possible FotM risk, but I would rather risk a temporary flash of than than either dismiss feedback or discard iterative balance and just start "shooting in the dark" instead. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3008	Posted - 2014.10.01 22:23:00 - [77] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: John Demonsbane wrote: Just like Pokey, I like my proposed change to the EQ bonuses best, the global one. But, I think 50% is actually too high, the original proposal was for roughly 30%, to avoid over-homogenizing the suits, which is the most valid criticism of the idea. To be fair, I think what Cross is going for with the increase to fitting is that it would make it such that only Logis can easily fit Proto Equipment, which in turns makes them better at using all equipment than any other role. So in effect, the resource reduction bonus is actually an equipment buff for all equipment, simply because it's able to use a higher tier than what you could use otherwise. You are correct, one aspect/goal of that change is to enhance the specialized value of the support niche without overbuffing the specific racial skills or removing the diversity they instill. The role bonus should be exactly that. Assaults get a discount to Light Weapons, Sidearms, and Grenades Scouts get a discount to Cloaks Commandos get a reload speed bonus (maximizing their ability to capitalize on those two Light Weapons) Sentinels get Damage Resistance and a discount to Heavy Weapons Logistics get a discount to Equipment (but if the other roles can already run the proto equipment they need all the time then...) ^That was the general thought process behind that specific sub-aspect of the proposed alteration to fittings values on "the big four" (i.e. the four primary pieces of support equipment as defined by CCPs assigning them - 1 each - to the logistics suits by race). See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3017	Posted - 2014.10.02 03:27:00 - [78] - Quote Logi Bro wrote: After looking at your spreadsheet, I see nothing that would in any way overpower the class, but there are a few things I disagree with. While I understand your logic behind giving Minmatar/Caldari a shield transporter bonus if it were implemented, it makes no real sense why the Amarr would have a bonus to Minmatar equipment while the Minmatar themselves have no bonus to their own equipment. I think that Method 3 is really a no-go. Method 1, as many other people have said, really reeks of homogenization. Method 2 is definitely my favorite, but the Tertiary bonuses in Method 2 don't make sense to me. They are all bonuses to the equipment of the primary enemy of the logi's race. The Amarr, lore-wise, wouldn't want a bonus to Minmatar equipment, so on and so forth. The tertiary bonus should be the ally of the enemy's equipment, for example, a bonus to nanohives for the Minmatar, a bonus to scanners for the Amarr, a bonus to uplinks for the Gallente, and a bonus to the rep tool for the Caldari. Those were just my personal opinion disagreements, but now I'd like to point out a few math discrepancies. While I love lore, and racial flavor, and making the world draw together because of it (I have stacks of RPGs around which attest to this) the simple truth at this point is that the "toolbox" when it comes to dust assets, particularly equipment in this case, is limited enough that I have had to primarily dismiss lore from my considerations as the proposal was crafted But, it is what it is, and regardless of the why of my actions your support for Method #2 is noted Logi Bro wrote: I have to point out that if you decrease remote explosive damage by 25%, you will need to make the logi bonus give a 33.33% increase in order to keep the damage the same. Alternatively, you could decrease the remote damage by 20%, and the 25% logi increase will keep it at where it is currently. Now, once again admitting I'm not the best numbers guy, but what about the effects of the Demolition skill change? That should keep things even on base before applying any theoretical change to racial logi skills no? (because it is supposed to, and if it doesn't then it needs to be changed ) Logi Bro wrote: The amounts of eHP each logi is getting is the same, 30 in one stat and 50 in another for a total of 80 for each logi, and that's all well and good, but you have to consider that the Amarr logi has the most eHP, and should get the biggest increase, while the Minmatar should get a smaller increase to give the same percentages. If we use the Caldari and Gallente as the template, they are getting a ~28% increase to their dominant stat and a ~33% increase to their recessive stat. So applying that to the Amarr and Minmatar, the Amarr should get +28% to their armor, which would make it +60 armor instead of +50(not a big difference, but CCP has specifically set up health to speed ratios, and you have to increase by percentages rather than set amounts if you want to keep the ratios the same) and the Minmatar would get +40 armor instead of +50. But having said all that, I'm really just nitpicking, it's a solid proposal. All increase values in all logi racial lines have been intentionally kept as uniform as possible to avoid altering *internal* logi balance while we close the gap on *external* logi vs rest of frames balance. While you are correct that the Amarr have higher HP than the Minmatar, in theory every suit in a role should have the same eHP once all is said and done. And while, yes, the changes could be sculpted to an extent such that they would further feed, rather than simply maintain as they currently do, the diversity of the racial profiles, the margins for possible change on any given attribute are relatively small due to ensuring the logi frame does not encroach the role of either scout or assault. The final consideration in this regard is that some of these aspects are a bit "apples to oranges" which is good, but it does create a devil of a time if we cannot buff them all by the same %Delta which in some cases we cannot because the actual numbers do not have room to do so, either because of how close they are to scout/assault or because of possible rounding which would force them outside of that % margin anyway. Now, having said all of that I more than welcome you to put together some alternate numbers on this front which more fully take into account both racial flavor and HP to speed ratios. Since I do all of this stuff in my (so called) free time it is quite possible that I have yet to hit on a more dynamic method that is still workable within this context, and if you (or someone else) can present it to me then so much the better Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3018	Posted - 2014.10.02 03:44:00 - [79] - Quote Booby Tuesdays wrote: John Demonsbane wrote: But I think I still have to go with Cross in that I see zero problem with non-logis's needing to downgrade their equipment. To anyone who disagrees, I'll pose the same question as Cross. If other classes can use the same equipment in a totally self-sufficient way, why does the logi suit need to exist? You may like using the equipment, see a valid tactical reason for your particular suit class to need it, but in a global sense, why does a squad, much less an organized PC team, need a logi if they can easily spread equipment out amongst others? I think this quote might put me on board with the direction equipment is heading. A squad should need and want a Logi. My other concern is will other roles want Logis to not be able to carry or use Proto weapons. If only a Logi can carry Proto equipment and weapons, it makes me wonder what type of blowback will arise. I am not adamently opposed to this, I'm mainly supporting, not killing, but I do need to defend myself from time to time. Just a thought. I have all related skills (weapon, fitting, etc) to max and already cannot run both a full proto tank and full proto weapons (LW+nad and sidearm for the Amarr) if I first ensure the use of a full set of proto equipment filling all slots. So this requirement, that fittings - not slot layout or some other hard coded restriction - not allow room for that is already the case at present (clearly not all fits are created equally, and there are exceptions). I totally agree with your point that treading carefully is important however for while I think making it more CPU/PG intensive to run gear from another role is fine; Scouts get cloaks, Assaults have LW/Sidearm/Nade, Sent have Heavy Weapons, etc. such things should not be absolutely prohibitive, just usually suboptimal, in essence it comes at a high cost in fittings resources. I also, just for anyone jumping into the thread at this point, want to reiterate that said proposed changes are only proposed for "the big 4" pieces of logistics support equipment as defined by CCPs application of racial logistics bonuses (i.e. Rep Tool, Active scan, Links, Hives). The change is not intended nor proposed to be applied more generally. (And in keeping with this tone the current discount logi gain to fitting a cloak because it is 'equipment' would no longer apply). Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3018	Posted - 2014.10.02 03:48:00 - [80] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Reduced lock-on times for the repair tools would be nice. Working on that pending all the usual tech VooDoo Aeon Amadi wrote: Maybe another re-evaluation of Active Scanners as they could be doing a little better. Reduced duration killed the scanner-ina stuff but the increased cooldown is a bit much, imo. I honestly hadn't considered touching the cooldown as an aspect, that's worth thinking about thanks Aeon Amadi wrote: Something that I'd like to see (that I keep asking for) is standard variations of weaponry (assault combat rifle, for instance). That'd work wonders for lower tier Logistics suits in terms of fitting capability. 1.35 damage per round isn't worth 21 CPU/1 PG to me (standard vs advanced combat rifle) That's a bit outside of my domain as far as this proposal is concerned, but it is certainly something the CPM could have a conversation about. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)

Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3022	Posted - 2014.10.02 07:40:00 - [81] - Quote Fizzer XCIV wrote: Just make logis faster. Make them just as fast as assaults(maybe faster?), but with more Stamina. That way they can run away from pretty much anything but a scout, but their actual combat effectiveness is still low. Without some level of enhanced survivability outside of speed most of the light weapons in the game do not care how fast you are, just as the Rail Rifle, or any scout caught out in the open 0.02 ISK Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3036	Posted - 2014.10.02 18:55:00 - [82] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Unfortunately cross I have no idea just how tight the commandos really are until I am off work and bust out a calculator or get my light weapons to 5 and all of the light weapon optimizations to 4. All I know is that I'm aiming for basic RE/prox mines and I can only get that on two of my fits. Hives/links are right out ATM. Otherwise I have engineering/electronics 5. So I need to defer to more heavily specced commando users. But no I was never advocating that commandos need proto rep gear. Basic serves my purpose there easily as a secondary logi assistant. I would like commandos to have an eadier time fitting offensively aspected equipment. Scanners, explosives, mines and non rep hives seem most appropriate given they are specced for havoc and suffer rapid ammo depletion if you survive longer than three minutes. I am beginning to be of the impression the the Commando may need an uptrend on its fittings situation generally speaking. I don't have a commando suit unlocked at present sadly but how would it effect things if their fittings resources matched the racial Sent? See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3036	Posted - 2014.10.02 19:16:00 - [83] - Quote ACT1ON BASTARD wrote: Cross Atu wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Unfortunately cross I have no idea just how tight the commandos really are until I am off work and bust out a calculator or get my light weapons to 5 and all of the light weapon optimizations to 4. All I know is that I'm aiming for basic RE/prox mines and I can only get that on two of my fits. Hives/links are right out ATM. Otherwise I have engineering/electronics 5. So I need to defer to more heavily specced commando users. But no I was never advocating that commandos need proto rep gear. Basic serves my purpose there easily as a secondary logi assistant. I would like commandos to have an eadier time fitting offensively aspected equipment. Scanners, explosives, mines and non rep hives seem most appropriate given they are specced for havoc and suffer rapid ammo depletion if you survive longer than three minutes. I am beginning to be of the impression the the Commando may need an uptrend on its fittings situation generally speaking. I don't have a commando suit unlocked at present sadly but how would it effect things if their fittings resources matched the racial Sent? Yeah some extra fitting or give them some built in reps so you can put something besides a repper in your lows. Commando Thread Created. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3071	Posted - 2014.10.03 20:02:00 - [84] - Quote Now that we've pretty much established the Commando needs its own touch ups (and that they will be taken care of outside of this proposal to maintain the iterative approach to changes) I'd like to focus in on where things stand for the second draft. How do the new eHP changes stack up against the prior ones? (in this case include the mobility changes) How does everyone feel about tabling just the Eq fittings changes until a second pass? Good idea, bad idea, keep them in but with one of the scaled methods? Would people please reiterate their skill method preferences with their second choice present as well (since all of these are contingent on the tech eval saying "yes we can do that") Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3077	Posted - 2014.10.03 21:10:00 - [85] - Quote John Demonsbane wrote: 1)I agree with Logi Bro (hung up your HMG this week, did you?) in that the HP changes should be scaled the same way the suits are now due to the inherent speed/HP ratios. They may not be perfect but there is a good reason for them, unlike some other things CCP does. Why should the Minmatar suit get a proportionately larger HP buff while IGÇÖm still a plodding beast? (And also the same relative buff to stamina!) 2)IGÇÖm fine with tabling the increase to equipment fitting for now, no need to change too many things at once. 3)Of all the methods you list, I naturally pick #2, but still think it might be a little strong. Again, the original proposal I put out was for ~30% of the original bonus, not 50%. Not that I would have a problem with getting that big a bonus to rep tools but I understand the concerns about reducing diversity too much. IGÇÖll take this opportunity to finally flesh out what I guess I should call my GÇ£Method 2bGÇ¥ in the next postGÇª. 1) Happy to extend you the same invitation I did him with regards to cooking some numbers up for that 2) nods thanks for the input 3) That modification is worth keeping in mind esp if we narrow in on that being the primary advocated method, now rather than ramble on I'll go read that "Method 2b" post Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3084	Posted - 2014.10.04 01:47:00 - [86] - Quote Just a few quick notes, people can feel free to yell at me - or even better to politely disagree - but here they are. When it comes to balancing within limited resources; Good balance > Adherence to Lore I know Jonh will smite me in the name of the empress All my duct tape will spontaneously vanish Exotic dancers will start throwing drinks in my face and someone will try a hostile takeover of my place of employment ...but really, as much as I love lore (and I do honestly) it kind of has to play second fiddle to the game actually working. Shield transporter - I really, really want one in game. I do not know if it is possible in the current dev cycle I even though I run mostly armor I think having it in game would be a huge asset Yes I am advocating it be given (bonus wise) to the Min and Cal despite such a change making me need to rebuild most of my logi fits and all of my most used ones. Cal is obvious I think, and as many objections as can be raised about the Min there are two key points 1) They make make more sense lore wise than the Gal or Amarr 2) (and more importantly) they are the most mobile and shield built race outside of the Cal so they can make the best actual use of them. Sub note here, don't hold out for a new repper slot, that is a UI overhaul thing and until CCP says otherwise all those sorts of changes are off the table. Racial Diversity* I am deeply and intently in favor of this, with one caveat, I support effective racial diversity, meaning that if a bonus isn't going to be effective then I do not really support it even if it is still diverse. This last one brings me to the discussion of racial bonuses and a few concerns. A bonus must be large enough to have an actual/meaningful impact and apply to an area or stat which is not already substantially covered. Max uplink spawn count for example is not actually all that useful in the current state of things, truly how often do you have *more than* 25 people spawn off the same proto uplink in a single match? Now with the recommended changes to uplinks form my proposal this racial buff becomes more worthwhile because at 5 spawns or less per uplink an additional 1-2 spawns per level actually becomes meaningful. Certain percentile bonuses can be this way as well, depending on how much of a percent buff they offer and how large or small the base number being modified is. I do not think this one applies to any of the ideas in our thread currently (execpt maybe nanohives, 4% is about 2 clusters per level, but until I get more details from CCP I won't know how much of anything that can actually refill) but is key to keep in mind. (Ugh, now I have to go back and recheck my numbers to make sure I fully accounted for this ) In essence, we want to make sure our efforts yield different viable and balanced logistics options, not just different options which - at least for me - can be tricky to keep track of some times when playing with the strange realm where numbers and lore meet Anyway, keep the input coming folks, it is useful Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3086	Posted - 2014.10.04 03:06:00 - [87] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: I do like the idea of an equipment being in the sidearm slot for quick access though. Would it be as simple as giving the logis a sidearm, and then making the sidearm slot an equipment slot? The Amarr logo can lose this abilityfor the normal sidearm slot. That's a UI level change and as such won't be an option unless/until Dust development gets more resources and can do client updates. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3090	Posted - 2014.10.04 06:46:00 - [88] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Cross Atu wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: I do like the idea of an equipment being in the sidearm slot for quick access though. Would it be as simple as giving the logis a sidearm, and then making the sidearm slot an equipment slot? The Amarr logo can lose this abilityfor the normal sidearm slot. That's a UI level change and as such won't be an option unless/until Dust development gets more resources and can do client updates. Unfortunate. But can we at least give the Cal and Am logis another equipment slot? Don't get why Min and Gal get 4 and not Cal and Am. I'm not sure but I think slot alterations are possible within the current development set up. I can look into that. o7 See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3101	Posted - 2014.10.04 22:11:00 - [89] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: This would make my day, along with some extra pg/CPU to fit another equipment. CalLogi especially is tight even with a CPU mod. Cal CPU and Amarr PG are both on my list to be looked at/recommend tweaks to See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3104	Posted - 2014.10.05 17:42:00 - [90] - Quote Updated Iteration 2 Fixed improperly entered numbers Added 1 new skill method and 2 modified versions So please check out the doc link again although if you've been keeping up with this thread the only method you have not yet seen is my modified version of Method 3 in which the Minmatar as the single duel tanked race, has a bonus to Shield Transporter and Repair Tool as its two logistics bonuses. Obviously use of this method is entirely predicated upon the ability to get a shield transporter in game, but presuming that happens how would people feel about the modified method? I think it addresses most of the concerns I have seen raised about Method 3 and even gives more of a nod to lore in the bargain, but I want feedback on it, what do you think? Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)

Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3106	Posted - 2014.10.05 20:04:00 - [91] - Quote RKKR wrote: How are things going with the DEVs? You see them talking about other stuff, posting in other threads,... but nothing here? They are well aware of this thread and project, I keep them apprised directly and have CC'ed them on the proposals. It is one of the values of the CPM, we can sponsor initiatives like this one and shave a lot of dev time off of revisions and polish by conducting this conversation with the community and then bringing that feedback to CCP. Rest assured that regardless of the presence of blue tags in this thread CCP is in the loop. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3106	Posted - 2014.10.05 20:05:00 - [92] - Quote Mister Goo wrote: Cross, I can get behind method 4, It looks solid and also makes all logi's viable in PC for their reps. I still don't think that RE's are equipment, but Pokey has made some good points about their use. Also leveling out the PG and CPU of each suit is a good idea if they normalize the slot layouts. Thanks for the continued feedback See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3111	Posted - 2014.10.05 21:23:00 - [93] - Quote Logi Bro wrote: I'll admit I haven't been following this thread very closely, but I have to say I have a very strong dislike for method 3 and 4. By giving every logi a rep tool bonus, you are saying, "your primary role is to sit behind and rep people, that is your purpose, and you aren't fulfilling your maximum potential if you aren't doing so." It's basically dooming every logistics unit to triage, when that isn't even necessarily their purpose. It's like saying every square is a rectangle, but not every rectangle is a square. The purpose of logistics is support, and just because triage is a support function, that does not mean every support function is triage. I can slap REs, an active scanner, and a nanohive on my logi and I would still be a tried and true dedicated support logi, but it's not like I'm doing any sort of triage. You might say, "just because you have the bonus, doesn't mean you have to use it," but I would then respond by saying that is faulty logic. If you are trying to buff the class by giving it more bonuses, why would you then advocate for not using those bonuses just because someone wanted to be a different kind of support unit other than triage? Having said all that, I am beginning to believe that Method 1 is the best option, despite the homogenization. You choose your logi's race based on whatever you believe the best piece of equipment to be, but you are still better with every other piece of equipment than the other classes. Since the secondary bonus is not specific, you don't have to feel like you are mis-using your suit's potential for not equipping a specific piece of equipment. Tracking your input here. Also, on a general note just to reiterate clearly all changes are still contingent upon tech evaluation. Method 1 - Requires a check on 4 racial skills Method 2 - Requires stacking of several bonuses on one suit/item Method 3 - Optimal use predicated upon addition of a shield transporter Method 4 - Is a hybrid, see prior methods Both Method 2b & Method 3b fall under their respective primary methods regarding tech. In theory any of them should be viable, but my understanding of the tech side limitations is rudimentary so I could be wrong on any count. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3121	Posted - 2014.10.06 17:26:00 - [94] - Quote John Demonsbane wrote: 2 quick things, Cross: 1) In method 4 the Gallente are listed as having 2 separate bonuses for rep tools. I assume that's a typo. That or I've discovered a Gallente plot to make your logi suit the FoTM again. Sneaky... 2) Either I got confused or you changed the numbering (the former is more likely), but I think method 2b should actually be listed as 1b because method 2 isn't the global bonus. Makes more sense that way. 1) Fixed! Thanks for the heads up. 2) That's the method modification you proposed in this thread. Are the numbers wrong somehow, because I thought I'd simply pasted them directly from your post (but I am operating on just under five hours of sleep so I may be missing something). As to the naming, I'm keeping the current conventions simply because of the chronology tied to when they were introduced as changing it now would alter the context in which a number of posts were made. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3121	Posted - 2014.10.06 17:27:00 - [95] - Quote General note: The alteration to the logistics role bonus is not a part of any method listed. It is proposed in its own right regardless of the racial method selected. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3122	Posted - 2014.10.06 18:08:00 - [96] - Quote Logi Bro wrote: I'll admit I haven't been following this thread very closely, but I have to say I have a very strong dislike for method 3 and 4. By giving every logi a rep tool bonus, you are saying, "your primary role is to sit behind and rep people, that is your purpose, and you aren't fulfilling your maximum potential if you aren't doing so." It's basically dooming every logistics unit to triage, when that isn't even necessarily their purpose. While I am all for the logistics being more than a medic there are also contextual and mechanical aspects in play when proposing bonus options. In this case the simple mechanics of the gear and bonuses played a non-trivial role in that process. I was far less saying "your primary role is X" than "the most effective/used bonus is X so lets share it" Without further restricting the use of equipment by other classes (something which the fittings alteration would have had an impact on but which has been generally opposed to the point where it has been tentatively tabled as part of the first pass) it is hard to meaningfully buff the other gear in an effective manner. Uplink - Current bonus ends when the merc dies (or suit swaps). Net effect being that mobility is more relevant to meaningful uplink placement/use than the racial buff. Further the second part of the racial buff, increased spawns per link, very rarely comes into play at all, most links are destroyed before they burn through their native 20-25 spawns much less start to make any use of the latter half of the racial buff. Nanohives - Like the uplink the current bonus ends when the merc leaves the suit creating situations where killing the logi reduces the value of hives deployed for his squad. While hives are more often fully consumed than links they are still more consistently destroyed by hostiles or abandoned (if squad is mobile) than fully consumed. Further, "supply amount and repair rate per level" AFAIK actually decreases potential WPs earned by causing the hives to do more while warding the same WP (just like the current mechanics for using high end needles). Active Scans - This racial could me modified to effect other traits as well, such as cooldown, to improve its overall utility so there is some room to grow. That being said the active scanner use case is likely to stay somewhat marginal as long as there are more accurate always on 360 degree passive scans being shared team wide. It is hard for the less accurate, smaller scan area, temporary duration, squad only, scans to compete with that.... especially when you have to put away your weapon to use them. "Aggressive" Equipment - I personally consider mining a road, or setting REs to guard an objective panel valid support actions but use of such things is hardly a primary use case and even providing it as a secondary bonus as proposed in one version of method 3, has met with resistance so the room to grow here is limited. Injectors - These also fall directly into "your role is medic" style thinking, and furthermore with 100% needles already on the market as is there really aren't options to add a racial buff here. That brings us back around once again to the repair tool, part of the reason it is effective and popular is that it is one of the pieces of equipment which does not currently have either A) another role doing its same job better (scanner) or B) another class able to use it to greater or equal effect as the logi (links, hives, needles, REs, Proxy). Although it does still suffer from the common bane of the equipment line which is C) better functioning equipment *reduces* the potential WP earned, this applies frequently to both higher meta gear as well as bonuses to gear. I am, of course, quite open to additional ideas and suggestions. Any any of the methods would be a buff and in that sense an improvement, but in the current context methods 1, 2, 2b all fall prey to the same limitation, that being that they'd increase the use a player can get out of their logi suit if they already run one throughout the battle (so still a buff) but provide only minor added incentive to be in one throughout and it is unlikely those changes would make most logi races considered viable in optimal balance/high level competitive play. Meanwhile methods 3, 3b, 4, rely to one degree or another on inclusion of a shield transporter, focus logi more on reps than is currently true, and include the buff to RE/Proxy use which some have objected to. So every method has shortfalls, but all methods have to cope with the fundamental flaws in the equipment line as a whole, and how it scales WP earnings as well. None of which is to say anyone should abandon their POV, I am simply stating relevant factors the apply to the situation (and as such have fed/will advise) proposals going forward. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3122	Posted - 2014.10.06 18:25:00 - [97] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: in order for your proposed equipment changes to work you have to have the gear be universally recognized as the same thing: Which means you have to have a militia uplink = templar uplink = proto uplink as far as the game is concerned. a lot of the uplink spam is caused by suits with 3-4 different classes of uplinks and dropping two of each of them. So it needs to treat ALL uplinks as the same item to prevent that mass spam cluster. Same with hives and any other deployable. otherwise no solution will be had. I like the 1 uplink = 1 spawn idea best. I disagree. Granted it is a matter of degrees certainly but it is not an all or nothing proposition. There are things (some of them suggested in the proposal) which can moderate the number of deployed assets on the field, and how long they are present, and how likely players are to focus on deploying them, without hard coding a limit on deployables as you describe. The other aspect worth noting is that hard coding a limit as you've outlined would do nothing to improve the logistics use case for any of those items or limit the use case of those items for roles outside of logistics which is a net soft nerf to the value of multiple equipment slots (yes a slight one, but still a further constraint in a situation where logistics suits are already underperforming their role). Regarding the 1 link = 1 spawn method. Conceptually this is what I supported initially as well, however there were some technical/resource management issues brought to light when I presented the idea to CCP for tech eval which was a key reason the spawns per link were pushed up to 5. 0.02 ISK Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3122	Posted - 2014.10.06 18:40:00 - [98] - Quote John Demonsbane wrote: Cross Atu wrote: John Demonsbane wrote: 2 quick things, Cross: 1) In method 4 the Gallente are listed as having 2 separate bonuses for rep tools. I assume that's a typo. That or I've discovered a Gallente plot to make your logi suit the FoTM again. Sneaky... 2) Either I got confused or you changed the numbering (the former is more likely), but I think method 2b should actually be listed as 1b because method 2 isn't the global bonus. Makes more sense that way. 1) Fixed! Thanks for the heads up. 2) That's the method modification you proposed in this thread. Are the numbers wrong somehow, because I thought I'd simply pasted them directly from your post (but I am operating on just under five hours of sleep so I may be missing something). As to the naming, I'm keeping the current conventions simply because of the chronology tied to when they were introduced as changing it now would alter the context in which a number of posts were made. The most recent iteration I proposed in this thread is correctly listed under "2b" on your revised spreadsheet. (EDIT: Scratch that. On further review of 2b on your spreadsheet the Caldari have the scanner bonus listed twice instead of the bonus to rep tool range. Otherwise looks OK.) However, while neither Method 1 or 2 (2a) exactly matches my orignal proposal (incidentally I have updated that thread to include 2b), Method 1 is closer, as method 2 provides bonuses to only 3 of the 4 major equipment types and is also not a flat bonus across races (e.g., Gallente gets a better bonus to rep tools than Amarr). My point was that since method 2a was not mine, it wouldn't necessarily make sense for my new proposal to be called 2b, and that 1b might be more appropriate. I guess since method 1 is not exaclty what I proposed either, maybe it doesn't matter and I'm just nitpicking. No biggie. Good catch, now fixed! Also, I see what you mean, I wasn't considering the baseline of your other thread/linked proposal. I'll keep the nomenclature the same for now but bear it in mind if a full iteration 3 document is called for. Thanks for all your input here o7 Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3122	Posted - 2014.10.06 18:45:00 - [99] - Quote John Demonsbane wrote: (If you could just get people off the "spam=lag" bandwagon that might be helpful, that longstanding misperception drives a lot of displaced logi hate.) Totally agreed and as such I will reiterate here yet again, just so it is in another place on the forums, that I have actively tested the notion that deployed equipment creates substantive lag and have been unable to reproduce the effect during my tests. Further I have encountered my most sever cases of lag (in Pubs/FW) during games with hardly any (or even no) equipment present on field prior to/during the onset of lag. In PC matches I have encountered intense lag in situations both with and without substantial deployed equipment present and have seen no meaningful trend or corollary within that context. It could be that for some reason my particular playstation 3 is just immune to the purported lag caused by deployed equipment, but that is highly implausible. 0.02 ISK Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3122	Posted - 2014.10.06 20:12:00 - [100] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: So now that we are solidifying some ideas, we need to get some input from a dev once a complete (notionally) set of proposals is made. 37 pages of discussion, we should have some pretty solid ideas, and judging from the spreadsheets Cross and others have worked so hard on, I think we need to hear what Rattati thinks of these ideas. Both Rattati and LogiBro have been linked this thread as well as each iteration of the proposals as the discussion has gone on. Currently I am awaiting word on some of the tech feasibility of these ideas which may further focus our discussion if certain options are taken off the table after that information comes back (if we can't do a thing, we can focus elsewhere). Rest assured I will continue to keep CCP in the loop. When the time comes for a full on hotfix proposal to be made and discussed I'm sure CCP Rattati will create an Echo (or Foxtrot) thread for that. Until then we have this one Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)

Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3125	Posted - 2014.10.06 21:19:00 - [101] - Quote Booby Tuesdays wrote: Updating my vote from Method 2, to Method 2b. The big 4 should be best in a Logi's hands. Also, thoughts on swapping the Min Logi's Shield and Armor HP values? 160 Shield, 120 Armor? Stats would align more closely with the other Min suits. Seems sensible to me on first blush, anyone have reasons to raise why moderating the Min Logi profile to fit with the rest of the Min suits would be a poor change? See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3130	Posted - 2014.10.06 23:11:00 - [102] - Quote Speaking of Lore and Minmatar (as kind of a sidebar) here's the ingame lore for the repair tool In game info panel wrote: The repair tool has several design innovations, the most surprising probably being the incorporation of Amarr focusing crystal technology. Beyond that, the device also makes use of an advanced K7 nano static co-processor on par with Caldari planet side missile tracking systems and a 55x5 reverse current power cell configuration rarely used beyond self-sustaining Gallente drone units. The result is an elegant tool combining technology from several very different design philosophies. Again, I think mechanics a play quality trump lore, but as far as lore is concerned there is no reason why every race should not have a repair tool bonus for their logi just mentioning this since lore was raised as one of the concerns with that idea. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3141	Posted - 2014.10.07 07:04:00 - [103] - Quote Sgt Kirk wrote: This is the most balance I've seen in a while from this game but there's no reason to stop now. This thread will be about the ways we can bring Logistics suits up to par and because I know we all hate long, bombastic, pompous speech I'll keep this post short, simple and to the point. Like any Red Blooded Gallente would. Slot Layout Adjustment: Logistics need to have the same slot layouts though each tier as their Assault Counterpart. Logistics suits currently have an odd slot layout that makes most Standard Logistics useless and disproportionate to higher progression. ____________________ Equipment and Modules: Besides the fact that Codebreakers need to be in highslots there's no reason they should take up the amount of PG that they do, they shouldn't take PG in the first place just like the Precision Modules, it just doesn't make sense and deters fitting modules of the like and just using it for more HP. Especially when a complex codebreaker cost more resources than some of your Complex Armor repairs and plates. It's just bad design. Active Scanners: There needs to be more variants of active scanners. Some of them offer trivial bonuses to them from the basic variant so I propose Active Scanners come in three base types: One that scans a long range but short scan angle one that has a wide angle but short range and one that's in between. With all the variants that would be within each one of course. There also needs to be more WP earned from having a squadmate kill a target you've scanned. Overall Logistics Bonus to all Equipment respectively: There needs to be more incentive to use equipment on Logistics suits on not be stuck with just one bonus. That's bland and does not separate you from the other classes that could easily do the same. I recommend a bonus for all equipment when using Logistics. Not the same exact bonus but it would be based off the races relation with said equipment. Example A: Caldari would get a bonus to repair tool range whilst Gallente get a Bonus to Repair tool amount. Meanwhile Amarr still gets a bonus to the repair tool but due to the nature of the repair tool, it's going to have the least effective bonus to the Repair tool going towards repair rate. Of course Minmatar gets the best bonus to the Repair tool for obvious reasons. Example B: Amarr gets a bonus to Nanohive Nanite amount and repair Rate per level whilst Minmatar get a bonus to Ammo Resupply Rate and Nanite Amount per level. The gallente would get a small bonus to Repair amount per level and that's it and of course the Caldari would get the best bonus to the Nanohive overall. I could go more into detail with which suit should get which bonus but that's a conversation for a different day...if this even happens at all so I will be moving on. I Hope that was easy to understand. _____________________ Base Logistics Stats: Innate Logistics Repair rates need to be reintroduced at a base of 1hp/s yes it's not much but it means a lot for Logistics shield suits that don't want to waste a low for a basic reactive plate. Either Faster Movement and Walking Speed or more Health: Logistics should have some drawbacks when it comes to speed and health but right now I think it's a little bit much to have both stats lowered. I know it would take more work so it probably wouldn't be welcomed but I'd like it if the Amarr and Caldari Logistics got a small Armor and shield buff respectively while Gallente and Minmatar received the speed buff. Thank you for your time and hopefully constructive feedback follows. o7 Quoted for discussion here. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3177	Posted - 2014.10.09 00:18:00 - [104] - Quote @el OPERATOR, before I dig too deeply into your feedback, let me make sure that you have read Iteration 2 of the document, because some changes were made and from the sounds of your post you may have been reading doc 1 or you may think the changes were in the wrong direction/not far enough and I would rather know for sure rather than assume. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3177	Posted - 2014.10.09 00:23:00 - [105] - Quote Mister Goo wrote: Cross, Any chance of getting price reductions on equipment? with the increase of damage by almost all weapons how about an equal repair tool increase? An adjustment to equipment ISK cost was to run in tandem with the change in fittings costs. While I still view a cost adjustment as a good thing it is currently tabled with the fittings adjustment until some more data is acquired so as to avoid overbalancing/changing too much at once. As to the rep tool I had not considered the power creep of weapons in this context but it should likely be normlized to a higher base... the drawback of course being that unless/until we earn WP from actual HP healed rather than 'rep cycles run' any increase in function of the rep tool is also a nerf to earnings, but since that is its own problem with the need for a fix I'm inclined to just roll with it and get the rep numbers improved... (honestly I still have a taste for the grown up version of reps seen by our sky clad counterparts in EVE, but that idea may be seen as too radical ). See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3177	Posted - 2014.10.09 00:28:00 - [106] - Quote el OPERATOR wrote: Cool, I was wondering where he was since he so clearly made his passion obvious and, really, his "raising of the alarm" regarding the inital proposed speed nerfs was the wake-up (for me at least) that initiated the thread awareness. Its just weird he's silent, but w/e, Life Happens. Speed nerfs? What speed nerfs? Or are we talking way back in the day? el OPERATOR wrote: I do see a valid role in scouts placing uplinks. I see a valid role in ALL suits placing uplinks. But, as a specialty? As the deployment first pick? Thats where I see an issue. Send a scout to recon/clear. Send a Logi to link. OR if the Scout is linking, yeah, its a slow link he'll have to cover until the Logi spawns and can fully utilize the locale. Passive scans aren't wallhacks, bro. Not even close. They are absolutley dependent on the scanning players' distance, not just for the scan but for the reception too. When I stack my Amps up, I'm only expanding my circle of detection. My heavy, next to me, he'll see what I detect on his tacnet because positionally our tacnets overlap. Our Scout, running our flank 40 meters out, does not see what I detect because he's too far away. If I'm separated from my squad, only I see what I detect, until I'm close enough for the net to overlap again, then it's shared. Also, don't forget that passive detection is also limited by the db profile of the scanning suit, PrecEnh mods drop the detection % from the suits base, which was why passive stacks work OK (just ok too, not great) with my Scout or Logi but suck on my Commando since the Commando frame initial profile base is too high to make PrecEnh worthwhile relative to 99% of the other battlefield circumstances. There's no real intent to touch high or low slot mods within this proposal, just to be clear. That having been said, since you mentioned both PC and Active Scans, how often do you have a dedicated GalLogi on the ground running active scans throughout an full PC match? I know differing players and corps play differently so an additional angle of input is of interest to me. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3184	Posted - 2014.10.09 17:54:00 - [107] - Quote el OPERATOR wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Cross Atu wrote: (honestly I still have a taste for the grown up version of reps seen by our sky clad counterparts in EVE, but that idea may be seen as too radical ). In EVE it's about what, +150% bonus to reps per level of Logistics right? so +750% to a Focused Core Repair tool, puts you at like what....1312 HP/second? Give me that bonus and I'll gladly take the "Sidearm Only" Logi that people get so excited for. hmm... make it the dual slot sidearm (not the dual wield unless the proposed numbers get better) logi and I'd buy in. This! I have been saying this since closed beta. Either completely deep six this "logi should not be able to fight" non-sense or give an actual substantial support role, which would not be combat capable on its own but still meaningful in a fight. The ill defined middle ground thing is frankly a mess and in no small part casual in creating a lot of the current troubles and frictions. It is hard to innovate a way to polish a role - especially via server side only changes - while what the role is remains undefined/in dispute. Even in this thread, which has thankfully remained productive and constructive, there are clear hallmarks of the "what role is it anyway" dispute. Some think 'the big 4' should be logi only, some think only medic play is logi, some despise the idea of logi being identified primarily with medic play etc. While I am deeply grateful that the discussion here is being held in a way that is useful it is still a bit galling to have a situation in which the first question I have to ask upon reading any post is "what role does this poster mean when they say Logistics or Support". Because quite honestly few, or none, of the role ideas are incorrect, but functionally it is highly unlikely that the mechanics of Dust will support a single specialist role attaining all of those concepts at the same time while not being overpowered. Getting back to the quoted posts, the other caveat I would make is that under such a change we would really need a proper War Points system which rewarded based on a X HP restored = Y War Points earned method rather than the current 'cycles and cap' nonsense. Granted keeping the "must me in combat etc" aspects of the current system is not only fine but needed, however that does not justify either cycles or a cap. Honestly such a granulated system could be taken farther still and make kills be a x HP destroyed = Y War Points earned method with the same ratio as the repairs. The just add an extra bonus for things like revives, downing a merc and terminating a clone. At which point you have a more unified earnings system that puts related actions on even footing. "A client patch, a client patch, my kingdom for a client patch" Okay, that's my "I've wanted this stuff since closed beta" rant, I now return you to your regularly scheduled thread. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3184	Posted - 2014.10.09 18:32:00 - [108] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Cross Atu wrote: (honestly I still have a taste for the grown up version of reps seen by our sky clad counterparts in EVE, but that idea may be seen as too radical ). In EVE it's about what, +150% bonus to reps per level of Logistics right? so +750% to a Focused Core Repair tool, puts you at like what....1312 HP/second? Give me that bonus and I'll gladly take the "Sidearm Only" Logi that people get so excited for. 150% to rep RANGE per level of racial cruiser.. And 15% decrease in cap cost per level of logistics ships. Rough numbers put together purely for illustrative purposes. Clearly there are many more factors in an actual battle, such as range, relative SP invested, accuracy, etc. but these numbers roughly show the comparative magnitude of base reps outgoing vs base damage incoming. And while not by any means exact the margin between Dust and EVE is large enough to highlight the point even if the numbers are kind of a hack job. Working from basic Tech I in EVE (and STD in Dust) here is how it presently stacks up. (All values are gear only, without skills included) Repair EVE Medium I-ax Regenerative Projector Meta level 1 168 HP/5 sec (33.6 HP/s) Dust Repair Tool Meta level 1 (standard gear) 40 HP/s Damage EVE Medium Hybrid Turret - Heavy Electron Blaster I Meta level 1 Rate of fire 3s Damage Modifier 1.8375x Hybrid Charge - Lead Charge M base vs shields 10.8 vs armor 11.4 Base used 11.1 (middle ground) Damage per Second ~ 6.79875 Dust Assault Rifle Meta level 1 (Standard gear) Damage 30.90 HP Rate of fire 800.00 RPM Damage per Second ~ 412 Comparitive margin EVE Repairs 26.80125 HP/s faster (just under 5 times incoming damage) Dust Damage 372 HP/s faster (10.3 times incoming rep rate) So if we were to make the base repair tool in dust conform to the margins in EVE it would heal at approximately 2060 HP/s. Once again that would be the standard repair tool, without skill buffs included, while those values for the Core Focused Repair Tool currently in Dust are 125 HP/s without skills and that is the most intense prototype tool in the game. I trust this highlights the significant difference between a dedicated/pure "I'm not made for killing things" logi (as we see in EVE) and a hybrid "I kill things but also heal some stuff" logi (as we currently have in Dust). Simply put, at the most basic level support play needs a real identity, because the current version where it is supposed to be a hybrid who competes with the slayers but is stacked to lose every fair fight is a conceptual mess. 0.02 ISK Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3184	Posted - 2014.10.09 19:13:00 - [109] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: The trick here, that cross is slipping around, is it's hard to balance a logi for meaningful support play without causing DUST to devolve into blob or Zerg warfare whwre everyone must focus fire (primary) on the guy the logi is repping or be annihilated by the numbers. That implies that zerg play is not the most common style currently Honestly I'm not slipping around anything, I stated outright that there were many factors not included and that this numbers were not a combat simulation of either game. Breakin Stuff wrote: In EVE you need to be able to rep tank because there are only so many ways you can get instablapped. (Being the tackle frigate diving on a double-webbed vindicator would be a good example of instant death) In DUST Since human reaction and aim is the deciding factor if we made reps comparable to EVE you're gonna pass out from boredom before you crack the sentinel's tank. To be clear, I did state that this was purely to highlight a point. And while I don't advocate the x50 power swing to remote repairs that would be required to give Dust parity with EVE, the point about conceptual roles still stands. Currently in Dust there is this deeply broken notion that a support class should not be combat capable, meanwhile everyone should have full access to the same equipment that the support class is "based around" and layered on top of that the skill buffs for the class, when they even apply in a useful/meaningful way (unlike say half of the current Amarr racial) are not potent enough to bring the equipment up to a level of function wherein actively using it is usually as mechanically potent as simply having another active gun in the fight. A specialization cannot exist as a role within such a conflicted environment and that is what we currently face. Which is why I so often ask the question What can a logi do that makes them of equal value on the field to a slayer? Put another way, within the current context what situation would case having a dedicated support logi stay on the field throughout the whole match be as desired by a ground commander as having a Sentinel, a full damped scout, or a slayer stacked assault? Use cases are key and logistics support play, much like the commando, currently lacks a clear one. 0.02 ISK Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3184	Posted - 2014.10.09 19:16:00 - [110] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Solo logi should be suicide. Agreed, with the addendum that I think the same should apply every bit as much to most fits/roles the majority of the time. But if I really try to make that a baseline I'll only get lynched soo.... /goes back to trying to balance a team game within a world were everyone wants to be their own flavor of Rambo See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)

Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3186	Posted - 2014.10.09 23:16:00 - [111] - Quote ACT1ON BASTARD wrote: Cross Atu wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Solo logi should be suicide. Agreed, with the addendum that I think the same should apply every bit as much to most fits/roles the majority of the time. But if I really try to make that a baseline I'll only get lynched soo.... /goes back to trying to balance a team game within a world were everyone wants to be their own flavor of Rambo Ccp threw teamwork out the window as soon as the cloak was introduced. A bit of an oversimplification IMO, not that I'd claim the cloak didn't impact the ability to play solo, obviously it did, but the game isn't as binary as all that. Being tacnet invisible does more to allow solo scout strikers than the 'predatory shimmer' at least in my experience. Even before either of those back in beta there were assaults using (the then much more potent) nanohives to supply themselves and lone wolf it all over. There is the whole redline sniping thing, in or out of HAVS. There's the LAV tanking solo play, and used to be the murder taxi epidemic, ADS (no gunners required here) were recently the most potent single thing in the game according to the numbers. The list of course goes on. And honestly I'm not saying anything as intense as "hey your 70m from the nearest ally, your head will now explode" but general premises are good to keep track of. In essence, can you get the value of another role while running in your current role? Also, do you gain extra benefits by having and running with, a squad (you can be in one and not run together so the mechanical "squad" isn't much of an indicator). Can you remain combat ready without a logi despite taking damage and expending ammo? Does your scout fit allow you to solo assault an entrenched position? Can your sniper secure and hack a point? Does your heavy have meaningful force projection? Obviously the answer to all of these questions is situational, which is what makes balance tricky, but situational or not these are the type of ideas that are important to keep track of because any role that is able to do the "jack of all trades" thing without having the corresponding "master of none" is going to be game breaking. The specializations within dust come, ideally, with drawbacks other roles do not face, and assets other roles cannot replicate. We are not currently at that point, but it is, in my view, a laudable goal to shoot for. 0.02 ISK Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3187	Posted - 2014.10.09 23:24:00 - [112] - Quote Sgt Kirk wrote: Cross Atu wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Solo logi should be suicide. Agreed, with the addendum that I think the same should apply every bit as much to most fits/roles the majority of the time. But if I really try to make that a baseline I'll only get lynched soo.... /goes back to trying to balance a team game within a world were everyone wants to be their own flavor of Rambo Funny because another member of the CPM sounds like he wants the game to be focused on Solo Players, which is cancerous thinking. Teamwork > Random Blues that don't know what they are doing. Working together makes New berries better just by communication, that's how new guys get better. Not being solo, that rarely works and when it does they mostly just become snipers that think that's the only thing to do in this game. Yeah, as it turns out, the CPM do not universally agree Actually I am glad the CPM dispute things because it would likely make for very poor consideration of ideas if we all just nodded on que and said "yes" to everything, or even all the same things. But yeah, turns out getting this shiny white tag didn't change my thoughts on the game even when they don't fall into line with the CPM or CCP See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3187	Posted - 2014.10.09 23:27:00 - [113] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: I wasn't contradicting, just adding. nods You know that, and I know that, but random berry who pops into the thread may not know that so I generally respond anyway just to keep the bases covered. Which is why you may have noticed I am a lot less wordy on comms than I am here in the forums See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3189	Posted - 2014.10.09 23:30:00 - [114] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: I wasn't contradicting, just adding. The problem with the unarmed logi is the same as the slow turning heavy back in beta. A feeling of impotence. When you cannot make even a token gesture of defiant bloodshed against an attacker you don't fell like a valuable team member. You feel like a victim. No one plays vidya games to be the victim unless they need serious psych help. IMHO the logi needs to have the speed of a assault so they can respond to changing situations, reach downed allies quickly and get behind cover (like a sentinel) when the shooting starts. They need to be more efficient in using equipment than combat suits. This is imperative, even if that means nerfing equipment and bonusing logis to use them at full efficacy. The only exceptions to this rule would be scanners and explosives. Logistics need to not be able to field assault level tank. This was the direct cause of the slayer logi. End. Stop. Look no further for the cause. Logistics do not fare well in a solo pubstar environment because blueberries are idiots. A logistics fit properly costs almost 50%more than a comparable sentinel or assault suit. Losing said fits because your dingleberry allies cannot comprehend that they need to wait up is intensely frustrating. Logistics are mostly ignored by friendly players except sentinels. The sentinel/logi pair is a natural because fatboy is the only ally the suit can keep up with. The sentinel benefit from logi reps more than other suits and more WP can be earned shoving fat intestines back in fat bellies because the HP pool is deep and guardian awards are plentiful. But logi play is stagnant. Most logi suitas are tourist fits used to spam equipment then frag off to a killer fit because no one wants to be a victim, or to tether themselves to sone donut-munching HMG heavy who may or may not understand which way the weapon is supposed to be pointed. Logis are not incentivized to be pro squad players because the squads leave them In the dust with the fatsuits who are relegated to protecting cap points and playing squad bait. I know I just quoted the opening passage a moment ago, but I am quoting the whole thing now. Why? Because this is one of the most complete single post summaries of current logi related troubles that I have had the opportunity to read. o7 See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3189	Posted - 2014.10.09 23:33:00 - [115] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: John Demonsbane wrote: A boat-ton of stuff Remember when mass driver logis were a primary support staple to assault squads? Good times. I miss the real mass driver from those days. I used to only run mass driver because of its suppression options. I would hardly ever get a kill but I racked up assists like mad and more importantly I supported my squad. The the changes, and now my proto MD sits on a shelf 99% of the time. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3190	Posted - 2014.10.10 00:05:00 - [116] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Cross Atu wrote: The the changes, and now my proto MD sits on a shelf 99% of the time. Take it off the shelf. I'm going to say two words, and I'm going to let the implications sink in and make you cackle insanely: Scout Hunting. considers... results = goes to build fit See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3190	Posted - 2014.10.10 00:36:00 - [117] - Quote Llast 326 wrote: Cross Atu wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Cross Atu wrote: The the changes, and now my proto MD sits on a shelf 99% of the time. Take it off the shelf. I'm going to say two words, and I'm going to let the implications sink in and make you cackle insanely: Scout Hunting. considers... results = goes to build fit Watches Cross from that dark corner of his Merc Quarters We always knowGÇª Mass Driver Minja, the new super scout See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3240	Posted - 2014.10.14 18:49:00 - [118] - Quote el OPERATOR wrote: Sheet get updated yet? Iteration #3 has not yet been posted - I am currently waiting on the tech evaluations for related items (mostly checking which of the skill methods can be confirmed as possible) before moving forward. I will be certain there is a post here stating when Iteration #3 goes live See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3258	Posted - 2014.10.15 18:24:00 - [119] - Quote el OPERATOR wrote: John Demonsbane wrote: Nothing personal, but I'm ok with meee one being out of this, *the grown ups need to make some possibly far reaching decisions here (as far reaching as things can be in dust) and objectivity is crucial*. So, more like this then? When will you clean the FanFestRageQuitter riding the reputation of characters THEY AREN'T stardust from your eyes and see that this cabal of individuals has zero interest in balanced gameplay mechanics? The game got better while they were gone. Coincidence? Now they're "back" and continued improvement gets stymied while new misinformation and intentionally useless data is introduced by them and vetted? Coincidence again? DUST is built on customized counters countering counters but if one class group has 95% of the counters built in outright then there will always be one class group that starts, ends, and decides almost every battle. Nerf scouts. All stats. At all levels. If "Shotty Go Bang" or "Appia" want to discuss it with me, I'm not hiding. I Laugh My Ass Off Out Loud at altcowards. Not the thread for debating the overall viability of the scout role or its overall balance with other roles. While certainly the scout, assault, and even commando have some relevance to the topic of this thread a debate centering around another class is hardly useful in this context - even less so calling out specific members of the community. I realize that there is somewhat of a 'holding pattern' going on right now until I can update the thread with tech evaluations in hand, and as such it is easy for conversation to sidetrack, but let us try to keep this thread 'on point'. 0.02 ISK Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3383	Posted - 2014.10.21 06:39:00 - [120] - Quote Songs of Seraphim wrote: patiently waits for anything logi and support related makes passive-aggressive post ._. In all seriousness, does the announcement of 1.9 postpone any logistics and support alterations? Or would any update from here on out be updated with the installment of 1.9? I need a reason to not give up on my logi suit, since outside of PC, I seldom use it. Since the standard Caldari logistics suit is laughable, and the advanced is mediocre... It's proto or go home. Which isn't necessarily the case, but it sure feels like it if you want survivability. Currently trying to get Logi updates ready for hotfix Echo, but that won't come until after patch 1.9 deployment my current *guess* is we'll be looking at updates to this thread second or third week of Nov. I will of course make efforts to have it in before that if possible, but 1.9 takes priority. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)

Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3383	Posted - 2014.10.21 07:25:00 - [121] - Quote Sgt Kirk wrote: Cross Atu wrote: Songs of Seraphim wrote: patiently waits for anything logi and support related makes passive-aggressive post ._. In all seriousness, does the announcement of 1.9 postpone any logistics and support alterations? Or would any update from here on out be updated with the installment of 1.9? I need a reason to not give up on my logi suit, since outside of PC, I seldom use it. Since the standard Caldari logistics suit is laughable, and the advanced is mediocre... It's proto or go home. Which isn't necessarily the case, but it sure feels like it if you want survivability. Currently trying to get Logi updates ready for hotfix Echo, but that won't come until after patch 1.9 deployment my current *guess* is we'll be looking at updates to this thread second or third week of Nov. I will of course make efforts to have it in before that if possible, but 1.9 takes priority. Cheers, Cross I like you and all but your name is right there, why do you sign your post with your name when we know it's you? lol, I was wondering when someone would bring that up, and honestly I am surprised it's taken this long to happen. The answer is nothing particularly interesting though, it is simply an old habit from when I started gaming long ago in a galaxy far far away. Rationally I know full well it doesn't actually do anything in this context, but then again, habitual behavior is rarely a font of rationality See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3387	Posted - 2014.10.22 02:45:00 - [122] - Quote An idea that would, if implemented, have an effect on our conversation here. Honestly I think it would be a positive step as it would give more flex in what/how we can proceed with iterations on the proposal here (of course still going to need some info back from CCP on those, but still this could open a door IMO). See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3447	Posted - 2014.10.23 10:56:00 - [123] - Quote Updated stats these will be considered and incorporated for the next iteration of the proposal. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3452	Posted - 2014.10.23 19:05:00 - [124] - Quote el OPERATOR wrote: Cross Atu wrote: Currently trying to get Logi updates ready for hotfix Echo, but that won't come until after patch 1.9 deployment my current *guess* is we'll be looking at updates to this thread second or third week of Nov. I will of course make efforts to have it in before that if possible, but 1.9 takes priority. Cheers, Cross So am I inferring accurately then that we'll see 1.9 deployed here last week of October or so? My current guess is that it will be deployed along side the patch for EVE so that there is only one extended DT for TQ. That is my deduced/inferred time frame reasoning. (I don't remember the date for the EVE patch off the top of my head but I believe it was early November) See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3623	Posted - 2014.10.30 04:15:00 - [125] - Quote KalOfTheRathi wrote: Is there any possibility for squad based uplinks? I ask because way back in time we had a specification for an uplink that had very limited spawns (five as I recall) and the interesting aspect was that it was squad limited. The intention as I understood it was to send in the Scout with one and allow your squad (5? seems wrong with current squad sizes) to attack an objective, counter a push or just make life more interesting for the Red Berries. If the current code base doesn't support it I understand. But if it does I believe it would add a level of entertaining game play. I am not sure but I will add an inquiry about squad based links to my list, I am all for diversity of possible game play See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3658	Posted - 2014.10.31 20:31:00 - [126] - Quote Update: I will be creating and linking a new iteration of the proposal after patch 1.9 deploys (and we have the chance to see if it creates any unexpected side effects). Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3661	Posted - 2014.11.01 10:50:00 - [127] - Quote Iteration 3 is up, current revision includes the new native armor rep stats. This iteration should be considered in draft form until after the 1.9 patch has been deployed and we have further opportunity to test its effects, I'm just getting a jump on things See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3661	Posted - 2014.11.01 11:17:00 - [128] - Quote RKKR wrote: Cross Atu wrote: Iteration 3 is up, current revision includes the new native armor rep stats. This iteration should be considered in draft form until after the 1.9 patch has been deployed and we have further opportunity to test its effects, I'm just getting a jump on things Just took a quick look, some questions (i'm not so up to date anymore): Are the slot lay-outs the same as the current ones in the 3rd draft? Why the CPU difference between the cal assault and logi, will it work? (at first glance it seems that equipment is more CPU favorable for logis, but what about the shield modules?) something small: Think you mixed the 'current' (no change) & 'proposed' (empty) columns of Scan profile/precision? Slot layouts have not been altered in any of the drafts, High/Low would retain present distribution under the proposal. All CPU and PG changes assume the simultaneous change of the Logistics Role bonus, the increase in which will more than compensate for any lost fittings values on nearly all fits running full racks of equipment (i.e. fits with full equipment may even have a little be extra compared to current, while fits without full sets of equipment will be facing more of a pinch than they do at present). Thanks for the heads up about the possible column mix up, I'll give it a look o7 See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3676	Posted - 2014.11.02 18:08:00 - [129] - Quote Z3dog wrote: John Demonsbane wrote: Z3dog wrote: Is anyone else concerned about the nanite injector in 1.9 being opt-in instead of opt-out for team revives? Yes. Thanks. Guess I'll be unequipping my nanite injectors when 1.9 comes out. I recommend running a MLT injector for the first two weeks after 1.9 so that you can see the icon if players call for revive and assess directly how often you will have use for the needle. Same with Active Scanners, select the lowest level Active Scanner on the market - that has team scan enabled - and test under battlefield conditions to see what value it does or does not hold for your own play conditions. If everyone tests the new changes rather than assumes effects we can provide more meaningful feedback to CCP regarding the impact and implication of the various changes. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3746	Posted - 2014.11.08 19:32:00 - [130] - Quote Looking for continued feedback on the state of injectors, active scanners, and survivability in 1.9 Also check out the eWar thread to voice your opinions there. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)

Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3764	Posted - 2014.11.12 08:40:00 - [131] - Quote John Demonsbane wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Meee One wrote: ResistanceGTA wrote: You know, a lot of information, can't process as I'm at 2 hours of sleep in the past 40 hours, but I would like to pop in this conversation at some point. But what's with this 'removing undocumented CPU reduction on Nanocircuitry'? It says it right on the skillbook, just because CCP is lazy and never readded it to the skill description doesn't mean we should remove it. We need more passives, not less. The problem is that other suits besides logistics gets the bonus too. Not seeing how this is a bad thing. Speaking as a logi, I don't see an issue either, really. I know it's always bugged shayz, tbh I'm not sure if that's because it just doesn't say it in the main skill screen or if he has an actual issue with the bonus itself. Nanohives are the one piece of equipment that you really can't make an argument against everyone using. If you don't want assaults, for example, using nanohives, then you may as well just take the EQ slot away. As for "solving" EQ spam, there's a few reasonable solutions around. You could streamline the EQ line, like Meee suggests, which is OK. I've suggested a skill-based limitation on deployable equipment as well. (the website is not letting me look at my favorites right now and I'm too lazy to find it otherwise) A much better solution, imo, was brought up by vell0cet. If it is technically feasible to do, then it's unquestionably the best solution I've ever read. Undocumented skill effects are generally a bad thing, in the case of this one it is problematic because it effects the interplay between classes, races, equipment types and roles. Either we could add effects to all equipment related skills, rebalanced everything, or remove this undocumented effect. The point being that balancing around something which isn't clearly stated or explained is a consistent mess / pervasive distortion. To be clear I am all for every skill providing more than unlocks, but that is its own polish/balance pass so even if an effect like this is ultimately applied to all equipment related skills (something I wouldn't oppose at all) removing the undocumented effect now is still best practice with regards to balance and assessing clearly the state of suits and equipment. 0.02 ISK Cross PS ~ I love my new Apex Minmatar Logi suit, call me addicted to Fac War but I just find it fun to run faction suits in faction battles See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3764	Posted - 2014.11.12 08:44:00 - [132] - Quote Also, just to reiterate, make sure you are getting your feedback into the eWar thread as in part how that balance iteration plays out will define some of our course for further polish on the Logi Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3871	Posted - 2014.11.16 20:07:00 - [133] - Quote I-Shayz-I wrote: Orion Sanjeet wrote: TL;DR version We need to change the end of match leaderboads and actual leaderboards so shallow s.o.b.s can stop tearing down ideas that are good for logis. P.S. Payouts would also have to be looked at, and can we please change how we earn orbitals? P.P.S. Changing the leaderboards like this would also improve new player retention because giving praise to a gamer is like giving crack to an addict. After rereading this I realize that it really doesn't belong in this topic. this is why I keep suggesting that triage bonuses should be reduced while things like equipment destruction and Intel assist should be increased. also Sentinels should have another way of earning wp since they are not able to use equipment. I'm actually highly opposed to that, it is already meaningfully more expensive to run a full on logistics fit than the equivalent assault fitting reducing logistics earnings while raising assault earnings would only serve to exacerbate a currently persistent problem. We can do things such as discount equipment and so forth but the simple fact is that since logi have more mod slots to fill in order to run the role, due to equipment being a mod, they need to be able to have a higher potential rewards curve in order to have and *equal* risk vs reward baseline. Until the risk vs reward ratio for each role is even it will always be on balance more profitable to run one over the other for an average player context. All of that aside, balancing around epeen considerations such as what to kdr kittens want to stroke their egos is a very bad practice indeed because someone who is focused on 'status' and FotM chasing wants an advantage they do not wish the game to be balanced (speaking broadly, there are of course exceptions). I suggest we focus on fixing what is broken and to the best of our ability discount factors which are outside of balance - such as who falls where on the leaderboards. 0.02 ISK Cross EDIT: To be clear, I would support an increase to both equipment destruction (no higher than 10pts per however) and to scanner intel (20 + having them give WP for team scans should be sufficiently ample). On the note of scanners, having them give team scans without team scans giving WP is a nerf to scanner potential earnings and I am intent on seeing it changes. As far as the ability to run a sustainable logi is concerned the current scanning mechanics are a step backwards. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3871	Posted - 2014.11.16 20:22:00 - [134] - Quote Baal Omniscient wrote: Forgive me for not reading the whole thread, but I am under time constraints. I have only a few things to say as a jack of all trades in the game, and I'm sure it will all be unpopular because I am recommending nerfs to adjust for all of it's benifits. Repair tools, like everything else in the game has done so far, needs an anti-point farming mechanic built in. We nerfed nano hives and uplinks because they were too easy to just continuously farm points with, despite their usefulness to the team. The repair tool should be no different. I know points cut off if the person you're repairing hasn't done damage within a set amount of time, but the amount of points able to be accrued with a repair tool has been a bit laughable for a long time now (Reference: I-Shayz-I videos). I have no problem with a logi being able to work hard and do poorly k/d wise and still hit the top, I'm merely saying the repair tool allows a logi with a heavy or two to repair all match to be at the top in pretty much every match. All I'm saying is is that they are being a little overcompensated WP-wise for their role repairing. A slight drop to WP/rep cycle should smooth things out nicely, dropping it from 25 to 20 would probably even be enough. I have to respectfully disagree with you brother. Balancing around the top tier of players such as I-Shayz-I is one of the easiest ways to kill a role. If something is throttled hard enough so that the most successful in it are unable to perform beyond the current average of game play then everyone below them is pushed out. Conceptual acid test; Take the guys who won each officer weapons challenge and balance the stats on those guns around making the winners only able to hit a break even kdr in a match. See the problem? The repair tool at present is one of the only pieces of equipment reliably working for support play and even then it still faces rewards scaling problems (i.e. you have higher potential earnings with lower quality gear). Further a purely proto support if with less combat utility than my STD Assault can still go ISK negative if it dies 3 times in a match where it topped the leaderboard and earned 500K. Simply put the compensation for other equipment needs to be improved until support actions are at a 'livable' level for an average player who plays only the support role. (This should be true for all roles, and average player should not be forced to play another role just to grind ISK so they can play their main role.) Re: OBs - Agree that they should be assists for the whole squad not kills for the SL Re: Guardian awards - "Farming" is improper terminology for doing something that is clearly working as intended. CCP went so far as to put a separate, specific, named award into the game explicitly for the act of repping someone who is getting kills regardless of their armor status, it is a tactical asset and should be rewarded as such. All of that being said a more active repair tool method would be appealing, buy my character limit is low so see next post See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3873	Posted - 2014.11.16 20:34:00 - [135] - Quote I-Shayz-I wrote: Equipment needs a full scale rebalance in terms of isk price and utility, we both know this more than anything. Things like the flux nanohive/proximity scanner being useless while flux scanner is OP, or the fact that the most useful equipment that runs the least amount of risk of loss (switching to another suit at a supply depot), has the lowest isk price? Proto Uplinks cost barely anything at all and give out tons of wp passively, while scans only give you points when someone kills someone within an average of 10 seconds of the scan results displayed. They recently made weapon variants the same price as standard...I'm in favor of SIDGRADES being the same price, things like the focused equipment can be a bit more pricy. All true, also the costs seem to have no clear correlation to the CPU/PG fittings requirements in many cases and that's not even getting into the effects of interracial balance when which gear is optimized comes into play. My major point however is that the baseline needs to be both established and functional prior to a focus on scaling anything back. The role as a whole is at present under performing and while some aspects may need to be scaled back eventually that should be done after a functioning sustainable baseline for the role is found to ensure that said baseline is maintained. Alena Ventrallis wrote: Cross Atu wrote: I-Shayz-I wrote: Orion Sanjeet wrote: TL;DR version We need to change the end of match leaderboads and actual leaderboards so shallow s.o.b.s can stop tearing down ideas that are good for logis. P.S. Payouts would also have to be looked at, and can we please change how we earn orbitals? P.P.S. Changing the leaderboards like this would also improve new player retention because giving praise to a gamer is like giving crack to an addict. After rereading this I realize that it really doesn't belong in this topic. this is why I keep suggesting that triage bonuses should be reduced while things like equipment destruction and Intel assist should be increased. also Sentinels should have another way of earning wp since they are not able to use equipment. I'm actually highly opposed to that, it is already meaningfully more expensive to run a full on logistics fit than the equivalent assault fitting reducing logistics earnings while raising assault earnings would only serve to exacerbate a currently persistent problem. We can do things such as discount equipment and so forth but the simple fact is that since logi have more mod slots to fill in order to run the role, due to equipment being a mod, they need to be able to have a higher potential rewards curve in order to have and *equal* risk vs reward baseline. Until the risk vs reward ratio for each role is even it will always be on balance more profitable to run one over the other for an average player context. All of that aside, balancing around epeen considerations such as what to kdr kittens want to stroke their egos is a very bad practice indeed because someone who is focused on 'status' and FotM chasing wants an advantage they do not wish the game to be balanced (speaking broadly, there are of course exceptions). I suggest we focus on fixing what is broken and to the best of our ability discount factors which are outside of balance - such as who falls where on the leaderboards. 0.02 ISK Cross EDIT: To be clear, I would support an increase to both equipment destruction (no higher than 10pts per however) and to scanner intel (20 + having them give WP for team scans should be sufficiently ample). On the note of scanners, having them give team scans without team scans giving WP is a nerf to scanner potential earnings and I am intent on seeing it changes. As far as the ability to run a sustainable logi is concerned the current scanning mechanics are a step backwards. Is it possible to give WP based in item meta level? For instance, I destroy a militia link, that's 5 points. I destroy a Viziam link, that's 10 points. Conversely, a spawn on a militia link is reduced to 10 points. A spawn on a viziam link gives 30 points. These numbers can be changed, but we can reward logis better for using higher tier equipment, and reward assaults for destroying higher tier equipment. The better stuff you run, the more points you get, and the more payout you receive. Something more dynamic like that is indeed what I would like to see, the question becomes largely one of technical constraint and finding out what can or cannot be done. That being said I would very much like to hear from the community what ideal solutions would look like so we can get as close to them as is technically feasible. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3878	Posted - 2014.11.16 22:46:00 - [136] - Quote Repair Revolution This will serve as a partial preview of the upcoming iteration on our logistics rework proposal, please provide feedback accordingly. (Also please pardon the very truncated presentation, I am typing this up when I should be getting ready for work so I have to keep it quite short) 1. Add an Infantry Shield Transporter (rep tool for shields) 2. Make repair actions more active. <-- Key feature, more below 3. Remove the cap from repair earnings (note this would not remove the 'in combat' requirements) 4. Logistics skill update - - Race or role wide bonuses to one/both 'rep tools' active pool (active what now? More below) Explanation Give repair tools the 'active pool' mechanic used by things like the cloaking device. In effect make them run off of their own "stamina pool". The repair tool would now provide scaled rep rewards correlated to the meta and type of tool used. A cap is no longer needed because the active pool depletes and refreshes dynamically preventing earnings beyond a maximum use case set by CCP for that tool. Guardian point mechanics remain the same, however with a new opportunity cost because of the 'pool' method now present on the repair tool, this rewards tactical play and user choice directly. Further WP would now be earned in much smaller portions on a WP/s basis. This when combined with earnings scaled to the tool in question eliminates the current reward disparity between high and low meta gear. These mechanics would apply to both shield and armor 'repair tools'. Further the active pool mechanic applies to each instance of equipment separately such that players who wish to have constant access to repair output can choose to equip more than one repair tool thus giving them a larger repair pool to employ at the cost of a higher 'buy in' via equipment slots and fittings costs. Point number 4 from above is a consideration being given to the logistics role as a support class within this system, providing some form of per level bonus to the rep pool (i.e. duration) for either armor, shields or a combination there of (depending on racial persuasion). This final element ensures that the newly revamped and active support tool will still be usable by other classes but always more effective when employed by a logistics frame. -= Other context =- Uplinks / Hives - Consider spam and some of the earnings potential on these nerfed, more details coming later as things develop but for now please provide feedback to the above idea with this in mind. Active Scanner - Presume that Team Scans give WP and that the scanner line has been split into two general groups, more effective squad only scanners and less effective team wide scanners. More details forthcoming after the eWar rework that CCP is currently taking feedback on. In closing I'm interested in impressions and ideas. Sorry for the rough nature of the presentation, I'm just crunched for time at the moment. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3878	Posted - 2014.11.16 22:48:00 - [137] - Quote RKKR wrote: ^ What about a system, where you only get (limited) WP after the blueberry that spawned on your uplink does something usefull +á la transportation WP system? I don't really know, just throwing something out here. Cross (or shy DEV), about the injector stuff above? is it doable? Injector stuff my be doable in a future iteration but would at minimum require another client patch to alter it in that manner. While I support the notion of it in the game play sense I am doubtful that it will be within our reach as a change within the near future. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3878	Posted - 2014.11.16 22:54:00 - [138] - Quote RedBleach LeSanglant wrote: John Demonsbane wrote: As is usual, I agree with a lot of what RedBleach said, in particular I've always liked the Logi as "light medium" instead of the "heavy medium", though there is a good case to be made the other way. But if you do that, like he said, you better be putting a pretty sizable HP buff on the table. One place I do disagree though, is in the CPU/PG buff. Personally, while there are obvious issues with the Caldari CPU, and the Amarr logi PG has literally always been broken since it's creation... it was, what, some laughable amount like 20 PG at STD when it first existed? But, I don't think that a fitting resource buff to the level of the assault is the answer. I would favor a more modest buff and then a 50-100% increase to the fitting bonus instead, to make it relatively easy to fit proto equipment but not proto weapons. This is just a sort of pre-emptive thing to stop the slayerlogi derpiness that is 100% guaranteed to follow any buff to logis. By doing it with an EQ bonus you can very easily make the claim that the offensive capabilities of the suit will be at most only modestly better but the "intended" capability, as a support platform, is brought in line with the other frames. I completely agree. I suppose I have not taken the time to run numbers and fits to find the perfect PG/CPU combinations. I am with you that the key is to get proto gear and proto modules equipped and then have little left over so the sacrifices are between weapon level, grenade level (if at all), and side arm where applicable. If the bonus works and it allows me to maintain current fittings I am ready to move with it. But I need to take some time to wrap my head around why the Lower PG/CPU would work out. I don't want there to be a rush of slayer logi's but I do know that there are various types of Logistics characters. I typically fall on the Logibro side of things but a bomber fit must be just as viable, a logi that can kill/defend should be possible. I believe it boils down to the ease at which one can accomplish such a fitting. If it is easy for common newbs to jump into a logi and slay it up then there is a problem. But a creative individual that can tailor their playstyle and fitting to have a fit that can sadface the opponent is ok. But saying anything light that brings the logi hate for logistics killing anything - we all know this. Can you tell me Your PG/CPU suggestions and Why? I would just like to see something as an example about why the values are too much. Maybe what I ask is not available. I can get on board, I just need the logic. Very simple quick comment - and by all means continue with more input - before I run. The proposed changes as linked in the spreadsheet cannot be taken piecemeal or they are broken. The alteration to suit stats without the changes to role bonus are key here without one the other is not properly applying. With both in place logi frames being used without equipment have fewer resources than current, while logi frames being used with a full set of equipment will have more net resources to use. This combined effect allows for more freedom to buff the overall logi frame and role while still precluding any theoretical risk of use as a slayer suit. So, please carry on with the feedback, but bear in mind that with regards to the proposal if you are not considering the entire proposal then the suggestions will be distorted/broken. They are meant to be taken together, or not at all. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3893	Posted - 2014.11.18 06:12:00 - [139] - Quote RedBleach LeSanglant wrote: The Logistics bonus would have to be in the neighborhood of 75% net total to get my fittings anything close to what they are now.... and that is still untenable for most of the solid fits. Throttle PG/CPU but make it count with the bonus. I can math it if needed. But I'll trust you Cross. I would love to see numbers worked up especially with any annotation on how and why the contrast the current listings. This proposal has undergone so many revisions both within the community and internally (usually meaning I find out something either does not, or cannot, work mechanically as I had hoped and thus must be worked around) that it is sometimes hard for me to keep track of whether everything is current and as it should be with regard to the numeric details (these are of course important details but they are often derivative ones as well which makes them harder to keep track of). Anyway, if a concept seems sound but the specific numbers do not execute it properly then by all means feel free to provide alternatives you know me I'm big into discourse. Now, you have an entire post with a lot more 'meat' to it than the bit I've excerpted above and I am still reading (and re-reading) the thread but I just wanted to get this bit out right now. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3896	Posted - 2014.11.18 17:08:00 - [140] - Quote All of you should check this out. It has a direct impact on the future of support and logistics play, please go read, comment, then come back here for further discussion as well regarding the implications. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)

Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3897	Posted - 2014.11.18 18:25:00 - [141] - Quote Llast 326 wrote: Cross Atu wrote: All of you should check this out. It has a direct impact on the future of support and logistics play, please go read, comment, then come back here for further discussion as well regarding the implications. Cheers, Cross Interested in your take on this ^ Particularly when combined with the EWAR changes being discussed. Any concern that the Amarr Logi may become a go to all rounder suit? Doubtful in that fitting a full load of proto equipment, especially uplinks, still requires a great deal of CPU/PG and thus limits other capacities. That being said the greatest risk is that someone uses Amarr Logi fits without equipment in place and thus employs the BW mechanic passively after deploying a max equipment load, thus gaming the fittings system. Preventing exploits like that last case is exactly why I want to shift Logistics CPU/PG values downward somewhat while substantially buffing their role bonus with the net outcome that fittings using full proto equipment in all slots have a bit more fitting flex than they do currently but logi fits without a full rack of equipment have distinctly reduced fittings options than they do currently. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3897	Posted - 2014.11.18 18:26:00 - [142] - Quote Cat Merc wrote: So with this idea in place, could you please increase STD and ADV logistics to their full PRO equipment count? There would still be a reason to skill up to PRO, but STD and ADV logis wouldn't be so limited in their equipment choice. Interested in everyones take on this notion, balanced, OP, a step for suit progression but not enough on its own? See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3903	Posted - 2014.11.18 19:16:00 - [143] - Quote I-Shayz-I wrote: Nothing against you Cross, but this thread feels more like an idea farm than a productive way to gather feedback. You should convince rattati to create a sticky for a specific change we want feedback about. That's basically what my job description as a CPM amounts to, "gather ideas from the playerbase and transmit them to CCP." "Farm" seems a bit pejorative but aside from that I would have to say "yes of course it is, that's what I was elected to do." In the case of the logistics class we cannot limit it to a 'specific change' in the same way that LW or Sidearm balance could be limited due to the interlinking nature of the support role. Now granted the currently linked version of the proposal is a bit outdated when considered in light of the native rep changes, the eWar debate, and the BW idea. But even so there is a specific proposal for feedback being linked and there really is no meaningful difference between providing feedback on the ideas now or waiting until after I present them to CCP Rattati and only then providing feedback... except that it takes up more of CCP Rattatis time duplicating work. This is one of the key reasons the CPM was formed in the first place, so that the Devs (let alone the team lead) did not need to micro manage everything directly and thus could address a greater volume in a more effective manner. If it is the communities preference that I simply build an idea and try to get CCP to push that directly into game I am certainly able to do so, however if - as I suspect - it is the communities preference to have direct input into shaping the process then this is how it is done, there is really nothing meaningfully different about a blue tag being on the OP. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3935	Posted - 2014.11.18 19:22:00 - [144] - Quote I-Shayz-I wrote: Actually I have to aplologize. I just read the changes proposed in that spreadsheet on the first page and pretty much agree with everything there. Only two things I have issues with: 1. Leave the changes to logistics racial bonuses alone for now aside from the 50% reduction to equipment and the overal increase in equipment cost. 2. No proposed changes to rebalancing equipment (aside from the deployable changes), yet we're still discussing adding a shield transporter. I'm going to spend the day updating my equipment spreadsheet and will propose some numbers for the variants along with isk prices. Looking forward to it EDIT: and also completing my full on read through of this thread up to current, sorry if some responses or somewhat outdated due to this See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 3963	Posted - 2014.11.19 22:55:00 - [145] - Quote Quoting the work of John Demonsbane to provide more clarity on the subject of BW in case anyone is a bit foggy at this point. John Demonsbane wrote: It seems like people are a little confused about how the EQ bandwidth thing is supposed to work, so hereGÇÖs some examples to help make it more clear than RattatiGÇÖs spreadsheet (I do give him a +1 for the use of both GÇ£shenanigansGÇ¥ and GÇ£follyGÇ¥ in a spreadsheet). Personally I like the idea (a lot) so I want to make sure everyone understands its purpose and mechanics before they jump to any conclusions. Example 1: This is exactly what the BW mechanic is intended to stop. -Player starts match in scout suit or speedy min logi suit stacked with uplinks. Litters the map with them along a path leading to supply depot -Switches to another suit, drops a bunch of triage hives at a chokepoint, heads back to supply depot -Switches to HMG sentinel, camps said hives. -Profit. When he dies he respawns in the relatively cheaper sentinel suit while the expensive equipment is used cost-free Example 2: The way I, as a proper Amarr logi specializing in tactical logistics, starts basically every battle: -Spawn in with scout suit with 2 uplinks (the Amarr logi suit is not really any faster than a Min sentinel once you put some armor on it). Place uplinks judiciously, in well-chosen locations (click signature for details) -Switch to Amarr logi suit. Drop a couple more if itGÇÖs a large 5 point map. Do logi stuff with rep tool or nanohives or whatever -Replace uplinks when needed -No profit as my suit is expensive and the d-bag above stole all my WP by dropping his uplinks right on top of mine after spawning on them. GG, dude. -Insert bandwidth here- Example 1a: Same Scout/Sentinel 514 youGÇÖve grown to love, but now with BW! -Player starts match with ADV min logi suit (BW=6 EQ worth) -Craps out 5 uplinks on the way to supply depot in numerical order, #1 under the MCC, #2 in the middle of the road, #3 kinda near the city entrance, etc. -Switches to another ADV min logi suit, drops 3 more (#6,7,8). -Ooops! Exceeded BW of 6 EQ. (5+3 >6). Uplinks #1 and #2 pop. -Returns to supply depot, switches to cloaked shotty scout to display l33t skillz while farming uplink WP -Uh oh. Scout BW = 3 EQ. Uplinks 3-5 pop. Sad face. -Complain on forums Example 2a:You can still be a logi -Spawn in with scout suit (BW = 3 EQ) for initial run, drop 3 uplinks, need to be even more judicious since itGÇÖs only 3 -Switch to Amarr logi suit (BW=8GÇª yay!), drop the remaining uplinks, letGÇÖs call it 5 total. -Do logi stuff. Still have room for 3 REGÇÖs to set a trap or to drop a full complement of proto hives. -Profit. Less equipment is being spammed. No one else is stealing my WP -Rep tool, injector, scanners not affected. I can switch to a medic suit with those 3 things and my EQ stays exactly where it is! Hope this cleared up any confusion. I can always put up a couple other scenarios/examples if desired. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4029	Posted - 2015.01.28 09:43:00 - [146] - Quote I leave you guys alone for one minute (well, okay, a good sight longer than that, blame work and look what I come back too! ...constructive discussion... am I still on the Dust boards? You LogiBros do my heart good o7 Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4029	Posted - 2015.01.28 09:48:00 - [147] - Quote As a quick update, last word I have is that there will be some Logi love coming in the next hotfix which should be deployed (as I understand it) post patch. All things have been somewhat delayed due to the nature of multi-national holidays combined with coordinating two games on the same server + working with Sony QA (which streamlined or not still takes time). Now, having said that I am confident that after all the various changes to the game there will likely be room for further polish on Logis and equipment even after the changes. Room to really make them shine. But I am a firm believer in the iterative process and working with the community here so that is IMO all to the good. When the changes come please play test them and post your feedback (tagged with build etc) in this thread so we can craft the next step together Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4029	Posted - 2015.01.28 09:52:00 - [148] - Quote RedBleach LeSanglant wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: This works for uplinks, but splitting up ammo is simply a bad idea. As it is it takes next to no time for 2-3 people to drain a proto hive, even with CalLogi bonuses. So I'd simply advocate increased max carry for hives. Yep, the nano bonus is pretty weak, and nanohives in general feel weak. I actually am being "sneaky" here to be totally blunt. I do want to see the changes outlined for hives go through, however it is my impression that it will cause ripples in how hives are employed generally and that those ripples will create a data trend that supports some things I have been saying for quite awhile now. Such as the need for polish on both the hives and the CalLogi racial. One other effect of all the changes would be that while hives would still hold value, they would hold an even greater weighted value in the hands of a Logi and that I believe is the proper course to take just as a LW holds more value in the hands of an Assault. 