DUST Search - [PROPOSAL]Sentinel battle role

Breakin Stuff wrote:

el OPERATOR wrote:

Breakin Stuff wrote:

Argetlam Thorson wrote:

Breakin Stuff wrote:

Im amazed no one seems to care about this topic given that assault and logi utility in PC is being held hostage by the need to keep sentinels as the kings of CQC, a role that makes no sense for the suit design.

Sentinel - a soldier stationed as a guard to challenge all comers and prevent a surprise attack

The whole definition of a sentinel is someone who is guarding a point. Ergo, one would assume it should be the king of CQC as the points are generally in close quarters. The penalty for being the king of CQC (which also pushes the suit into fitting the word's definition) should be being extremely slow. Then you have Sentinel suits playing the role of a sentinel.

Basic heavy suits could understandably be faster (relatively, anyway), possibly weaker, not as good at CQC, etc. They should be the suits people should want to use when they're not guarding a point but still want to wield a heavy weapon or have more HP than Medium/Light suits.

Point defense is "I pick a spot then MURDER everyone who tries to come close."

It does NOT mean CQC.

Point defense and Close Quarter Defense are NOT the same thing.

lol, dude, cmon now. "I pick a spot then MURDER everyone who tries to come CLOSE".
" CLOSE" as in nearby, adjoining, abutting. Not "CLOSE" as in 50-70m downrange.
CQC= Close Quarters Combat. "CLOSE" Quarters. Not "Over There" Quarters. "CLOSE" Quarters. Have some Doritos and Kickstart, they're actually good together.

And don't try to correct me on Military terminology unless you have also served in the military. I guarantee you that your definition does not match reality.

