DUST Search - Sticky:[Feedback] EWAR Concentric Circle Scan Falloff Design

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Sticky:[Feedback] EWAR Concentric Circle Scan Falloff Design

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 13 post(s)
matsumoto yuichi san The Elite Few Inc. The Methodical Alliance 83	Posted - 2014.11.17 21:15:00 - [91] - Quote I am sad literally no one had any comments for or against my proposed numbers, does that mean everyone thinks they are good since there was no flaming ? :P
shaman oga The Dunwich Horror 3221	Posted - 2014.11.17 21:16:00 - [92] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: shaman oga wrote: Let me know if i'm wrong. From what i understand you have 3 chances (1 chance for each circle) of scanning someone else, the more one get close, the higher are the chance to scan him. Is it like that? No. Each suit has a decibel (dB) value for both profile (being scanned) and precision (scanning; active scanners also have dB values). When the profile dB is less than the precision dB, you're not scanned. When precision is equal or lower, you are scanned. Therefore scans are an "all-or-none" mechanic, either you are or your aren't. Currently, passive scans have a consistent dB reading the full range, so my 90m passive scanning Cal Scout will have the same dB reading across the whole distance. What this change will do is make my passive scans at the last 25% of my range be 10% less accurate (110% dB reading), while the nearest 25% distance be 10% stronger (90% dB reading). Understood, i would like something more progressive, more circles for instance, but i guess it's a lot of work for a PS3 system. A series of circles each at -2% +2% would be great.
Cass Caul 1583	Posted - 2014.11.17 21:48:00 - [93] - Quote 1) Scout range and Scout dampening does not need a Nerf. 2) as a closed beta Scout, that's been a Gallente Scout for more than 2 years now, after the removal of shared LoS and the buff to 16m scan range and a bonus of +50% to scan range, let me tell you how much 15 meters sucks. Because it does. It's not a significant change and it really won't help regardless of the number of people exited simply from seeing it as a buff. Anything sort of 16 is crap. Trust me, 15m won't make enough of a change. On Hiatus. This is my smartphone alt
Varoth Drac Vengeance Unbound RISE of LEGION 362	Posted - 2014.11.17 22:07:00 - [94] - Quote I'm inclined to say scout dampening bonuses should be scrapped. It's just too hard to balance EWAR otherwise. Dampening is such a fundamental stat for scouts it doesn't work to have some scouts better at it than others. It doesn't even matter about Caldari scout's lack of low slots, no scout should have to fit more than 2 dampeners anyway. Focused scanners should be countered by positioning and timing rather than dampening.
Zatara Rought Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 4632	Posted - 2014.11.17 23:07:00 - [95] - Quote I honestly think heavies and commando's could use 15m base scan range and scouts/assaults get 20 and logi's get slightly more. Scanners cost a ** ton of resources to fit (afaik the focused is 18 ***** pg 0_0) (but honestly I'd be fine if all but the flux scanners were squad only) Passive scans being shared needs to get blown to smithereens. I don't know what it will take...but it just needs to happen. So long as you can have one person sacrifice to be the dude with the best passive scans and just share the investment with everyone around you at all times...e-war will never be truly balanced. Precision on Scouts need to be worse than assaults and assaults worse than logi's. not terribad, but yes they need to give up the edge in precision game. Scouts were given an extra slot in 1.8. and they can all choose to get under all scans (sans gallogi focused) with 2 slots being used. B3RT > PFBHz > TEAM > MHPD > IMPS > FA They call me ~Princess Zatata~ Skype: Zatara.Rought Twitter: @ZataraRought
iKILLu osborne Vengeance Unbound RISE of LEGION 473	Posted - 2014.11.17 23:11:00 - [96] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Can the Cal scout get its precision bonus back now? i miss my precision too, i now look at gal scouts with a hatred that can only be eased with 4 eye stew lp cal scout i demand it z platoon, cfw channel
