|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 13 post(s) |
iWanderer
PT-BR
10
   |
Posted - 2014.11.17 16:25:00 -
[1] - Quote
I have 3 comments to Haers table for now:
- Why do commandos have a worst profile than sentinels. Commandos are between assault and sentinels.
- I see a possible problem with the medium range/precision ratio. Example: Assault. Today you have a 50db precision to maximum of 10m. In this new proposal the 50db precision is now at 7,5m? shorter. Or see it inversed, at the now 10 meters, the precision is worsened to 55db.
The first cenario could be a problem especially between scouts and other suits. The second between assaults and sentinels. |
iWanderer
PT-BR
10
|
Posted - 2014.11.17 16:38:00 -
[2] - Quote
15m range base for assaults could work batter against scouts. 15m is the the new scout proposed medium range |
iWanderer
PT-BR
10
|
Posted - 2014.11.18 16:42:00 -
[3] - Quote
Haerr wrote:* Added Squad and Team sharing Active Scanners to the spreadsheet.
Can Active scanners do 3 scans instead of 1? Just like the new passive scans?
Oh and is it possible to move Range Amplifiers to high slots?
It would neatly counterbalance being able to have both precise and long distance passive scans at the same time.
I think that an Assault suit with 3cPDs should be able to avoid all passive scans @ medium range that a Max Precision Scout can throw at them.
I also think that allowing an Assault suit with 3cPDs to avoid a Gallente Logistics Prototype Active Scanner @ Medium range is a good idea, what do you think?
Been messing around with your sheet and I think I almost got my proposal readable. Can only post later at night.
But I can share a few outcomes:
Example: A Gal scout with 1 damp can evade a Gal scout with no damp at medium range. This fixes the kind of things in your sheet where a sentinel would need to have 4 complex precision to see a Gal Scout at medium range.
Basically I raised the dampening requirements on scouts to become closer to assaults. I also expanded the precision range because it was getting tight to fit all in between the previous values of 12db to 60, and now use 12 to 66, plus a few other tweaks.
Another exemple: Amarr/Min Scout need 1 enhanced damp to evade a assault with 2 complex precision.
Post it later. |
iWanderer
PT-BR
11
|
Posted - 2014.11.18 17:43:00 -
[4] - Quote
Haerr wrote:One way of encouraging Scouts to use a cloak is to have inactive cloaks give a passive bonus to dampening and larger bonus to dampening when active. Figured I'd just throw it out there.
Edit: So instead of attaching the dampener bonus to one scout or another it is given to any scout who fits a cloak.
I disagree!
The cloak just by itself it a great visual trick mastery reserved only for suits who have the requirements. There are suits in your own sheet that don-¦t have a equipment slot but you still calculated a cloak scenario that is impossible.
Cloaks just by themselves are great things and I don-¦t think they need added bonus except maybe one, fitting reduction for all suits or dampening for all suits.
Even today I still notice you can release a shot while the cloak animation is running, and I think under the 1 second mark. If really cloaked or not I dont know. |
iWanderer
PT-BR
11
|
Posted - 2014.11.18 18:02:00 -
[5] - Quote
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2464720#post2464720
Awsome work! |
iWanderer
PT-BR
11
|
Posted - 2014.11.18 20:48:00 -
[6] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:General Goal in this idea: Changes done: Precision modifiers changed to: 60%/100%/130%
Range modifiers changed to 30%/100%/125%
Assault Suit base scan range upped to 24m
Commando Suit base scan range upped to 24m
Scout suit base scan range upped to 30m
Scout suit base precision upped to 45dB
Logistics suit base scan range upped to 30m
Assault suit base profile changed to 45dB
Commando suit base profile changed to 50dB
Sentinel base scan range upped to 18m
Range Amps have been nerfed from 45% to 30%
I tried to fit your values in Haerrs sheet and got negative values.
Not quite sure what whent wrong but maybe you final objective can be seen in my proposal.
I use Haerrs sheet because it enables do relative diferente suits.
Again I think in a way its getting to the same objective with diferent values. |
iWanderer
PT-BR
11
|
Posted - 2014.11.18 20:58:00 -
[7] - Quote
Ok. Here a new revised Haerr sheet to try and balace every suit in the game.
