|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 13 post(s) |
Haerr
Dead Man's Game
RUST415
1809
   |
Posted - 2014.11.06 14:00:00 -
[1] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Everyone, post 1.9 there have been a lot of calls for EWAR changes and I am all for another spin, anything to shake up the meta.
Commando should have better sig profile (-5) than Sentinel, Sentinel has better precision (-5) - skirmisher vs point defense
Assault should have better sig profile (-5) than Logi, Logi has better precision (-5)
[Feedback] EWAR Ideas - Scan Table
Scan Profiles and Scan Precisions for suits are found on the "input" sheet.
How to play around with the numbers.
"File" -> "Make a Copy..."
Type in a name and press "OK"
Since the tables rely on a script for sorting and colouring you will have to start the script and allow it to run.
"Tools" -> "Script Editor..."
"Run"
"Continue"
"Accept"
After you have done this the tables will automatically be updated, sorted, and coloured when you change the value in one of the cells with black background colour in the input sheet.
Once you have changed a value wait for the loading bar in the top right of the window to finish before you change an other value. |
Haerr
Dead Man's Game
RUST415
1813
|
Posted - 2014.11.06 18:15:00 -
[2] - Quote
I've updated the Scan Table for Hotfix Echo, added all the different suits to both the dampening and scanning sides.
The old link is now dead.
Edit: Scan Table - Hotfix Echo |
Haerr
Dead Man's Game
RUST415
1820
|
Posted - 2014.11.06 18:54:00 -
[3] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Plot twist: Extenders and Plates add signature profile
How about giving Temporary (~3 sec) Scan Profile penalties to firing weapons and/or equipment? |
Haerr
Dead Man's Game
RUST415
1831
|
Posted - 2014.11.06 22:39:00 -
[4] - Quote
Would any CPM member care to share their thoughts on EWAR? |
Haerr
Dead Man's Game
RUST415
1847
|
Posted - 2014.11.10 07:37:00 -
[5] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Kaeru Nayiri wrote:Kaeru Nayiri wrote:IDEA
[...]
You created a secondary 60m scanning ring for vehicles, why not create more of them to reflect different radius of scanning power?
first ring: 5m
120% scanning precision
second ring:10m
100% scanning precision
third ring: 20m
80% scanning precision
I also want to repeat that I am against removing the directional indicator on the red dots on tacnet. The type of scout we want to have in the game (intel, stealth, low combat abilities, low tank) needs to know when to run from cover to cover. If peeking was possible, this would not be an issue. When he or she is running around with 250 EHP it isn't possible to survive even 1 person noticing him/her moving around. Any thoughts on this compromise to scanning falloff, Rattati? We are evaluating this technically as we speak. Dynamic fallout is impossible, there may be hope for this
MMMMmmmmmmmmmm good read, will read again. +1 |
Haerr
Dead Man's Game
RUST415
1847
|
Posted - 2014.11.10 07:38:00 -
[6] - Quote
Haerr wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:Kaeru Nayiri wrote:Kaeru Nayiri wrote:IDEA
[...]
You created a secondary 60m scanning ring for vehicles, why not create more of them to reflect different radius of scanning power?
first ring: 5m
120% scanning precision
second ring:10m
100% scanning precision
third ring: 20m
80% scanning precision
I also want to repeat that I am against removing the directional indicator on the red dots on tacnet. The type of scout we want to have in the game (intel, stealth, low combat abilities, low tank) needs to know when to run from cover to cover. If peeking was possible, this would not be an issue. When he or she is running around with 250 EHP it isn't possible to survive even 1 person noticing him/her moving around. Any thoughts on this compromise to scanning falloff, Rattati? We are evaluating this technically as we speak. Dynamic fallout is impossible, there may be hope for this MMMMmmmmmmmmmm good read, will read again. +1
Just read it again, still a good read, will read again. (Trying to find more posts to +1) |
|
|
| |
|