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 2578	Posted - 2014.11.17 23:23:00 - [97] - Quote Zatara Rought wrote: I honestly think heavies and commando's could use 15m base scan range and scouts/assaults get 20 and logi's get slightly more. Scanners cost a ** ton of resources to fit (afaik the focused is 18 ***** pg 0_0) (but honestly I'd be fine if all but the flux scanners were squad only) Passive scans being shared needs to get blown to smithereens. I don't know what it will take...but it just needs to happen. So long as you can have one person sacrifice to be the dude with the best passive scans and just share the investment with everyone around you at all times...e-war will never be truly balanced. Precision on Scouts need to be worse than assaults and assaults worse than logi's. not terribad, but yes they need to give up the edge in precision game. Scouts were given an extra slot in 1.8. and they can all choose to get under all scans (sans gallogi focused) with 2 slots being used. Scouts need longer range than every other suit. It shouldn't be too OP since virtually every suit can get under most combat-fit scout's scans. 25m should be fine. Passive sharing is fine, about as fair as a perma-scanning GalLogi. What's so wrong about sacrificing one player's usefulness in combat (no ehp due to all scan mods) to help the team with passives? If anything is to be done with passives, make them ony available on the mini-map and make active scans show on both the mini-map and HUD. That should be mor balanced. Dust is there! I was real! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
WeapondigitX V7 The Exemplars Top Men. 174	Posted - 2014.11.17 23:32:00 - [98] - Quote Zaria Min Deir wrote: WeapondigitX V7 wrote: Please make scouts be unscannable if they are beyond 45m ranges with 2 complex damps. (for enemies with ewar dedicated fittings) With 3 complex damps please make scouts unscannable within 15 meters of the enemy (if enemy has Ewar dedicated fits) The nova knive scouts should be viable in PC. Make scouts need 4 complex damps to be unscannable within approx 10 meters. (when enemy is using ewar dedicated fits) All the above refers to passive scanning. Scouts sacrifice a lot using ewar dedicated fits. Be paranoid and look around a lot while in a squad and you''ll kill that sneaky scout sometimes. (if they use no hp mods and you have good aim, little lag) ...Unless I am reading the spreadsheet completely wrong, with these numbers, scouts with 2 complex damps would be unscannable at all ranges, even by a logi with 4 precision enhancers. And it would even take 3 enhancers to catch a scout with only one dampener at short-medium range. You've confused me, are you saying that we should get less benefit with 2 proto damps but same benefit as now with 3 damps and the same benefit as now with 4 damps? The std amarr scout only has 3 low slots. I was hoping corps that didn't have proto suits could still run ewar fits with proto mods and be competent at some level in PC by being able to evade any scans at certain ranges.
Zatara Rought Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 4638	Posted - 2014.11.17 23:34:00 - [99] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Scouts need longer range than every other suit. It shouldn't be too OP since virtually every suit can get under most combat-fit scout's scans. 25m should be fine. Passive sharing is fine, about as fair as a perma-scanning GalLogi. What's so wrong about sacrificing one player's usefulness in combat (no ehp due to all scan mods) to help the team with passives? If anything is to be done with passives, make them only available on the mini-map and make active scans show on both the mini-map and HUD. That should be mor balanced. Umm...because an amarr scout only needs to sacrifice 3 slots that cost about...that 100 cpu/0 pg? Vs a gal logi focused who using 4 slots and about what...72 PG before bonuses and a **** ton of CPU to get 5 seconds windows of opportunity with a long cooldown. You can't feasibly keep them up the whole time. and you're sacrificing tank as well due to the fitting costs. My double precision amarr scout? Stil 500 ehp on my scan fit. for perma scans. The underlined is cool...as an aside. But no passive scans need to be for yourself. I have a lot of red flags about providing scouts with advantages in all 3 aspects of e-war. What if Assaults had the best base range and logi's had the best base precision but 5m less range? B3RT > PFBHz > TEAM > MHPD > IMPS > FA They call me ~Princess Zatata~ Skype: Zatara.Rought Twitter: @ZataraRought
Vitantur Nothus Nos Nothi 315	Posted - 2014.11.17 23:36:00 - [100] - Quote Zatara Rought wrote: I have a lot of red flags about providing scouts with advantages in all 3 aspects of e-war. Somewhat confused. Why can't squishy scouts be better at EWAR than 1000+ HP units?

