|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 13 post(s) |
Vell0cet
Vengeance Unbound
RISE of LEGION
2558
   |
Posted - 2014.11.17 17:52:00 -
[1] - Quote
I realize that it's not possible to have a gradual precision curve and that precision radii have to occur in hard-defined bands. I assume this is largely for performance reasons. I do wonder if it would be possible to introduce an element of randomness in the current proposal. Calls to rand() are pretty efficient and it might make things more interesting. So these values of your proposal would affect the chance of success/failure.
Also some players have been advocating for buffing Sentinel's Ewar. I'm very much against this. IMO sentinels are supposed to be absolute beasts in their optimals, with huge EHP and DPS. The trade off is they're supposed to be dependent on support and slow. If we make it so scouts aren't good at killing sentinels in CQC via buffs to the heavy's precision and scan radius, then we're going to see even more heavy spam. Keep them blind in, and make them dependent on squad mates' passive/active scans for Ewar.
Edit: I forgot to mention, overall I love this direction. Great work CCP Rattati!
Best PvE idea ever!
|
Vell0cet
Vengeance Unbound
RISE of LEGION
2565
|
Posted - 2014.11.18 02:24:00 -
[2] - Quote
Zatara Rought wrote:Vitantur Nothus wrote:Zatara Rought wrote:Vitantur Nothus wrote:
...
Again with insinuations that I am not asserting. I'm not intending to assert or insinuation anything. Simply seeking clarification. Assuming Shared Passives cannot be disabled: 1. Do you think Scouts should be penalized when they HP tank? 2. Do you think Scout Scan Precision should be made inferior to Assault Scan Precision? Umm...should there be opportunity costs for scouts brick tanking? Yes. Do I think assaults should have better precision than scouts? either better...or the same. If not assaults. Give the best precision to logi's. They will have less EHP, but have first shot advantage in a default scenario.  I also think range amplifiers should be a set amount of meters!
I think Ewar efficacy should be something like:
1. Scout
2. Assault
3. Commando & Logi
4. Sentinel
Logis get the CPU/PG to fit scanners, and GalLogis get the efficacy bonus too. They don't need suit stats as well, and should want a scout or assault in their squad to round out the group's situational awareness. If you don't think active scanners are good at scanning, then that should be addressed via improving active scanners. We don't need Logi good at everything again.
Best PvE idea ever!
|
Vell0cet
Vengeance Unbound
RISE of LEGION
2567
|
Posted - 2014.11.18 04:39:00 -
[3] - Quote
Vell0cet wrote:I realize that it's not possible to have a gradual precision curve and that precision radii have to occur in hard-defined bands. I assume this is largely for performance reasons. I do wonder if it would be possible to introduce an element of randomness in the current proposal. Calls to rand() are pretty efficient and it might make things more interesting. So these values of your proposal would effect the chance of success/failure.
I know it's tacky to self-quote but I just wanted to expand on this a bit.
This is just an example, the numbers are up for debate. Let's say for example that as your precision approaches their dampening your chances of seeing them get better. Here's a rough idea of how it might work
Precision is +1 greater than damps you have a 30% chance to detect them each "roll"
Precision is +2 greater than damps you have a 22% chance to detect them for each "roll"
Precision is +3 greater than damps you have a 17% chance to detect them for each "roll"
Precision is +4 greater than damps you have a 13% chance to detect them for each "roll"
Precision is +5 greater than damps you have a 10% chance to detect them for each "roll"
Precision is +6 greater than damps you have a 7% chance to detect them for each "roll"
Precision is +7 greater than damps you have a 5% chance to detect them for each "roll"
Precision is +8 greater than damps you have a 3% chance to detect them for each "roll"
Precision is +9 greater than damps you have a 2% chance to detect them for each "roll"
Precision is +10 greater than damps you have a 1% chance to detect them for each "roll"
Precision is +11 or more, you cannot detect them.
If Precision == damps it's 50/50
Precision is -1 less than damps you have a 70% chance to detect them on each "roll"
Precision is -2 less than damps you have a 78% chance to detect them on each "roll"
Precision is -3 less than damps you have a 83% chance to detect them on each "roll"
Precision is -4 less than damps you have a 87% chance to detect them on each "roll"
Precision is -5 less than damps you have a 90% chance to detect them on each "roll"
Precision is -6 less than damps you have a 93% chance to detect them on each "roll"
Precision is -7 less than damps you have a 95% chance to detect them on each "roll"
Precision is -8 less than damps you have a 97% chance to detect them on each "roll"
Precision is -9 less than damps you have a 98% chance to detect them on each "roll"
Precision is -10 less than damps you have a 99% chance to detect them on each "roll"
Precision is -11 or less, you always detect them.
Best PvE idea ever!
|
Vell0cet
Vengeance Unbound
RISE of LEGION
2569
|
Posted - 2014.11.18 06:50:00 -
[4] - Quote
Spectral Clone wrote:I think we all agree that scouts cant be best at every eWAR aspect in the game, while at the same time being the fastest suits with smallest hitboxes. Something gotta give.
Question for other scouts: What is the eWAR stat you want scouts to excel at? Dampening? Scan range?
Dampening makes most sense, so lets assume that scout = dampening experts.
Who is then a range expert, which class is a precision expert, etc?
Rattati: Is it possible to make the "scan bands" have a stronger precision further out than close by? This would be really cool on commando suits. Be able to do long range scans, but not see enemies up close.
We certainly don't all agree with that. I think buffing assault's Ewar enough so running a couple modules is worth the EHP sacrifice is a good place to start, as is this proposal by CCP Rattati. Sorry but scouts should be Ewar kings, there just needs to be a class that's an Ewar queen to keep them in check.
Best PvE idea ever!
|
Vell0cet
Vengeance Unbound
2631
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 18:59:00 -
[5] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Amps decrease Precision
Precision reduces range
Both increase Profile
Precision without range is pretty worthless (being able to see nearly everyone once they're already in CQC means you're already dead), range without precision is moderately helpful but not great. If detection Ewar mods cancel each other out, most will start running tank mods. I have concerns about how this will play out. Right now, I think most agree that the current problem is cloaky scouts having it too easy. The emphasis should be on improving the ability to detect them if you sacrifice slots to do so.
I've got a "scout hunter" Amarr scout fit with 2 precision mods and a range amp. It's weak-as-hell in most situations, but it's pretty good at killing cloaky scouts that aren't stacking tons of damps. I have to stay close to my squad mates to protect me from everything else. It seems this proposal would make it much harder for suits like this to counter cloaky scouts--I'd be better off running tank mods instead of Ewar. That seems counter to what we're looking to accomplish. The cloaker seems to have most of the advantages compared to the hunter.
Best PvE idea ever!
|
|
|
| |
|