Again, it s a try. There are some tweaks to be done, example problem with Gallogi.
I don-¦t have much time myself but if you spend some time on it I think you can get a general picture.
Notes:
- I balanced it based only on medium range and no cloak.
- Problems with Gallogi
- Haven-¦t decided on Commando and Sentinel
- Didn-¦t pay much attention to the cloak effect because, in my opinion the dampening effect should be scrubbed because it should not be scout exclusive since we are changing things.
Have fun and please comment constructivly...
link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByLpG42z7QGHVEFIUjh0akg2UXM/view?usp=sharing |
iWanderer
PT-BR
11
|
Posted - 2014.11.19 10:42:00 -
[8] - Quote
Haerr wrote:Scan Table - New_EWAR - this is the full table
Scan Table - New_EWAR_Slim - this is a slimmed down version that removes a lot of less interesting things and only cares about complex dampenersProvided you use google docs and enable the script that comes with the table it will be updated, sorted, and coloured automatically.
There seems to be a difference between the slim and full sheets
In one, a assault with 2 complex prec. corresponds to galscout with 1 complex damp
In thefull sheet the same corresponds to galscout with 1 basic damp.
I am going to work with the full, because I think an assault with 2 complex prec. should already see a galscout or something arround that... |
iWanderer
PT-BR
11
|
Posted - 2014.11.19 17:59:00 -
[9] - Quote
Haerr wrote:Scan Table - New_EWAR - this is the full table
Scan Table - New_EWAR_Slim - this is a slimmed down version that removes a lot of less interesting things and only cares about complex dampenersProvided you use google docs and enable the script that comes with the table it will be updated, sorted, and coloured automatically.
I have been tweaking things. Post my sheet later at night. I had only one way to do things and that was forget the cloak.
If we want e-war across the board for all suits, I had to start without it. Especially with the new range variation proposal this is even more significant.
The cloak bonus if has to exist cannot be related to e-war, and, frankly don-¦t know what to do with it still. Maybe when I upload the sheet I-¦ll have something to propose if possible.
Maybe forget all cloak bonuses and keep it simple, the better the cloak, the longer you-¦re cloaked....
|
iWanderer
PT-BR
11
|
Posted - 2014.11.19 22:52:00 -
[10] - Quote
Here goes the latest revision;
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByLpG42z7QGHZHlUa3BhRW5IV3c/view?usp=sharing
The changes are in the input tab in blue.
Basic changes are:
- Good bye cloak (for now)
- Change damp values
- Change Scan Radius Modifier and scan precision modifier
- Changes to profiles and ranges
Basically, just tried to level it out between everybody. I admit it-¦s not perfect but it-¦s a work in progress.
If you zoom out, you get the general picture of what I think is the objective. A scale.
As to the cloak, I have no ideias but to scrap the bonus. This was need to balance.
I think the main problem with this all is that a balance is really hard using precision and dampening value ranges between 10 and 60, you end up getting repeting values on what should be a larger scale, so then all the bonuses have little ou too much effect to really balance this all out in the end.
Another thing to factor in is slot configuration and respective race bonuses. There are case that are impossible ou practically impratical.
It-¦s not the best, just a way of trying... |
|
|
iWanderer
PT-BR
11
|
Posted - 2014.11.22 08:45:00 -
[11] - Quote
Zaria Min Deir wrote:
...So, how does this help medium frame participation in EWAR? Well, I personally don't think medium frames can or should compete with scouts in stealth... Assaults can choose to dampen to try and hide themselves from active scanners/other mediums/heavies etc. But they don't need to reach the levels of dampening a scout can. But mediums should have a decent chance at detecting scouts, yes, even dampened ones. And the numbers we have seen really don't include a decent chance for that, 1 or 2 dampeners would be enough to competely hide a scout from any scans a medium frame is capable of. So, sacrificing slots for enhancers seems rather pointless. But if a medium frame can see a scout in their short range scans, the dynamic becomes less one-sided. Now everyone can choose to increase their effectiveness against stealthy players by increasing their scan range... as increased scan range would also slightly increase the radius of the short range scans.
You shoukd see my proposal:
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=warning&l=https%3a%2f%2fdrive.google.com%2ffile%2fd%2f0ByLpG42z7QGHZHlUa3BhRW5IV3c%2fview%3fusp%3dsharing&domain=google.com
and see if the ranges are what you were saying.