Open-Beta Vet.
Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 426	Posted - 2014.11.05 22:26:00 - [1] - Quote After reading the OP and the subsequent responses, I'm a no at this point. I don't see the cqc/point defense "issue" as stemming from the heavy frame or its attachments, I think its a matter of playerstyle. Some players want to point defend right up close to the point, some from farther out. The heavy, from what I've seen of them in both PCs and PUBS, accomodates either of these playstyles just fine with no other accomodation being needed. If the HMG isnt giving you the range you want to be able to not "hump the console" put on your RR and block everyone else in the match so as to not get the hatemail bombardment you'll be due. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 427	Posted - 2014.11.05 23:50:00 - [2] - Quote The two bricks with a heavy between as critisism makes as much sense as complaining people are using vehicles to cover large open areas faster. Thats what they're for. Maybe the real issue is the map design putting most control points within some sort of tightly controllable area? Heavies are the guardians of the gates. Where theres gates, there will be heavies. Many heavies then maybe = many gates? Or the overwhelming urge on the part of teams to protect those gates fully, with multiple heavies? I still don't see the problem here, heavies have counters (flux and smg to the dome is my fav), plenty of counters. EDIT before needing to EDIT: not a 10m SP newbro. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 427	Posted - 2014.11.05 23:52:00 - [3] - Quote As far as heavies being OP, they are still second to scouts soooooooo one problem at a time? Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 428	Posted - 2014.11.06 06:38:00 - [4] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: As far as heavies being OP, they are still second to scouts soooooooo one problem at a time? Heavies aren't OP, quit looking at a thread and assuming it's a complaint. Just because you consider your personal crusade against scouts > all doesn't mean you need to come in here, read part of the proposal by skimming and then threadcrapping. This is a role change not a call for a nerf. If you have to make scouts the center of attention go make more scout threads, God knows there are dozens, all equally ignored. But heavies in CQC negate the value of assaults in CQC. Bottom line. Are heavies supporting assaults? Or are Assaults supporting heavies? It looks to me like assaults are supporting heavies in the current meta, and that's bass-ackwards. Your previous comment about spam and ppl crying about OP is why I mentioned OP and scouts. I didn't read part of the proposal and decide to **** on your table. I have yet to start ANY anti-scout threads. The only thread I think I have ever created was the day of the Rouge Wedding where, amidst countless QQ and RAaAaaGE threads, I said I would stay playing DUST. Because I like it. To your actual point: The heavy/assault relationship is very clear- Assaults take, Heavies hold. Thats a two-way street so it works both ways sometimes, Heavies take and Assaults hold, but for the most part it's the first way. This isn't backwards or inappropriate, it's logical and it works. The two units (ideally) support each other using their strengths to compensate for the others' weakness blahblahblah you know the drill. HMG range buffing will take us backwards in time, to a DUST of not that long ago (a year and a half to two) where the forums were devoid of OP scout threads and flush with, "NERF HMGs" threads. People hated crossing those open areas to be pelted from afar by HMG rounds that didn't kill but would damage enough to make the runners easy pickings for whoever they ran into next. People hated turning a corner, finding a heavy, racing backwards to create distance and squeeze out a few rounds just to be utterly evicerated by the first sneeze out of that HMG. You are point defense. You don't have to do that all the time, but its what the frame is based on being for. That HMG is based on the idea of DPS, close to mid-range. Longer range already proved itself problematic overwhelmingly. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 428	Posted - 2014.11.06 06:44:00 - [5] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: But heavies in CQC negate the value of assaults in CQC. Bottom line. No, from what I've seen, they don't. Heavies are supported by assault players all the time. You might not realize though, since most of those assaults are in scout suits. Yes, thats where I took that. I'll leave my opinion about that out, but that the circumstance exists is undeniable by anyone who's actually played for more than an hour in the last 4 months. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 428	Posted - 2014.11.06 07:12:00 - [6] - Quote Victor Moody Stahl wrote: The heavy suit as a weapons platform has traditionally been defined by, gasp the ability to carry heavy weapons. Saying "just throw a RR on that sucka and ignore the hatemail if you want range" is asinine. * SNIP * In other words, for a heavy to, in current patch state, be useful over range, they have to either sacrifice heavily on their fit to accommodate something like a RR, or they have to change role entirely. Is this seriously acceptable to you, or are you too busy hating scouts? 