Zatara Rought Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 4639	Posted - 2014.11.17 23:46:00 - [101] - Quote Vitantur Nothus wrote: Zatara Rought wrote: I have a lot of red flags about providing scouts with advantages in all 3 aspects of e-war. Somewhat confused. Why can't squishy scouts be better at EWAR than 1000+ HP units? And if Zatara had his way, what would want Scouts to do in PC? Oh they absolutely should. Who insinuated otherwise? But when a squishy scout has the meta in all three aspects of e-war then you get to today in PC...where scouts are only not the most spammed thing in PC because when assaulting a point heavies ehp/hmg dps >cloak/re scouts. What should their purpose in PC be? You take scouts in 1.7 and add in the extra high or low and the equip slot...to say nothing of the cloak..and 1.7 woulda been awesome. B3RT > PFBHz > TEAM > MHPD > IMPS > FA They call me ~Princess Zatata~ Skype: Zatara.Rought Twitter: @ZataraRought
Vitantur Nothus Nos Nothi 318	Posted - 2014.11.18 00:04:00 - [102] - Quote Zatara Rought wrote: Vitantur Nothus wrote: Zatara Rought wrote: I have a lot of red flags about providing scouts with advantages in all 3 aspects of e-war. Somewhat confused. Why can't squishy scouts be better at EWAR than 1000+ HP units? And if Zatara had his way, what would want Scouts to do in PC? Oh they absolutely should. Who insinuated otherwise? But when a squishy scout has the meta in all three aspects of e-war then you get to today in PC...where scouts are only not the most spammed thing in PC because when assaulting a point heavies ehp/hmg dps >cloak/re scouts. What should their purpose in PC be? You take scouts in 1.7 and add in the extra high or low and the equip slot...to say nothing of the cloak..and 1.7 woulda been awesome. I'm still not seeing what you want from Scouts in PC. The general consensus is that the Scout should be penalized for HP tank. Shame on you, Assault Lite, but thank you for your help clearing out that Heavy Spam. So if they aren't supposed to run tank to kill heavies, what's the next best thing we can do for you? Run precision amps and range extenders; share those strong passives with the killers and try to stay out-of-the-way. Right? Apparently not. So ... sneak around with low HP and a low profile and pop/place uplinks? I don't see the value, but if you say so ...
One Eyed King Land of the BIind 5925	Posted - 2014.11.18 00:10:00 - [103] - Quote Zatara Rought wrote: Vitantur Nothus wrote: Zatara Rought wrote: I have a lot of red flags about providing scouts with advantages in all 3 aspects of e-war. Somewhat confused. Why can't squishy scouts be better at EWAR than 1000+ HP units? And if Zatara had his way, what would want Scouts to do in PC? Oh they absolutely should. Who insinuated otherwise? But when a squishy scout has the meta in all three aspects of e-war then you get to today in PC...where scouts are only not the most spammed thing in PC because when assaulting a point heavies ehp/hmg dps >cloak/re scouts. What should their purpose in PC be? You take scouts in 1.7 and add in the extra high or low and the equip slot...to say nothing of the cloak..and 1.7 woulda been awesome. I am by no means a PC player, but when cloaks are intimately tied to EWAR (all except for Gal), and you at the very least have a higher occurrence of Gal Logi's with Focused scanners and Amarr with max precision than pubs/FW, then you in essence force them to use the cloaks. No maybe there is some fluke where PC players aren't maxing their passive and active scanning abilities, I don't know. But it seems to me that in PC, of all places, because of the likelyhood to max out suit fittings, and having EWAR tied up in cloaks, that it is only natural that is what they would use. Thunderbolt. verb and noun. "James thunderbolted in his pants." "I lit a bag of thunderbolt on fire on CCP's doorway"
Zatara Rought Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 4639	Posted - 2014.11.18 00:11:00 - [104] - Quote Vitantur Nothus wrote: ... Again with insinuations that I am not asserting. B3RT > PFBHz > TEAM > MHPD > IMPS > FA They call me ~Princess Zatata~ Skype: Zatara.Rought Twitter: @ZataraRought
Zatara Rought Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 4639	Posted - 2014.11.18 00:19:00 - [105] - Quote One Eyed King wrote: Zatara Rought wrote: Vitantur Nothus wrote: Zatara Rought wrote: I have a lot of red flags about providing scouts with advantages in all 3 aspects of e-war. Somewhat confused. Why can't squishy scouts be better at EWAR than 1000+ HP units? And if Zatara had his way, what would want Scouts to do in PC? Oh they absolutely should. Who insinuated otherwise? But when a squishy scout has the meta in all three aspects of e-war then you get to today in PC...where scouts are only not the most spammed thing in PC because when assaulting a point heavies ehp/hmg dps >cloak/re scouts. What should their purpose in PC be? You take scouts in 1.7 and add in the extra high or low and the equip slot...to say nothing of the cloak..and 1.7 