As to the rest, you are to focused on range and precision and forget damps. And also remember slot configuration.
Take the opposites, Caldari, lots of high slots means precision mods for all suits and the scouts have the range.
Gallente, low slots, lots of damps and range if needed, scout have a precision bonus because of a few high slots
The other two are in between.
See the sheet and think on it.
|
iWanderer
PT-BR
11
|
Posted - 2014.11.23 14:40:00 -
[12] - Quote
[quote=Zatara Rought]I still am very much in love with Cet Mercs brilliant work here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1DrCb0IiA3G3MjjnObKURzEQBl46sfzbtIOKN_4iJWdM/edit#gid=0[/quote
I admit its interresting.
Ive put the values in Haerrs sheet. There are problems, for example the pro max GalLogi sees all and thats not right for scouts. It should at least have a contestant in the same range.
Thats why I use Haerrs, it covers all the possibilities.
Here is Cat Mercs values in the sheet:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByLpG42z7QGHRFNvTmtTbFRRYmM/view?usp=sharing
Later I-¦ll post a tweaked version.
|
iWanderer
PT-BR
11
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 15:15:00 -
[13] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:So umm, since the Gal Scout can avoid a highly specialized scan that happens every 40 or so seconds, and even then it needs to have all of its low slots fitted with dampeners, it means it's OP?
What about the Cal Scout in my design being practically a walking radar with a max range of 150 meters?
Mind you, the Amarr Scout can detect the Gal Scout within its short range scanners with two precision enhancers.
Heys guys.
I-¦m still tweaking Cat Mercs sheet values and had to try something out because as you could see assaults and heavys had no chance in that last sheet (example, sentinel would need 2 complex damps to evade another sentinel...)
Since all bonuses are percentage based, I had to use a dampening and precision scale from 1 to 200.
I still have problems with the Gal Logi, its bonus needs to be scrapped and the precision values, per suit and scanner, have to be fixed or else it doesn-¦t fit well in the scale.
Beacause of so many variables, I favor scrapping the cloak bonus.
I can already say the result for mediums and heavys and provisional amarr/min scout values look like this:
To not be seen on TACNET:
Sentinel needs 1B damp versus Commando in short range
Commando needs 1B damp versus Sentinel in short range (this could be tweaked so not so)
Comm/Sent needs 1C damp versus assault in short range
Comm/Sent needs 1B damp versus assault in medium range
Comm/Sent needs 1C+E damp versus Cal/Min Scout in short range
Comm/Sent needs 1C damp versus Cal/Min Scout in medium range
Comm/Sent needs 3C damp versus Gal Scout in short range
Comm/Sent needs 2C damp versus Gal Scout in medium range
Comm/Sent needs 1C damp versus Gal Scout in long range
Comm/Sent needs 2C damp versus 2 complex precision assault in medium range
Assault needs 1E damp against another assault in short range. In Medium nothing is needed
Assault needs nothing against comm/sent with 1 complex precision in medium range
Assault needs 1C damp against Cal/Min Scout in short range and 1E in medium
Assault needs 1C damp against Gal Scout in medium range, 1E in long. 2C in short range
Assault needs 1C+E damp against 2 complex precision assault
Assault needs 2C damp or more against 2 complex precisions Logi
Assault needs 2C+B damp against Amarr Scout in medium range, 1C in long range
Assault needs 1C+E against Cal/Min Scout in medium range, 2C+1B in short range
A/M Scout needs 1B damp against assault in short range, nothing in medium
A/M Scout needs 1E damp against Comm/Sent in short range
These are "sort of values" because of the cloak.