0.02 ISK Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4058	Posted - 2015.02.05 10:25:00 - [149] - Quote Booby Tuesdays wrote: RedBleach LeSanglant wrote: What do I get from a capacitor? a limited time to heal? or is it more like an overdrive double or tripling my reps for a limited time? A logi is already gimped enough, let us not gimp them further Booby and Mordecai. You know the arguments about capacitors, but if we need to rehash them we can cut and paste again. Battles are too varied to establish a set time for healing - though some may stay 'leashed' far to often it is not standard of being a logi. Look at the entire class and the many actions it takes, then take another stab at what you may see as WP disparity. I have had great logi games where I did hit the top of the charts, that was with a well coordinated team. Most often those high WP matches are a rarity and not the established experience of all logis. They are the outliers, the 5%. If we keep working this through we must ask: Do we start adding capacitors to all suits then? And what would be their purpose? You see, If we have one capacitor it must be used on other things as well, will it: Limit uplink spawning to 1 per x seconds? Limit firing times for weapons to a x shots withing x seconds? Where will it end? Don't get me wrong, capacitors work well in Eve and create a dynamic battle system. I can see them on vehicles as some have mentioned, but what bonus do the infantry get from such things? If they someday have capacitors I hope it will be for the supersoldier modules we've talked about in the past. Like increasing damage for a certain amount of time or sprint speed, but then lowering that boosted stat for the time it was down. I could see a super rep tool variant that used a capacitor or supper rep module that used a capacitor, but it should not be the norm. I guess what I am trying to say, is that we need a point of diminishing returns in regards to WP from rep tools. I do not want them to cease in functioning via a capacitor. That would be a huge nerf to logis. It's the WP whoring we're trying to cure. Starting off with +25, and falling as low as 5WP before it cuts off is more of what I am looking for. With the way that WPs work internally now I am not sure there needs to be any change here to be totally honest. However since I am not even remotely a fan of foregone conclusions, please outline for me the specifics of the situation and why it is a problem because I do not wish to assume there is nothing I have missed. Describe specifically what behavior you are trying to alter/address and why. Also what levels of WP would be considered proper, in what contexts, and why. Bonus Question: If diminishing returns were added should higher meta rep tools award more WP per cycle? (should they award more per cycle anyway considering that higher meta = fewer cycles and thus lower potential earnings in many contexts). Input on why/why not in both cases. Above questions open to all who wish to comment Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4058	Posted - 2015.02.05 10:30:00 - [150] - Quote RedBleach LeSanglant wrote: Booby Tuesdays wrote: RedBleach LeSanglant wrote: What do I get from a capacitor? a limited time to heal? or is it more like an overdrive double or tripling my reps for a limited time? A logi is already gimped enough, let us not gimp them further Booby and Mordecai. You know the arguments about capacitors, but if we need to rehash them we can cut and paste again. Battles are too varied to establish a set time for healing - though some may stay 'leashed' far to often it is not standard of being a logi. Look at the entire class and the many actions it takes, then take another stab at what you may see as WP disparity. I have had great logi games where I did hit the top of the charts, that was with a well coordinated team. Most often those high WP matches are a rarity and not the established experience of all logis. They are the outliers, the 5%. If we keep working this through we must ask: Do we start adding capacitors to all suits then? And what would be their purpose? You see, If we have one capacitor it must be used on other things as well, will it: Limit uplink spawning to 1 per x seconds? Limit firing times for weapons to a x shots withing x seconds? Where will it end? Don't get me wrong, capacitors work well in Eve and create a dynamic battle system. I can see them on vehicles as some have mentioned, but what bonus do the infantry get from such things? If they someday have capacitors I hope it will be for the supersoldier modules we've talked about in the past. Like increasing damage for a certain amount of time or sprint speed, but then lowering that boosted stat for the time it was down. I could see a super rep tool variant that used a capacitor or supper rep module that used a capacitor, but it should not be the norm. I guess what I am trying to say, is that we need a point of diminishing returns in regards to WP from rep tools. I do not want them to cease in functioning via a capacitor. That would be a huge nerf to logis. It's the WP whoring we're trying to cure. Starting off with +25, and falling as low as 5WP before it cuts off is more of what I am looking for. Ok, I see what you mean. The greedy part of me that has those games so rarely screams no, but we had a rep cap a while back... I know it was increased but I don't remeber it being removed. Are we also considering the other sources of WP like spawn uplinks? those are pretty bad too, not bad but just point farms. Usefull, just like repping, but that WP should be examined as well. The other part of me knows that the WP rewards are too high for things like guardian points. (and assists for that matter) IFF points were given as a percentage of health healed WP may change quite a bit... but which direction? The other option is to just lower the WP earned... but i am having so few good games I rarely make it to the middle of the charts - so that doesn't seem to solve the issue either. So a soft cap after X WP from repping? If we had to please just make it a high one. Instead of pressing these points down could we instead raise other sources of WP? Like kills, hacks, etc.? Here is the big logical issue / disconnect I see personally. Can I make more WP in my Logi suit than my assault or heavy? Yes. Can I break even ISK wise in my Logi suit even half as often as my assault or heavy? No. Should Logi WP be lowered thus deepening the current problem of overly burdensome role cost? I do not think so. The above is made worse still by the fact that I am a pretty solid Logi, and only a mediocre slayer so that I am more able to go ISK positive playing slayer than logi is a sign things are really not correctly calibrated. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)

Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4059	Posted - 2015.02.06 01:24:00 - [151] - Quote Booby Tuesdays wrote: Cross Atu wrote: Booby Tuesdays wrote: RedBleach LeSanglant wrote: Things Stuff With the way that WPs work internally now I am not sure there needs to be any change here to be totally honest. However since I am not even remotely a fan of foregone conclusions, please outline for me the specifics of the situation and why it is a problem because I do not wish to assume there is nothing I have missed. Describe specifically what behavior you are trying to alter/address and why. Also what levels of WP would be considered proper, in what contexts, and why. Bonus Question: If diminishing returns were added should higher meta rep tools award more WP per cycle? (should they award more per cycle anyway considering that higher meta = fewer cycles and thus lower potential earnings in many contexts). Input on why/why not in both cases. Above questions open to all who wish to comment Cheers, Cross I guess the biggest issue for me is that some schmo can hold R1 the entire match and see little to no decrease in the amount of WP, versus a Logi that was an actual integral asset to the team via links, hives, reps/revives, and kills/kill assists. I honestly believe that if the rep tool had a point of diminishing returns, then the Logi WP whores would go do something else. I don't see many staying put and continuing to rep if they are not grossly rewarded for doing so. What I can see though, is a real Logibro staying and doing the job needed even if they are not getting as many WP as before. The diminishing returns could be offset by the tier of rep tool being used. Mlt/Basic would bottom out at 5 WP, Adv at 10, Proto/Specialist at 15. What would not change is the Guardian Warpoints, keep those as it is. If the WP values were going to change, I would have it at a 20, 25, and 30WP tier from Mlt/Basic to Proto/Specialist. What I do not want to see, is a rep tool that needs to physically cool down. Lower or no WP? Sure. Just don't have it stop working. First things first, a tech issue. I do not see diminishing returns as being at all likely from a coding standpoint. Could it be done? Sure. Would it be done in light of the resource cost (in game/match) to implement it? Almost certainly not. Now, I am not a CCP programer and I could simply be mistaken but from other features I have seen discussed and dismissed (scaled WP for injectors based on total HP restored for example) I do not think we will see it in game. Independent of that there are a couple of issues to address. 1. If Logi income is to be balanced including kills/kill assists as part of the baseline then logi combat ability needs to be balanced with the ability to get kills (and survive in the contexts to do so) as part of the baseline as well (I do not believe this is the current condition of the frame). 2. If Reps are to be brought down in value to normalize them with other support actions to force players to spend less time repping then that contains an implicit assumption that logi earnings are improperly high. Otherwise the proper course would be to raise the other rewards to the level of reps. I cannot fully support the notion that logi rewards should be diminished unless/until playing logi throughout an entire match is not so frequently a losing (ISK) prospect. Conceptually I am adamantly opposed to building the game such that proper tactical behavior is not rewarded. There are times when this will be needed due to exploits but I am not a fan of things like caps and cooldowns on earnings for actions. Should there be a cool down or cap on the earnings from kills or assists? I can see a real slayer staying and doing the job needed even if they are not getting as many WP as before (but does that make it a good move?) To be clear, I spend more of my support play time deploying links and hives in key areas than I do repping so the recent changes to BW (which I supported) have had more of an impact on my earnings than a rep tool change would. But these changes cannot be made based on any one of our personal play styles or preferences. We need solid game or role level concepts to recommend a change. 0.02 ISK Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4063	Posted - 2015.02.10 23:05:00 - [152] - Quote RedBleach LeSanglant wrote: So. yeah. ahem. Scaled with HP repped, not cycles so rewards will scale. Don't change rewards Change gear prices Make gear better, and even better for logis. Noted in order (sorry I'm doing several things at once so this will be a short reply). 1. I really want this, but I do not think we will see it directly. Just like diminishing returns it costs a lot with regards to performance to run those active calculations. We can perhaps mimic it however, by increasing the rate cycles happen while pulling back on the number of HP repped per cycle. This does not have to alter the actual net rep value and can still create a more granular/proper system without the in game performance cost. 2. Agreed generally (there could be a few changes made to baseline rewards mechanic but not at a role based level so that's another topic). 3. Agreed. This is something I am advocating to CCP as part of the Logi revamp. 4. This is pivotal, needs to include WP being tied more directly to tactically effective behavior as much as possible, and hopefully will include some increased diversity within the equipment line(s). 0.02 ISK Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4065	Posted - 2015.02.12 12:14:00 - [153] - Quote Mister Goo wrote: Cross Atu wrote: snip 3. Agreed. This is something I am advocating to CCP as part of the Logi revamp. snip We have 64 pages of Ideas, some good, some great, and some terribad. We have been talking about a logi revamp for months and have seen nothing other than the BW which effectively made a logi's job harder, with no benefit to the class. I know you have been advocating a change and I know it is on the Rattati's Big Board of Things. But it is not on the road map anywhere in the next 3 releases. Sooo Is this something that CCP / Rattati is looking at, or just something they hope posting here will pacify us. Right now I get the feeling that it is just a pacifying technique. Are you willing to say that there is some positive changes seriously being look at for the logi? You don't have to explain just a simple yes or no. Sadly I am beginning to agree with Mee One, and that sad. Yes it is being looked at. To be blunt it has not happened as expediently as I would wish and as recently as this week I brought it up again because I believe it is long overdue. The Trello board is for patch level releases and the bulk of the logi fixes can be done via hotfix so it is still slated for sooner than it seems but I will redouble my efforts to make sure it does not get lost in the shuffle. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4078	Posted - 2015.03.10 21:19:00 - [154] - Quote DJINN Jecture wrote: The reduction of useful equipment is really not needed, however if you really want feedback how about asking what we think Support players need. I honestly do not know what you are saying here, please elaborate because there is clearly a breakdown in communication somewhere (quite possibly on my end). Quote: My personal opinion is more towards giving all Logi suits more HP at the base level, at least an extra 50-100hp per level of logistics suit as a bonus for all Logis. Support means helping not being the first rag doll off the field because you are the lowest HP of the bunch. More HP, or at least eHP is unequivocally required in my studied view. I very much doubt there is a proposal for a rework that could be viable and not include this. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4084	Posted - 2015.03.26 20:43:00 - [155] - Quote Booby Tuesdays wrote: So, if the Logis get a small HP buff, swap speeds with the Assault frames, and attain better equipment bonuses; will people come back yelling about Slayer Logis? Assaults, Heavies, and Scouts will still be better slayers, imo. How does everyone feel about forcing equipment slots to be filled to make a fit valid? This is the direction Rattati took with the Madruger and Gunlogi, by forcing them to have small turrets. Could help ward off any die hard slayer logi QQ. Will people come back yelling about slayer logi? Quite possibly and I will do my best to be constructive while addressing their deeply misplaced fears. I am not a fan of forced fits as a rule but required equipment slots is something that - for me personally - is not off the table if it serves a needed purpose. I think there are other methods to explore that I would like to look into first, but if it comes down to it I'd likely support a equipment requirement despite my overall distaste for that type of mechanic. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4085	Posted - 2015.03.26 20:49:00 - [156] - Quote el OPERATOR wrote: Booby Tuesdays wrote: So, if the Logis get a small HP buff, swap speeds with the Assault frames, and attain better equipment bonuses; will people come back yelling about Slayer Logis? Assaults, Heavies, and Scouts will still be better slayers, imo. How does everyone feel about forcing equipment slots to be filled to make a fit valid? This is the direction Rattati took with the Madruger and Gunlogi, by forcing them to have small turrets. Could help ward off any die hard slayer logi QQ. I definitely don't think we should swap speeds with assault frames, they should be faster, we just shouldn't be as slow as we are. Base tank, gank and speed should all be better from the other frames, we just need our base to be close enough to keep up. I'd rather not see a full equipment fitting requirement for us but if there had to be I'd much prefer that it just be a slot used requirement versus some of the preload garbage we see on the bpo's. I'm of the stated view that Logi should be positioned between the Light frame and the Assault. Now what that means as to details I'm open about but I would actually support swapping speed with the Assaults. As has been shown repeatedly mobility effects the value of many support actions at such a profound level that the light frame line of suits can often be more viable as support even without skill buffs simply because of their enhanced mobility. Besides that if the Assault is going to be the more tanked medium frame (which seems reasonable) then making logi both more fragile and less capable of GTFO when they're outmatched seems like a good way to keep the role crippled. If you can't fight and you can't run and you can't really hide what do you do besides die? I see no reason why the Assault should be the medium frame with the better stats in everything aside from equipment slots, in fact in that context I see no way that the internal balance of medium frames can avoid being broken. 0.02 ISK Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4085	Posted - 2015.03.26 20:53:00 - [157] - Quote Mad Syringe wrote: Jaysyn Larrisen wrote: @Zaria... I was referring to removing BW in favor of the increased equipment carried OR keeping BW and dropping the increased carry numbers of equipment. Concur that Rattati and some folks on the CPM are quite enamored with BW and it's unlikely to change. If the increased carry rate is a logi bonus only that could work well. When it's open to all...it flies in the face of the BW "buff". I don't like the BW too much, but I can cope... What I really don't like however, is the Echo changes to links, the medium and basic links do not have enought spawns. Right now, these are only viable for close support logis, meaning you drop them when one of your squadmates needs a spawn close to the squad. They lost all strategic value however, so that you have to lay proto links, if you want a longer term backup link of the beaten paths. This is bad, because it favours the proto stompers once again... So what we need, is more variety betwheen different link types. Also, I think all hives should be only one active at any time. Since the hive animation, seems to be a bigger resource hog than any other EQ in the field. But, give the Caldari logi a +1 active for all hive variants. This would make the Cal logi the hive specialist, and if you want to support your core spamming friends, the go to suit for it. Compact hives should be 1 carried max, otherwise the assault who use these the most, will be to self sufficient... It also favors the Amarr logi skill bonus, those extra spawns from the racial now carry a lot more tactical/contextual potency than they once did. All of that being said I heartily support a diversification sweep on support gear (deployed and otherwise). It is something I would like to tackle once the pass on logistics frames has been iterated and pushed into the live game. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4085	Posted - 2015.03.26 20:57:00 - [158] - Quote John Demonsbane wrote: Booby Tuesdays wrote: And on the 82nd page Boobies checked in , looking for that elusive Blue Tag. Alas, it was not to be this day... walks by, looks over his shoulder Indeed. Hope springs eternal, I suppose. Try again in a few weeks then? I don't expect to see a blue tag in this thread, because I talk to CCP R directly about the content and developments within this thread so it would almost be redundant. That being said you can now all yell at me when the changes some and you object to some part of them Seriously though I have touched base with Dev on this subject within the last few hours and I'm obviously not going to let the issue rest until changes have happened. When they do I'm counting on the support community to find all the broken things and feed them too me post haste so I can get them addressed as opposed to letting them fall off the radar. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4102	Posted - 2015.03.26 21:55:00 - [159] - Quote Mad Syringe wrote: Cross Atu wrote: I'm of the stated view that Logi should be positioned between the Light frame and the Assault. Now what that means as to details I'm open about but I would actually support swapping speed with the Assaults. As has been shown repeatedly mobility effects the value of many support actions at such a profound level that the light frame line of suits can often be more viable as support even without skill buffs simply because of their enhanced mobility. Besides that if the Assault is going to be the more tanked medium frame (which seems reasonable) then making logi both more fragile and less capable of GTFO when they're outmatched seems like a good way to keep the role crippled. If you can't fight and you can't run and you can't really hide what do you do besides die? I see no reason why the Assault should be the medium frame with the better stats in everything aside from equipment slots, in fact in that context I see no way that the internal balance of medium frames can avoid being broken. 0.02 ISK Cross Thank you very much, this would help a lot. Also standardizing the EQ slots for all tiers. That's the way all other classes work. EQ slot progression is absolutely on the list. With BW in the game - and one of the reasons I supported it - I see no reason why a STD logi frame can/should not have a full allotment of EQ slots. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4134	Posted - 2015.03.27 07:00:00 - [160] - Quote The Dark Cloud wrote: Gonna throw this in: Change the cal. logi to be a shield logi and introduce a shield recharger tool to finally fill the gap between armor and shields. Nobody uses the Cal. Logi simply because it has the worst bonus on it and "buffing" the nanohive bonus wont help. It needs a 100% rework and be capable to support players that have shield tanked suits. And if you say that would be OP then how about we remove remote armor reps and replace the minlogi bonus to remote explosive damage? Seems fair to me. I'd rather improve the rest of the logi to meet the Mins with level of effective value, not nerf the whole role. I am actually a strong proponent of exploring what is needed to get a shield repper into the game. When it comes to racial logi my hope is to add a second layer of skill to each race giving some rep type (shield or armor) to each race. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)

Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4158	Posted - 2015.03.28 06:59:00 - [161] - Quote Booby Tuesdays wrote: Cross Atu wrote: I'm of the stated view that Logi should be positioned between the Light frame and the Assault. Now what that means as to details I'm open about but I would actually support swapping speed with the Assaults. As has been shown repeatedly mobility effects the value of many support actions at such a profound level that the light frame line of suits can often be more viable as support even without skill buffs simply because of their enhanced mobility. Besides that if the Assault is going to be the more tanked medium frame (which seems reasonable) then making logi both more fragile and less capable of GTFO when they're outmatched seems like a good way to keep the role crippled. If you can't fight and you can't run and you can't really hide what do you do besides die? I see no reason why the Assault should be the medium frame with the better stats in everything aside from equipment slots, in fact in that context I see no way that the internal balance of medium frames can avoid being broken. 0.02 ISK Cross I think that a straight speed swap will also be an indirect nerf to the Min Assault, which would actually reign its super strafing QQ in. Cross, can you shed any light on whether or not Logis will be getting a bonus to ALL equipment, with certain races getting greater bonuses than others? A Min Logi's uplinks should be worse than an Amarr Logi, but greater than a Scout, Commando, or Assault. Also, even though I have suggested forcing equipment slots to be filled, I too am not a fan of forcing playstyles on people. However, I see no way to keep 'Logis OP' threads from popping up otherwise once we finally get the few buffs we need. Based on the numbers I'm aware of a 'soft nerf' to the Min Assault is required at this point yes. That wasn't part of the initial motive for these changes on my end but it does give even more reason to support them IMO. There is still a lot of push from certain quarters that the number of deployed equipment pieces on the field is too high, as such the first way to give logistics a role wide advantage to equipment use while also addressing the continued push to bring down deployment saturation is pretty simple in my view and goes back to iteration one of the proposal from the OP. Increase the CPU/PG cost on support equipment and double the logistics role buff that reduces the CPU/PG cost of fitted equipment mods. This is a very mild net gain for the logi in fitting and a further constraint for other frames with regards to equipment use (lower meta levels have lower max deployed totals etc.) This does not directly hard code the Cal Logi having better uplinks than a scout but it does make the opportunity cost ratio for any logi better than for other frames. I like that it still allows other frames to run gear at full effect, but they have to pay a high price for it, while logi running top support rigs will be brought closer to standard. @Thread; Re: Slayer Logi/Logi OP threads - These threads are present even now, there are calls to nerf links, nerf scans, nerf reps, etc. I think that no matter what changes are made there will still be threads call for logi nerfs after the change just as there are now, and that the number of them will increase. I am to a place now where if the thread in question does not provide some clear and constructive reasoning behind it I'm disinclined to give it any credence and am proceeding with my suggestions to CCP in that vein. Support should be a viable role on the field not just chum for "rambo" slayers to use in padding their kdr. Logistics need a buff, and I'm simply going to suggest the most reasonable buff I can see that will properly align their balance and deal with the "slayer/OP" threads afterwords, but to be blunt the fear of "slayer logi" has been vastly over blown for months (if not longer) at this point. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4162	Posted - 2015.03.28 15:23:00 - [162] - Quote Mad Syringe wrote: Cross Atu wrote: @Thread; Re: Slayer Logi/Logi OP threads - These threads are present even now, there are calls to nerf links, nerf scans, nerf reps, etc. I think that no matter what changes are made there will still be threads call for logi nerfs after the change just as there are now, and that the number of them will increase. I am to a place now where if the thread in question does not provide some clear and constructive reasoning behind it I'm disinclined to give it any credence and am proceeding with my suggestions to CCP in that vein. Support should be a viable role on the field not just chum for "rambo" slayers to use in padding their kdr. Logistics need a buff, and I'm simply going to suggest the most reasonable buff I can see that will properly align their balance and deal with the "slayer/OP" threads afterwords, but to be blunt the fear of "slayer logi" has been vastly over blown for months (if not longer) at this point. Amen to that! Additionally I'd say, the main gripe Assaults have is the positioning of Logis above on the scoreboard... So this matter should easily be solved, if CCP puts in a More KDR based scoreboard as an alternative (not for the payouts, but maybe as an additional board for endmatch analysis). Call me crazy but I think ePeen should never be a factor in game balance choices. I'd rather see kdr cut from Dust and replaced with the vastly more relevant stat of ISK efficiency. That being said I don't expect kdr to ever change, the habit - derived from other games where it is in fact contextually meaningful - of consulting it heavily is too ingrained in the player base. In light of which an option to define how your end of match screen is sorted WP or KDR would be valuable/valid. Or as you have suggested another panel during the post match feedback step. And, my own views aside, if a way to display the information from a match can be found to make more players satisfied with their gaming experience than that is obviously a win even if in my view some of said information isn't terribly useful/relevant. I think I'll ask CCP how hard it would be to provide an option like what you've described, might make a lot of folks happy. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4169	Posted - 2015.03.28 23:59:00 - [163] - Quote Orion Sanjeet wrote: Lol, 83 pages and not a blue tag to be found, ladies and gentlemen, I declare this thread a success. As I've stated numinous times before, thread was not made to attract blue tags. I just talk to them directly while I manage the this thread myself. There have been more delays in the fix than I would like to be sure but sometimes that's just how development cycles go. Since I've had conversations with CCP on this subject as recently as yesterday I'm not overly concerned with them posting here and no one else should be either Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4170	Posted - 2015.03.29 10:41:00 - [164] - Quote Zaria Min Deir wrote: Cross Atu wrote: Orion Sanjeet wrote: Lol, 83 pages and not a blue tag to be found, ladies and gentlemen, I declare this thread a success. As I've stated numinous times before, thread was not made to attract blue tags. I just talk to them directly while I manage the this thread myself. There have been more delays in the fix than I would like to be sure but sometimes that's just how development cycles go. Since I've had conversations with CCP on this subject as recently as yesterday I'm not overly concerned with them posting here and no one else should be either Cheers, Cross Totally appreciate all that... but on the other hand, you could ask Rattati to poke his had in to just say hi, or, post a cat picture, whatever.... just so people can stop talking about the lack of a blue tag We all know how these forums work, a thread with no blue tag isn't real! P.S. Love you Cross Operation "Cat Pic" alright, challenge accepted If you need me to legitimize my existence through use of a blue tag then so be it! /pretends to be huffy On a more serious note, just so I'm clear here, I'm the guy who created this thread and if you check the time codes you'll see I know well the frustration of waiting for a response. I firmly believe communication between CCP and the player base is important, but to accomplish that part of the reality is knowing there's no way all threads (even all large well read ones) can be responded to. That is in part one of the values I see in the CPM, facilitating communication beyond the scope of what CCP can accomplish on their own. Speaking of which, there's another hotfix upcoming, and I need to have a conversation about what's slated for it I'm hoping to get logi changes included on the list. Cheers, Cross See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4218	Posted - 2015.04.06 21:18:00 - [165] - Quote Mister Goo wrote: Cross Atu wrote: Operation "Cat Pic" alright, challenge accepted If you need me to legitimize my existence through use of a blue tag then so be it! /pretends to be huffy On a more serious note, just so I'm clear here, I'm the guy who created this thread and if you check the time codes you'll see I know well the frustration of waiting for a response. I firmly believe communication between CCP and the player base is important, but to accomplish that part of the reality is knowing there's no way all threads (even all large well read ones) can be responded to. That is in part one of the values I see in the CPM, facilitating communication beyond the scope of what CCP can accomplish on their own. Speaking of which, there's another hotfix upcoming, and I need to have a conversation about what's slated for it I'm hoping to get logi changes included on the list. Cheers, Cross Any luck? No, I've been a slacker. I've been working on the LP stores for FacWar and haven't enacted operations cat pick yet. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4222	Posted - 2015.04.07 02:00:00 - [166] - Quote Vitantur Nothus wrote: Cross Atu wrote: I've been working on the LP stores for FacWar ... Idea! I like ideas '/click' See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4228	Posted - 2015.04.07 14:18:00 - [167] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: I think the iterations need a once-over now that we have had some updates that affect logis, like bandwidth and increased max carried and such. Yah the posted links are on the dated side now. /puts it on the "To-Do" list See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4358	Posted - 2015.04.18 21:27:00 - [168] - Quote CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4358	Posted - 2015.04.18 21:29:00 - [169] - Quote RedBleach LeSanglant wrote: Cross Atu wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: I think the iterations need a once-over now that we have had some updates that affect logis, like bandwidth and increased max carried and such. Yah the posted links are on the dated side now. /puts it on the "To-Do" list Yeah, and maybe I see it as a bigger project than it is, but essentially it is reworking the entire proposal, figuring out what new stuff to put on there, and what new stuff shouldn't be on there. Tough job. Being the judge of the final proposal and seeing what should reach CCP. - not that you have anything else to do right :) Is there something we can do to help? Rip, Cut, Paste a googledoc perhaps? Just let me know. Thanks for the offer Red, as always I appreciate your work on behalf of the support community. I will let you know, I should have some more word on this thread/subject within a week or two. (now that the LP rework has stopped consuming all my time and the next cycle of cpm meetings should be concluded by sometime middle of next week) CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4364	Posted - 2015.04.19 17:03:00 - [170] - Quote In the interest of conducting on going discussions even when they expand beyond the scope of a single thread or topic, and of giving us a place to hang out between out massive bouts of feedback, I've pitched us a tent over here. Drop by, bring other logis, stay awhile at listen ~Cross CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!

Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4591	Posted - 2015.04.27 07:15:00 - [171] - Quote So my logi brothers and sisters, this is a thing that has happened. CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4595	Posted - 2015.04.27 15:34:00 - [172] - Quote I-Shayz-I wrote: Last time I made a video about a problem in Dust, Rattati actually did something about it. I know in the podcast he talked about the logi update coming soon after warlords 1.1 and Echo 1.1 but he was still frustrated that the community flipped out over the sidearm. Maybe I should do the same for logistics progression. it's really not that hard. Give logistics the same slot layouts as assaults, give them all 4 equipment at proto, then take away one for Amarr at each tier and give it a sidearm. Also give Caldari some extra CPU. On top of the assault/logi speed flip this will make them more than viable. Done. Wouldn't hurt to have a video out there too. The more vectors for transmission of reasoned viewpoints the more likely they are to be incorporated. CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4639	Posted - 2015.04.29 23:27:00 - [173] - Quote I'm doing a spot check/review. Folks who have CalLogi proto fits please post your 1-3 tightest CPU fits. I need the whole fit used as well as the PG and CPU numbers (total and consumed). As well as the levels in relevant fittings skills (cpu, pg, logi, etc) for the fitted items. Thanks o7 CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4667	Posted - 2015.05.13 15:25:00 - [174] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Isn't there some sort of CCP formula where a given slot on a given suit is worth X CPU and Y PG? If there is I've never heard of it. Further while there may be, buried somewhere, my own work with suits and balance has shown that any such formula which may exist does not get applied universally (or if it does it gets further modified afterword by situational effects). For example the racial logi do not all share the same PG and CPU values even though they share the same total number of slots at proto. CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.