woulda been awesome. I am by no means a PC player, but when cloaks are intimately tied to EWAR (all except for Gal), and you at the very least have a higher occurrence of Gal Logi's with Focused scanners and Amarr with max precision than pubs/FW, then you in essence force them to use the cloaks. No maybe there is some fluke where PC players aren't maxing their passive and active scanning abilities, I don't know. But it seems to me that in PC, of all places, because of the likelyhood to max out suit fittings, and having EWAR tied up in cloaks, that it is only natural that is what they would use. On paper gal logi's look really appetizing in attempting to play a role in detecting scouts.. In practice...they are useless at detecting scouts...and amarr aren't much better. The % of the time you're going to scan a scout in PC because you used a gallogi focused is lol...and then it's 5 seconds with a long cooldown. So yeah..all scouts in PC use 2 damps + cloak...what's your point? Unless facing an opponent who you presume is a noob (pubs)..there's very little reason -not- to run 2 damps and a cloak in all situations..unless you're purposefully brick tanking it. B3RT > PFBHz > TEAM > MHPD > IMPS > FA They call me ~Princess Zatata~ Skype: Zatara.Rought Twitter: @ZataraRought
Vitantur Nothus Nos Nothi 319	Posted - 2014.11.18 00:34:00 - [106] - Quote 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?
Zatara Rought Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 4639	Posted - 2014.11.18 00:41:00 - [107] - Quote 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! B3RT > PFBHz > TEAM > MHPD > IMPS > FA They call me ~Princess Zatata~ Skype: Zatara.Rought Twitter: @ZataraRought
Vitantur Nothus Nos Nothi 320	Posted - 2014.11.18 00:52:00 - [108] - Quote Zatara Rought wrote: They will have less EHP, but have first shot advantage in a default scenario. I'd expect the opposite, as MedFrames have a good 'bit more base HP and better slot count than Scouts. So, what would prevent high HP units from running high-intensity, shared passive scans? If high-intensity, shared passive scans have to exists, wouldn't it be best to restrict them to easy-to-squish units?
Sylwester Dziewiecki Interregnum. 426	Posted - 2014.11.18 00:53:00 - [109] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: It can be quite frustrating to try and start a dialogue about the changes, and the majority of replies is: "wtf, so this is going to happen, that's terrible because I heard these numbers were, like, set in stone" "I have great ideas but noone listens so I am not going to post them" or "I thought we were also doing this other thing" Why not just post "I think we should do this because then this will be balanced" or "I see you posted these preliminary numbers and I think this would be a better set of numbers" Just sayin' According to your numbers Scout with 3 Enhancer's (21.08 dB short range) can not scan up 4 Damped Assaults and Logistics(21.05 dB), and 2 Enhancer Scout can not detect 4 Damped Sentinels (25.26 dB) - So I am very curious about new Scout bonuses.. Gallente Speed Scout. EVE side of me: Nosum Hseebnrido
One Eyed King Land of the BIind 5930	Posted - 2014.11.18 01:01:00 - [110] - Quote Zatara Rought wrote: Edit: Yeah I don't know what exactly of my post you're responding to/contesting. Care to clarify? I think my mind may have cobbled together an argument about only seeing a cloak, which I either miss read, or pulled out of my brains RAM from another post I saw inadvertently. OR I had a good reason, but can't remember what it is at the moment. My apologizes. Thunderbolt. verb and noun. "James thunderbolted in his pants." "I lit a bag of thunderbolt on fire on CCP's doorway"

Zatara Rought Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 4640	Posted - 2014.11.18 01:08:00 - [111] - Quote Vitantur Nothus wrote: Zatara Rought wrote: They will have less EHP, but have first shot advantage in a default scenario. I'd expect the opposite, as MedFrames have a good 'bit more base HP and better slot count than Scouts. So, what would prevent high HP units from running high-intensity, shared passive scans? If high-intensity, shared passive scans have to exists, wouldn't it be best to restrict them to easy-to-squish units? I was comparing medium to assault combat. Scouts would still just damp up and own mediums from behind like they already do. What prevents HP ehp units from running high intensity, shared passive scans? Well...for one assaults and logi's rarely get more than 800 ehp. a scout fully damped can get around 500-600ehp. so you can retain 70% of ehp for the meta in scanning...dampening..and precision? this is working very poorly for balance indeed. Scouts need to retain the meta on dampening, but surrender the meta on precision and either share the meta, or surrender it on scan range. I have already expressed my thoughts on passive scanning...I think they need to find a way to turn it off. But if there's going to be a meta of passive scanning...it should be assaults or logi's. B3RT > PFBHz > TEAM > MHPD > IMPS > FA They call me ~Princess Zatata~ Skype: Zatara.Rought Twitter: @ZataraRought