1. I don't hate scouts. Maybe someday I'll start a thread and explain myself but that day and thread ain't right now. 2. YES. YES. YES. If you missed it, YES it IS ACCEPTABLE TO ME for heavies, OR ANY OTHER ROLE to SACRIFICE in order to PERFORM outside their initial ROLE-DESIGN. -If you are a heavy but want to move fast YES you must sacrifice your innate invulnerability to AV weapons to drive that LAV around! -If you are a heavy and want to shoot people from 75m YES you must sacrifice your fitting space to cram on that CR/RR/AR/SNIPER/Whatever you choose!! ....and just so you don't mistake me as "hating heavies" or some bs.... -If you are a Logi but want to slay like an Assault, YES you must sacrifice some fitting bonuses to stack that relatively inferior HP/DM/BIO combo you'll need!! -If you are a scout but want to tank armor like a heavy YESYESYES you must sacrifice your speed to tank that extra 800 hp!!!!!! Need I go on? The entire game is built on risk/reward, benefits and sacrifices. EVERYONE is sacrificing something to perform outside of what their role usually doesn't include. If I want to cloak, I either design my entire Logi around accommodating that cloak, at the loss of my hp, my biotics, my ewar and my hacks OR I go put on my scout suit, cloak up and then fit the rest of it out however I want. Your patronizing tone regarding me, my opinion and scouts betrays your absolute lack of understanding of this game's fundamentals as well as the basis of my perspective. Hopefully I've enlightened you a little bit. If not, all I can say is gbfw. Oh, and the Forge Gun some of my corpmates wield does some amazing things from range. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 428	Posted - 2014.11.06 07:26:00 - [7] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Once rattati hits scouts with the nerf bat then we are going to come right back here. You may disagree with me but heavies were put in cqc so it wouldnGÇÿt take as much effort to kill them. Look how well that turned out. And the killing field everyone complained about was because you cannot exploit the strafe glitch at range because dispersion doesn't care whether you are synced or not. Beta players cried way too much scouts *** about heavies being OP all day, almost as much as everybody without a scout-superiority-centered focus bitches about scouts. Working as intended. And the killing fields were a mess. They still are, its just more palatable to people to have those kills be RR, CR and AR than be HMG on the feed. Beta players....idk. This game was craaazy when I started, ridiculouly dumb ** abounded. But the foundation for serious fun was obvious and well-laid. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 428	Posted - 2014.11.06 07:46:00 - [8] - Quote Ok, freeze frame- Heavies and Assaults support one another (ideally) equally but who and how that support materializes really is based on what they're doing. If they are pushing a point the Assaults have the lead and are backed up by the slower but more damage-dealing heavies who arrive to the battle after the Assaults have started -but- If they are defending a point the Heavies have the lead and are backed up by the Assaults, who by virtue of mobility are falling in and out of flanks as well as chasing those attackers who try to run. Heavies have a ton of weaknesses and a ton of counters that exploit those weaknesses. Heavies are great at wiping out other heavies but are not required, not even close. scouts, even after a serious nerfbludgeon, will still hold some keys to heavy defeat but not all of them. If anything, Heavies are the most Equal Opportunity Victim on the field, ANYONE can kill a heavy. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 430	Posted - 2014.11.06 18:22:00 - [9] - Quote So, I guess the real disagreement here is what will become of heavies once scouts are rebalanced relative to the game at large, with your idea being that heavies need to be rebalanced out of cq dominance and further into a mid-long range competition? Because if not, then heavies will be up for nerfswat and no-one wants to be or see anyone nerfed? Okay. The current PC meta isn't far from the old PC meta: take the points, keep the points, kill everyone, get paid. That the methods used in PC are beginning to surface in Pubs, IMO, is a good thing, insofar as the teamwork elements go. Yes, this can mean spam of w/e, scouts, heavies, uplinks, logi-heavy spidering etc. Again, I don't really see a problem with that, provided that all the game elements are balanced individually and overall, so that those elements can be combined to create super potent task-specific solutions, that are still highly vulnerable somehow. If the goal is to run around and rip hacks, then super-fast hacker squads get to work, capable of hacking consoles in 2-3 seconds but super low HP (a sacrifice) so susceptible to instadeath from any form of focused fire. If they can get to the console they WILL flip it, but once they get it they aren't fitted to actually HOLD it and need other units to present themselves. I don't see an issue here. I see exactly what sets DUST apart from EVERY other shooter, fp or otherwise, on the market. Teamwork, here, is king . Heavies' place in this is a good one, and really I feel that with a rebalancing of scouts yes heavy survivability will jump up. BUT I don't think heavies will be alone in this, ALL frames will have better survivability (even scouts) because that's how out of whack scout frames are. Nothing in this game lives in a vacuum. And should sentinels become the new FOTMscrub favorite as they stand now, I'm actually okay with that since sentinels as they stand now while being cqkings are far from the grossly imbalanced scout frames as far as strengths/weakness ratios go and are actually very easy to kill. Which is all the more reason, I feel, that giving sentinels a range buff to their weapons isn't really a good idea. If anything, not to beat a dead horse, once scouts are balanced and logis are restructured and balanced, frame-wise the meta will be complete and relatively ideal. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 430	Posted - 2014.11.06 18:23:00 - [10] - Quote So sorry so much of this just comes out as block text, hope you've got your reading glasses on! Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.