Post the new sheet later.
|
iWanderer
PT-BR
11
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 16:36:00 -
[14] - Quote
The rest for now:
A/M Scout needs 1C damp against Cal/Min Scout in short range, 1B in medium
A/M Scout needs 1C damp against Assualt and Logi in short range, 1E in medium
A/M Scout needs 1C+1E damp against Cal/Min Scout with 1C in short range, 1C in medium, 1E in long
A/M Scout needs 3C damp against Gal Scout with 1C in short range, 1C in medium, 1E in long
A/M Scout needs 2C+E damp against Assault with 3C in short range, 1C+E in medium, 1C in long
A/M Scout needs 3C damp against Cal Scout with 2C in short range, 2C in medium, 1C in long
A/M Scout cannot evade Gal Scout with 2C in short range, needs 3C+1B in medium, 2C in long
C/G Scout needs 1B damp against comm/sent with 1C in the short range, nothing in medium
C/G Scout needs 1E damp against cal/min scout short range, nothing in medium
C/G Scout needs 1B damp against comm/sent with 1C in the short range, nothing in medium
C/G Scout needs 1C damp against comm/sent with 2C in the short range, needs 1B in medium, nothing in long
C/G Scout needs 1C+1B damp against Gal Scout in short, needs 1C/E in medium, 1B in long range
C/G Scout needs 1C+1E damp against 2C assault in the short range, needs 1C in medium, 1B in long
C/G Scout needs 2C damp against Amarr Scout in short range, needs 1C in medium, needs 1E/B in the long range
C/G Scout needs 2C+1E damp against Cal/Min Scout with 2C in short range, needs 1C+1E in medium, 1C in the long range
C/G Scout needs 3C+1B damp against Cal/Min Scout with 3C in short range, needs 2C+1B in medium, 1C in the long range
C/G Scout needs 3C+1B damp against Cal/Min Scout with 3C in short range, needs 2C+1B in medium, 1C in the long range
C/G Scout needs 4C damp against Amarr Scout with 1C in short range, needs 2C+1E in medium, 1C+1E in the long range
C/G Scout needs 4C damp against Gal Scout with 2C in short range, needs 2C+1E in medium, needs 1C+1E in the long range
C/G Scout needs 4C damp against Cal Scout with 4C in short range, needs 2C+1E in medium, needs 1C+1E in the long range
C/G Scout has no defense against Amarr Scout with 2C in short range, needs 4C in medium, needs 2C+1E in the long range
...sigh....
I-¦ve decided to post two sheets later. They will be the same, only difference is one will not have cloak dampening.
This is for two reasons: haven-¦t really decided on the cloak bonus and the general principle of dampening between suits is better to understand with no bonus applied. |
iWanderer
PT-BR
11
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 23:02:00 -
[15] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:
When did you last get my numbers?
Because I have updated them quite actively over the last couple of days.
As far as the Gal Logi, it's a very precise scan that happens once every 40 seconds and lasts 5 seconds.
If it wasn't EXTREMELY hard to avoid, it would be useless.
Simple as that.
Honestly, dont remember, but you quoted me today so I thinks its those:
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2479307#post2479307
Your Values: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=warning&l=https%3a%2f%2fdrive.google.com%2ffile%2fd%2f0ByLpG42z7QGHRFNvTmtTbFRRYmM%2fview%3fusp%3dsharing&domain=google.com
Were a bit to agressive and hard for assaults and heavys, and I think the intended is the inverse.
If these are not your latest, then I missed something along the way...
|
iWanderer
PT-BR
11
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 23:07:00 -
[16] - Quote
Ok, new sheets and again trying for the best balance.
There are two sheets, cloak bonus and no cloak bonus:
Cloak Bonus:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByLpG42z7QGHbDh5ZzVpLWNid2M/view?usp=sharing
No-Cloak Bonus, easiear to understand the intended overall balance:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByLpG42z7QGHa0lIWUIySWNlU2s/view?usp=sharing
And, that-¦s all folks... |
iWanderer
PT-BR
12
|
Posted - 2014.11.27 11:41:00 -
[17] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:How are they aggressive? Two dampeners put you under the strongest scout long range and medium range scanning, it's only once you enter short range where it becomes a headache to try and get under the scans. Heavies aren't exactly supposed to be highly competitive in EWAR. They have massive advantages offset by being slow, blind and easily detected. They will be slightly less so with these changes, but they'll still be all three.
Cat Merc,
Your short range dampening is to weak, you need a lot of damps up close, and you medium and long range is to strong. Examples:
- A heavy versus heavy should only need 1C or 1E to make a difference in short range. In medium range 1E and 1B in long range, because then whats the point of a heavy trading hp for ewar with so few slots.