WeapondigitX V7 The Exemplars Top Men. 174	Posted - 2014.11.18 01:35:00 - [112] - Quote After reading approx. 5 pages I think this proposal would have a more positive effect than Rattatis proposals of the outer and inner circles ranges and precision. Active scanner equipment should have the idea of better precision to detect enemies the closer they are. Just like what Rattati is proposing for passive scans. I would propose EQ scanners have a 100% precision modifier at 95% of there current range. With 70% precision modifier at 47% of there current range. With 20% precision modifier at 25% of current range. This allows gal logis to scan scouts that are very close to allies (just aim the scanner in direction the allies backs are facing). It allows gal logis to scan scouts in line of sight at low ranges and, in effect, call for help to the entire allied team because the entire team may converge on the scout cause they see it. This allows all classes with scanners to call for help in killing targets at close range because of the scanners high precision at close range (basically it fulfills the role of calling for help on the microphone to other allies with microphones, except allies magically have a microphone at that instant every time, this incentivizes team work while putting those with scanners in danger because of the low range combined with high precision.) For passive scanning: make the inner circle have better qualities, give a precision modifier of approx. 70% with a range of approx. 42%. Make the outer circle have a precision modifier of 120% with a range of approx. 140%. Make middle circle have a precision modifier of 100% and range modifier of 100%. This would make players be able to better realistically apply there ewar stats in battle. With max lvl 5 skills: Assault base scan precision: 50dB Assault base scan range: 15m Assaults with a proto range amp would get 7.5 extra meters of range in additon to 15m base range with 100% precision modifier (22m range rounded down with 50dB precision), while also getting a precision of 35 dB at a range of 13m (9m penalty rounded up). They also get a precision of 60dB at a range of 31m allowing them to detect undamped heavies at a good range. With 1 proto precision mod and 1 proto range mod, it gets way better for all classes: Assaults: 50dB x 0.8 x 0.7 at range of 13m: 28dB scan precision 50dB x 0.8 x 1.2 at range of 31m: 48dB scan precision, thus all moderately dampened heavies are scanned at 31m 50db x 0.8 at range of 22m: 40dB scan precision, tanked assaults are scanned which are around the corner in corridors. These proposed changes would have a larger positive effect. A std amarr assault with 3 proto damps gets a scan profile of approx. 23 dB if I remember correctly.
Vitantur Nothus Nos Nothi 330	Posted - 2014.11.18 02:13:00 - [113] - Quote Zatara Rought wrote: Vitantur Nothus wrote: Zatara Rought wrote: They will have less EHP, but have first shot advantage in a default scenario. I'd expect the opposite, as MedFrames have a good 'bit more base HP and better slot count than Scouts. So, what would prevent high HP units from running high-intensity, shared passive scans? If high-intensity, shared passive scans have to exists, wouldn't it be best to restrict them to easy-to-squish units? I was comparing logi to assault combat. Scouts would still just damp up and own mediums from behind like they already do. What prevents high ehp units from running high intensity, shared passive scans? TL;DR opportunity cost on the slots. Well...for one assaults and logi's rarely opt for more than 800 ehp. A high e-war suit is probably gonna knock that down to...about 500-600? a scout fully damped can get around 500-600ehp. so currently you can retain 70% of ehp for the meta in scanning...dampening..and precision? this contradicts the assertion that scouts need to be squishy to run the gambit on all three levels of e-war. this is working very poorly for balance indeed. Scouts need to retain the meta on dampening, but surrender the meta on precision and either share the meta, or surrender it on scan range. I have already expressed my thoughts on passive scanning...I think they need to find a way to turn it off. But if there's going to be a meta of passive scanning...it should be assaults or logi's. For PC, I run an AM Scout with 2 Precision Enhancers and 2 Range Extenders. For my last two lows, I choose between Damps or HP. I could run recon using another Scout, say Gallente or Caldari, but then I couldn't claim to have "competitive" scan precision so FC would probably pass me up, min / max and all. All that to say, I can't think of a single, competitive recon scout who can simultaneously run tank, precision and damps . Would it be too much to ask for you to cook one up for me? I ask because you say ... so currently you can retain 70% of ehp for the meta in scanning...dampening..and precision? ... and I'd like to learn precisely what you mean by this.