el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 431	Posted - 2014.11.06 19:50:00 - [11] - Quote wtf? Thorson! o7 Dude, login and play some matches tonight, we've got PCs and I'm sure Shep will be happy to see you in! Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 432	Posted - 2014.11.06 21:20:00 - [12] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Argetlam Thorson wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Im amazed no one seems to care about this topic given that assault and logi utility in PC is being held hostage by the need to keep sentinels as the kings of CQC, a role that makes no sense for the suit design. Sentinel - a soldier stationed as a guard to challenge all comers and prevent a surprise attack The whole definition of a sentinel is someone who is guarding a point. Ergo, one would assume it should be the king of CQC as the points are generally in close quarters. The penalty for being the king of CQC (which also pushes the suit into fitting the word's definition) should be being extremely slow. Then you have Sentinel suits playing the role of a sentinel. Basic heavy suits could understandably be faster (relatively, anyway), possibly weaker, not as good at CQC, etc. They should be the suits people should want to use when they're not guarding a point but still want to wield a heavy weapon or have more HP than Medium/Light suits. Point defense is "I pick a spot then MURDER everyone who tries to come close." It does NOT mean CQC. Point defense and Close Quarter Defense are NOT the same thing. lol, dude, cmon now. "I pick a spot then MURDER everyone who tries to come CLOSE". " CLOSE" as in nearby, adjoining, abutting. Not "CLOSE" as in 50-70m downrange. CQC= Close Quarters Combat. "CLOSE" Quarters. Not "Over There" Quarters. "CLOSE" Quarters. Have some Doritos and Kickstart, they're actually good together. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 432	Posted - 2014.11.06 22:30:00 - [13] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Argetlam Thorson wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Im amazed no one seems to care about this topic given that assault and logi utility in PC is being held hostage by the need to keep sentinels as the kings of CQC, a role that makes no sense for the suit design. Sentinel - a soldier stationed as a guard to challenge all comers and prevent a surprise attack The whole definition of a sentinel is someone who is guarding a point. Ergo, one would assume it should be the king of CQC as the points are generally in close quarters. The penalty for being the king of CQC (which also pushes the suit into fitting the word's definition) should be being extremely slow. Then you have Sentinel suits playing the role of a sentinel. Basic heavy suits could understandably be faster (relatively, anyway), possibly weaker, not as good at CQC, etc. They should be the suits people should want to use when they're not guarding a point but still want to wield a heavy weapon or have more HP than Medium/Light suits. Point defense is "I pick a spot then MURDER everyone who tries to come close." It does NOT mean CQC. Point defense and Close Quarter Defense are NOT the same thing. lol, dude, cmon now. "I pick a spot then MURDER everyone who tries to come CLOSE". " CLOSE" as in nearby, adjoining, abutting. Not "CLOSE" as in 50-70m downrange. CQC= Close Quarters Combat. "CLOSE" Quarters. Not "Over There" Quarters. "CLOSE" Quarters. Have some Doritos and Kickstart, they're actually good together. And don't try to correct me on Military terminology unless you have also served in the military. I guarantee you that your definition does not match reality. I guarantee that my definition serves the intents and purposes of the circumstances we are in here, your RL military background is as relevent as my RL military background, in that in the fantastic sci-fi setting we're in neither really matters. Reality here is as the game parameters define them, the "Virtual Reality", if you will. I didn't miss the point about Point Defense vs CQC, I'm just emphasizing the very productive design of Heavies in fufilling their Point Defense role by capitalizing on their CQC superiority not being broken, OP or otherwise innappropriate and justifying an adjustment. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 432	Posted - 2014.11.06 22:32:00 - [14] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: You seem awfully invested in keeping heavies where they are. Newest round of HMG nerfs already announced. I hope rattati breaks the class entirely. Because the HMG exists on the razor's edge of balance. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Perhaps if your persuasive abilities were applied to reinforcing the Heavy's role and positon on the field instead of attempting re-defining it some of what Rattati is doing wouldn't happen. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 432	Posted - 2014.11.06 23:02:00 - [15] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: The heavy spam has reinforced everything I have said. CQC negates all disadvantages sentinels have. They are the meta and the FOTM. And the only way they can be balanced in cqc is by removing them from it. No. Bitches need to Harden the **** Up and Adapt. Groups of Heavies are easier to kill the closer together they all are. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 432	Posted - 2014.11.07 00:12:00 - [16] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: And the only things that really counter sentinels in CQC are OHK niche weapons. This all there needs to be. Those weapons are available to EVERY suit. Like I said before, Heavies are the most Equal Opportunity Victims in the game, ANY suit packing for the bear Heavies are can get the job done, not just "scouts". Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
el OPERATOR Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 432	Posted - 2014.11.07 01:40:00 - [17] - Quote Victor Moody Stahl wrote: Except that throwing RE's into a group of heavies is 99% ********. This is not BattleDuty 15, this is DUST. If at all possible "stupid" should not be actively discouraged, so much as brutally punished. Even without REs Heavy counters abound for anybody with an IQ higher than cheetos. Open-Beta Vet. Drunk Night Tree Burner. This is my Main and Original. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.