- A heavy in you sheet cannot hide from a Cal ou Min scout in short range, thats shotgun madness
- An assault needs 4C damps to hide from a CalScout with 1C in short range. Thats too many low slots ocupied versus a Scout with a lot of high slots. On top of that a CalScout with a lot of shields for example.
- The Logis don-¦t fare to well in your sheet, since they have less hp and less weopons in some cases, that should have either a lot more natural dampening ou a little more precision. Another bad case in the sheet, a Logi with 1C versus a Logi with 5C in short range and 1C+1B in medium range. Its to up close
- An A/M Scout needs 2C+1E against a Logi in the short range and only 1B in medium. The natural dampening is to high in the short range and to low in the medium range.
- An Gal/Cal Scout needs 1C+1B against a Gal Scout in the short range and then nothing in the medium range. You also need nothing against a CalScout in the medium range.
These are just examples. In Sum, the short is to weakly dampened and the medium and long rang to heavy dampened with you values
That-¦s what I tried to change in my proposals, trying to balance everything again that-¦s just my way of seeing things.
The ideal would probably a 3 system approach, 1 ewar system between heavys versus assaults and another system for assaults and scouts and the last heavys versus scouts....what a ridiculous idea I just had... |
iWanderer
PT-BR
12
|
Posted - 2014.11.27 17:07:00 -
[18] - Quote
Fox Gaden wrote:Assault suits should have a long rang/low precision outer ring to detect undampened Sentinels. (15 to 20m.)
Assault suits should have a mid-rang precision identical to what they have now. (10m to 15m)
Assaults suits should have a high precision in the near circle to detect undamponed Scouts that get too close. (~10 m)
...
Got me thinking... |
iWanderer
PT-BR
12
|
Posted - 2014.11.27 18:03:00 -
[19] - Quote
iWanderer wrote:Fox Gaden wrote:Assault suits should have a long rang/low precision outer ring to detect undampened Sentinels. (15 to 20m.)
Assault suits should have a mid-rang precision identical to what they have now. (10m to 15m)
Assaults suits should have a high precision in the near circle to detect undamponed Scouts that get too close. (~10 m)
...
Got me thinking...
And did something incredibly stupid...
I gave scouts the worst dampening and precision, and heavys the best precision and dampening.
It-¦s crazy I know, and just for fun, some examples:
Starting from the top:
- Cal/Min scout with nothing cannot evade anything, except Amarr/Min Scout with 1 damp in short range
- Gal Scout with nothing - Amarr/Min needs 1E damp in short range, nothing in medium. Assault needs 1B in short range. Heavys don-¦t need anywhing to evade.
- Assault with 1C precision: GalScout with 1C+1B damp in short range, 1E damp in medium range, nothing in long. Assault 1C+1E damps in short range, 1C damp in medium, 1B damp in long. Sentinel with 1C damp in short range, 1B damp in medium, nothing in long range
- Assault with 2C precision: Gal/Cal Scout 2C+1E damps in short range, 1C+1E in medium range, 1C in long range. Assault 2C+1B damp to evade in short range, 1C+1E in medium range, 1C in long range. Sentinel 2C damps in short range, 1C in medium range, 1E in long range.
- To evade CalScout with 4C precision: Gal/Cal Scout 2C+1E damps in short range, 1C+1E damps in medium, 1C damp in long range. Assault 2C+E damps in short range, 1C+1E damps in medium range, 1C damp in long range. Sentinel 2C damp in short range 1E in medium and long range.
I-¦ll post this "inverted ewar philosophy" later at night.
|
iWanderer
PT-BR
12
|
Posted - 2014.11.27 21:21:00 -
[20] - Quote
iWanderer wrote:iWanderer wrote:Fox Gaden wrote:Assault suits should have a long rang/low precision outer ring to detect undampened Sentinels. (15 to 20m.)
Assault suits should have a mid-rang precision identical to what they have now. (10m to 15m)
Assaults suits should have a high precision in the near circle to detect undamponed Scouts that get too close. (~10 m)
... Got me thinking... And did something incredibly stupid...
Well, here goes the inverted philosphy of ewar.
This is not perfect or final. There are problems an bugs but I-¦m not even going to touch if there is no reason to or no responses.
It was in fact just a thought that took 3 mins to change.