Vell0cet Vengeance Unbound RISE of LEGION 2565	Posted - 2014.11.18 02:24:00 - [114] - 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!
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound RISE of LEGION 2187	Posted - 2014.11.18 02:35:00 - [115] - Quote Vell0cet wrote: 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. Logis don't NEED any advantage in a combat situation. They can fit light weapons, but combat is their secondary role to support. I also disagree with removing shared passive scans. That will make the cloaky scout issue much worse. As attack power increases, EWAR should decrease. Sentinels have the worst EWAR for best attack power, scouts should have the best EWAR in exchange for crap attack power. Therefore, logis should have better EWAR than assaults, unless we want logos having better attack power than assaults? The idea is that these suits cannot function well independently, and need each other. The assault is vulnerable without the EWAR logo backing it up, and the logo needs the assault to defend it in a straight up fight. Proof that Rattati/CCP do listen to the playerbase.
Funkmaster Whale Whale Pod 2487	Posted - 2014.11.18 02:44:00 - [116] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: As attack power increases, EWAR should decrease. Sentinels have the worst EWAR for best attack power, scouts should have the best EWAR in exchange for crap attack power. Therefore, logis should have better EWAR than assaults, unless we want logos having better attack power than assaults? The idea is that these suits cannot function well independently, and need each other. The assault is vulnerable without the EWAR logo backing it up, and the logo needs the assault to defend it in a straight up fight. What? How do Scouts have crap attack power? You're an invisible all-seeing death machine. Sneaking up on someone that can't see you and blasting them in the back with a shotgun is pretty strong attack power. If anything, I think Assaults should have lowered scan profile and Logis should have lowered scan precision. For ex. give Assaults 40 dB scan profile and Logis 40 dB scan precision such that they could fit modules in those respective areas and actually have use for them. Right now fitting scan modules on any medium frame suit is awful compared to just bricking it. Follow me on Twitch.tv!
Alena Ventrallis Vengeance Unbound RISE of LEGION 2187	Posted - 2014.11.18 02:50:00 - [117] - Quote Funkmaster Whale wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: As attack power increases, EWAR should decrease. Sentinels have the worst EWAR for best attack power, scouts should have the best EWAR in exchange for crap attack power. Therefore, logis should have better EWAR than assaults, unless we want logos having better attack power than assaults? The idea is that these suits cannot function well independently, and need each other. The assault is vulnerable without the EWAR logo backing it up, and the logo needs the assault to defend it in a straight up fight. What? How do Scouts have crap attack power? You're an invisible all-seeing death machine. Sneaking up on someone that can't see you and blasting them in the back with a shotgun is pretty strong attack power. If anything, I think Assaults should have lowered scan profile and Logis should have lowered scan precision. For ex. give Assaults 40 dB scan profile and Logis 40 dB scan precision such that they could fit modules in those respective areas and actually have use for them. Right now fitting scan modules on any medium frame suit is awful compared to just bricking it. Bolded, italicized, and underlined the operative word you missed. Proof that Rattati/CCP do listen to the playerbase.