Link:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByLpG42z7QGHOEx2c3hIOUs0cHc/view?usp=sharing |
|
|
iWanderer
PT-BR
12
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 10:38:00 -
[21] - Quote
Just put these new values into Haerr-¦s sheet, and since that is the best way I think to compare and can notice a few things just to get a general notion:
- A standard scanner can only see non level 5 skill players and heavys in short range
- A proto scanner can now only see a scout in short range and medium/heavy in short and medium range.
- Assault cannot damp against another assault with 3 precisions
- Sentinel/Commando need 3 to 4 complex damps versus Cal Scout in short range, and 1C+1B in medium
- Heavys continue out of ewar. Heavy versus CalScout with no precisions mods, needs 4C damps in short and 1B in long range. This goes for the same against an assault with 1 precison mod.
- Scout are going to need always 1 to 2 complex mods against a 1 or 2 precisions on medium assault in the short range, and 1B to 2C in the medium range.
In sum, it-¦s looking good. It is in between my proposed values and Cat Mercs values.
Notice: The scanners now become quite useless or in other terms, class restrictive to GalLogis. And to be worth it has to be a GalLogi 5, with protoscanner.
This I think is unfair, because all Logi classes get wp for there SP and ISK investment with hives, uplinks, repairtool and GalLogi nothing when out of a squad. But I leave this issue for another time.
P.S - Did not notice the precison mod penalty...and that-¦s not reflected in the presented values... |
iWanderer
PT-BR
12
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 11:51:00 -
[22] - Quote
Francois Sanchez wrote:...
I also see the come back of the most catastrophic thing that has ever happened to this game, the Cal and Amarr scout can have an unavoidable scan of 30 meters for every suits but Gal and Amarr scouts.
Btw, the gal scout will also have access to a crazy scan, that can be avoided by fully damped scout but it's still too good.
...
True
The only one suit able to see a CalScout in long range is the Amarr with 2 complex precisons. And even that is avoidable with 1B damp. A CalScout can even evade a CalScout with 4C precision mod. The only thing I cannot contemplate is the damp penalty to using a precison mod.
And I-¦ll even guess that this penalty when applied looks like my proposed values...just a guess...
I just cannot understand how is it possible to calculate values without comparing them to other suits...
|
iWanderer
PT-BR
12
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 12:01:00 -
[23] - Quote
Had just another crazy idea.
If in the future as proposed, the range mods change to high slots, a Proto CalScout:
Sees all, sees everywhere and still haves slots do damp...I present the new mobile scanner: A CalScout tied as a backpack to a heavy and you get a 360-¦ clone mobile scanner... |
iWanderer
PT-BR
13
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 12:36:00 -
[24] - Quote
Haerr wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:Design Principles
Max prior range should be the same, reducing Amplier module
Max prior range should be the same, reducing Amplifier skill
For later discussion
Range Amps to High Can you put the updated numbers for the Range Amplification skill and the Range Amplifier modules in your spread sheet so that we can see them? I really do believe that moving Range Amplifiers to high slots is something that cannot wait, as it is an important measure to prevent Short Range Passive Scans from becoming to good.
The proposed numbers have been put into the spreadsheets, here are the links. Scan Table - Base_New_EWARScan Table - Base_New_EWAR_SlimEdit: As Rattati mentioned Active Scanners have not been changed, which means that they only have 1 Scan Precision value... so the Short and Long Range Scans for Active Scanners that are in the Scan Table will not exist in game.
Hey Haerr, just to check, these links are old, right? The slim is not the same as the complete sheet.
|
iWanderer
PT-BR
13
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 14:48:00 -
[25] - Quote
I have been seeing the present existing values and with the latest proposed values and I have to say, in general:
- Every suit has to dampen more in short because everybody sort of got more precision or less natural dampening in short range. In long range we will be less visible then now.
- The above should work for scouts too, but with a cloak it kind of stays the same for a lot of cases.
- It gets a lot worse for mediums and heavys, they will need even more dampening in short range, then now. I thought we were trying to correct this...
|
iWanderer
PT-BR
14
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 16:18:00 -
[26] - Quote
Jebus McKing wrote:Ghost Kaisar wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:Vitantur Nothus wrote:Two complex damps and a proto cloak:on should enable all Scouts to beat all passive scans and all active scans excluding GA Logi + Focused. Focused Scanner cool down and scan duration should be improved.