Vrain Matari Mikramurka Shock Troop Minmatar Republic 2308	Posted - 2014.11.18 03:38:00 - [118] - Quote Zaria Min Deir wrote: I-Shayz-I wrote: I love this game, and I have been running complex dampeners on my logi/assault...heck even my sentinel sometimes even if it is a waste of a module when you do the math. I want this idea to work, but the current system is so complicated that not everyone is willing to do the math on these things in order to figure out if certain modules are worth it to use. SO PLEASE RATTATI Can we finally get e-war stats added to the fitting screen? Because if doing a complete overhaul of e-war isn't an option then we at least need to have a way to look at numbers and create numbers in-game rather than sitting here calculating then every time we want to discuss e-war? Don't get me wrong, I love math, but I hate providing feedback on this subject simply because of this reason. This. So very much this. Also have to support this, it's a big issue for the NPE. If new player uptake/retention is an issue or better yet a goal, we have to address the large volume of hidden character information in DUST. These intricate and interesting systems we're developing can & will drive players away, but an interactive intuitive fitting screen can leverage those complex systems into a theorycrafting, OCD-exploiting player retention mechanic. It's a big ask right now, too big imo, iirc there were serious database issues in accessing some of the information we're asking for. But worth keeping in mind for the future. Re: the thread topic. Beautiful! Would like to see the base scan range of medium suits such that range extenders were a reasonable temptation. Love the dynamics that this mechanic introduces, but we always have to ask ourselves: 'What does this mean for the wallhackiness of DUST?' Imo wallhacking results in fatalities primarily at short ranges and it looks like under this mechanic strong ewar types will gain a differential advantage: i.e. the 10% increase in their prey's precision will not affect the dynamics of that situation. As with all things ewar, the lag in the tacnet takes a bit of the shine off what will one day be one of the crown jewels of DUST's gameplay: the information war. Lastly, we go through an awful lot of contortions to compensate for the scout's ability to brick tank. I would be tempted to make brick tanking work directly against the scout's strengths: mobility and scan profile. PSN: RationalSpark
One Eyed King Land of the BIind 5942	Posted - 2014.11.18 03:47:00 - [119] - Quote @ Zatara If you were to take 2 of the 3 EWAR aspects away from scouts, scanning and range, and give them to medium frames: 1) What would the Caldari (Range), and Amarr (Precision) get in return for their sacrifice? 2) What would the medium frames getting these added bonuses be giving up? Thunderbolt. verb and noun. "James thunderbolted in his pants." "I lit a bag of thunderbolt on fire on CCP's doorway"
Aeon Amadi Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 7248	Posted - 2014.11.18 04:09:00 - [120] - Quote Zatara Rought wrote: One Eyed King wrote: Zatara Rought wrote: Vitantur Nothus wrote: Zatara Rought wrote: I have a lot of red flags about providing scouts with advantages in all 3 aspects of e-war. Somewhat confused. Why can't squishy scouts be better at EWAR than 1000+ HP units? And if Zatara had his way, what would want Scouts to do in PC? Oh they absolutely should. Who insinuated otherwise? But when a squishy scout has the meta in all three aspects of e-war then you get to today in PC...where scouts are only not the most spammed thing in PC because when assaulting a point heavies ehp/hmg dps >cloak/re scouts. What should their purpose in PC be? You take scouts in 1.7 and add in the extra high or low and the equip slot...to say nothing of the cloak..and 1.7 woulda been awesome. I am by no means a PC player, but when cloaks are intimately tied to EWAR (all except for Gal), and you at the very least have a higher occurrence of Gal Logi's with Focused scanners and Amarr with max precision than pubs/FW, then you in essence force them to use the cloaks. No maybe there is some fluke where PC players aren't maxing their passive and active scanning abilities, I don't know. But it seems to me that in PC, of all places, because of the likelyhood to max out suit fittings, and having EWAR tied up in cloaks, that it is only natural that is what they would use. On paper gal logi's look really appetizing in attempting to play a role in detecting scouts.. In practice...they are useless at detecting scouts...and amarr aren't much better. The % of the time you're going to scan a scout in PC because you used a gallogi focused is lol...and then it's 5 seconds with a long cooldown. So yeah..all scouts in PC use 2 damps + cloak...what's your point? Unless facing an opponent who you presume is a noob (pubs)..there's very little reason -not- to run 2 damps and a cloak in all situations..unless you're purposefully brick tanking it. Edit: Yeah I don't know what exactly of my post you're responding to/contesting. Care to clarify? I really hate that team-scans were implemented, honestly. At first I was excited because I was like, "Yay, my Gal Logi bonus actually helps the team and not just the squad" and "Yay, more WP finally I can be like the other Logis" Annnnd then I come to find out everyone and their mother is just *****ing about being perma-scanned and we don't even get WP for it anyway. Soooo kill the team scans with fire, allow Gal Logis to actually be able to scan Scouts with a Focused (I still think it was the dumbest decision ever to make it to where all scouts could get underneath that) and then balance the passive scans accordingly. Gal Logi needs to be good at -something- and considering -no one uses the focused scanner anyway-..... Long-Term Roadmap This Player is Against Proto BPOs



Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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.