As far as passives are concerned, Scouts should hunt Scouts and MedFrames hunt MedFrames. All passive, at short range as well? If you don't move Range amps to highs, then yes. Otherwise, people will just slap on two range amps and laugh as you try to be sneaky within 20m of them. I'm kinda worried about moving range amps to high slots because of the CAL scout. With 2x amps it already has a range of 90m.  Any suggestions`?
In comes the mentioned penalty by CCP Rattati for using precision mods. The CalScout would have to sacrifice shield to equip more precision, then more damps to counter the penalty, then no armor slots to equip....but if protected by a squad, you-¦ve got a problem...Like I said before, jackstrap a Calscout to a Heavys back and let-¦em rip....
Personally, not fun, we-¦ve got scanners for that.... |
iWanderer
PT-BR
14
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 16:24:00 -
[27] - Quote
Jebus McKing wrote:....
Any suggestions`?
EDIT: Precision penalty to range amps? or
Range penalty to precision mods?
By CCP Rattati
"To allow counterplay - precision modules give an equal penalty to profile..."
Not quite sure how this works out.. |
iWanderer
PT-BR
14
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 17:51:00 -
[28] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Amps decrease Precision
Precision reduces range
Both increase Profile
So Caldari heavys and medium who have high slots and were not in a position to damp, (because it-¦s almost useless), now become precision masters at the cost of shields.
Gallente heavys and medium who have a few high slots, dont have that much to make a difference. But a heavy will never sacrifice their low slots for 3 dampeners or whatever to make a difference.
Amarr and Min are in between.
As to Scouts, Cal have good damps, but annuled by precision mods or range mods if equipped. GalScout will continue to damp. |
iWanderer
PT-BR
15
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 22:01:00 -
[29] - Quote
Zatara Rought wrote:[quote=hfderrtgvcd]please keep the childish bickering to a minimum.
...
...
I do think dampening for medium frames needs a buff.
Can you provide specific examples of the best combo's of ehp/range, and precision...and what it would take to beat them from a few suits?...
I have already proposed this a while ago:
With no cloak bonus (for all suits):https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByLpG42z7QGHa0lIWUIySWNlU2s/view?usp=sharing
With cloak: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByLpG42z7QGHbDh5ZzVpLWNid2M/view?usp=sharing
I even invented a new inversed thingie: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByLpG42z7QGHOEx2c3hIOUs0cHc/view?usp=sharing
All for balance, the balance between all...
|
iWanderer
PT-BR
15
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 22:13:00 -
[30] - Quote
Vitantur Nothus wrote:
I'm of the opinion that Scouts should be running damps. Preferably two. I also agree that moving Scout EWAR bonuses to point to efficacy would be good for balance. These points I've expressed consistently.
What I disagree with are Logis sharing passive scans at 18dB from 15m to 40m. This shuts down CQC play for all but Gallente Scouts, this replaces the AM Scout with an embedded recon unit which generates constant and massive WP, and this upgrades Heavy+Logi blobs to near omniscience. There is no way that this is good for balance.
And again, please see:
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2491443#post2491443
And example were scouts have to use damps and precisions to be better, and mediums to get and edge and heavys get the jump on some mediums and scouts.
I have proposed this before. |
|
|
iWanderer
PT-BR
15
|
Posted - 2014.12.01 23:14:00 -
[31] - Quote
Vitantur Nothus wrote:
It'll take a long time for me to reverse engineer your chart.
What are your specific base values (inputs)?
What other changes are you proposing?
It-¦s not my chart, just fiddled with the values.
You have to download it, and in the input tab are the values. In the output tab are the values in the format of Rattati-¦s post, but related to my inputs.
But more important is the relation between diferent suits in the first tab.
It does not matter what the values are, it-¦s how the correspondence between suits and roles is nade.
My specific inputs use a scale from 0 to 200, because of dealing with bonus percentages and whatever, it-¦s more easy to differentiate.
I changed profiles, ranges, precision and a few scout bonuses. The scanner and GalLogi values are a bit off but can be fixed.
|
|
|
| |
|