| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
xAckie
Ghost. Mob
469
   |
Posted - 2014.12.03 11:24:00 -
[1] - Quote
I have just seen the new spread sheet numbers. Scouts are still too far away from Assault/ Medium/ heavy frames in numbers.
I thought the whole point was to compress the numbers between suits to create use of EWAR modules. This does nothing.
What happened ? Why regress the numbers?
Scout complaints? I run scout (edit: and have assault suits) |
Finn Colman
Immortal Guides
Learning Alliance
78
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 16:20:00 -
[2] - Quote
Did one of us read the numbers wrong? or are we both just looking at different things altogether?
EDIT: Yes, I read the numbers wrong. You're right, they hardly make a difference at all.
A shadow clad in duct tape, waiting for the moment to strike.
|
Fox Gaden
Immortal Guides
Learning Alliance
5268
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 16:43:00 -
[3] - Quote
Once the system is introduced, then we can work on convincing Rattati to teak the numbers. Better to bring in a new system with numbers close to what we have already, and look at how that plays out, so we understand the unanticipated consequences of the system a little more before we start making major changes to the numbers.
In other words, you are probably right, but making major changes when the new system is deployed could lead to major OP or UP consequences that no one expected, so one step at a time is safer.
Hand/Eye coordination cannot be taught. For everything else there is the Learning Coalition.
|
zzZaXxx
The Exemplars
686
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 16:54:00 -
[4] - Quote
Good point. Implement the new system first and take stock. Then balance EWAR further. Hopefully that is the intent. |
CommanderBolt
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
2644
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 16:58:00 -
[5] - Quote
Are you crazy? Sentinels that have 25 ish dB scan before any skills or modules. That's damn good for a fat boy, granted its short range but I think you underestimate that.
Besides scouts are always going to have to be stealthier and more precise at scanning. That is what they are about.
"Also I think knives are a good idea, big f**k-off shiny ones"
"Guns for show, Knives for a pro"
MY LIFE FOR AIUR!
|
GLOBAL fils'de RAGE
Consolidated Dust
63
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 19:41:00 -
[6] - Quote
CommanderBolt wrote:Are you crazy? Sentinels that have 25 ish dB scan before any skills or modules. That's damn good for a fat boy, granted its short range but I think you underestimate that.
Besides scouts are always going to have to be stealthier and more precise at scanning. That is what they are about.
sentinel: speadsheet says 24.61db with lvl 5 and 4 enhancers.
and even if my ck0 had all highs fitted with precision, i'd still miss 2x dampened scouts?
assault's ewar should not have stacking penalties.
|
Vulpes Dolosus
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
2644
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 20:43:00 -
[7] - Quote
GLOBAL fils'de RAGE wrote:CommanderBolt wrote:Are you crazy? Sentinels that have 25 ish dB scan before any skills or modules. That's damn good for a fat boy, granted its short range but I think you underestimate that.
Besides scouts are always going to have to be stealthier and more precise at scanning. That is what they are about. sentinel: speadsheet says 24.61db with lvl 5 and 4 enhancers. and even if my ck0 had all highs fitted with precision, i'd still miss 2x dampened scouts? assault's ewar should not have stacking penalties.
You're wrong. Heavies get 25 base dB scan at their innermost circle. You're looking at the wrong spreadsheet (check the bottom and make sure you're on the "proposal" tab).
Dust is there! I was real!
Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
|
Ghost Kaisar
Fatal Absolution
General Tso's Alliance
8479
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 21:08:00 -
[8] - Quote
GLOBAL fils'de RAGE wrote:CommanderBolt wrote:Are you crazy? Sentinels that have 25 ish dB scan before any skills or modules. That's damn good for a fat boy, granted its short range but I think you underestimate that.
Besides scouts are always going to have to be stealthier and more precise at scanning. That is what they are about. sentinel: speadsheet says 24.61db with lvl 5 and 4 enhancers. and even if my ck0 had all highs fitted with precision, i'd still miss 2x dampened scouts? assault's ewar should not have stacking penalties.
At lvl 5 precision and no modules Sentinels have the following:
45 dB scans at 11.25m
58.5 dB scans at 22.5m
22.5 dB scans at 4.5m
Granted, such scan ranges are really freaking short. The real treat here is the logi who's going with him.
A logi can have 16dB scans within ~10m if he runs 1x Precision and 2x Range. This means his fatty benefits from this too.
10m isn't too large of a warning, but you WILL see that scout when he enters range. If you call it out to your heavy, he should be able to waste the scout. Heavies can turn on a dime when the need arises.
Bullet Hell and Duct-Tape? Count me in!
FA recruits get free officer BPO's. Enlist today. Must be a scrub to enter.
|
Jebus McKing
Jebus Hates Scans
1181
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 23:08:00 -
[9] - Quote
Right, scouts scan range effectively getting halved and Assaults being able to see Heavies on their radars from 30m away even without using modules really won't change anything. 
Also assaults are getting both a precision and profile buff IIRC. You can't get much closer to a scout.
You have been scanned
|
GLOBAL fils'de RAGE
Consolidated Dust
64
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 03:28:00 -
[10] - Quote
Vulpes Dolosus wrote:GLOBAL fils'de RAGE wrote:CommanderBolt wrote:Are you crazy? Sentinels that have 25 ish dB scan before any skills or modules. That's damn good for a fat boy, granted its short range but I think you underestimate that.
Besides scouts are always going to have to be stealthier and more precise at scanning. That is what they are about. sentinel: speadsheet says 24.61db with lvl 5 and 4 enhancers. and even if my ck0 had all highs fitted with precision, i'd still miss 2x dampened scouts? assault's ewar should not have stacking penalties. You're wrong. Heavies get 25 base dB scan at their innermost circle. You're looking at the wrong spreadsheet (check the bottom and make sure you're on the "proposal" tab).
not me, the numnutz that presented the numbers was wrong, fuq tabs!
|
|
|
jace silencerww
D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
102
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 04:28:00 -
[11] - Quote
lol well I have been going though the number and I really hate this EWAR update of CCP Rattati.
I bet scouts will see gall & amarr assault with 2-3 complex precision for highs (maybe 1 damage mod) and 1 complex range amp 1 complex armor rep with 3 complex armor plates. the assault will see a Minnie/Amarr scout with 3 damps at 7 meters (well he will see most scouts lol). so no more hiding on the box or behind it while cloaked so the scout could nova knife him. lol shotgunners are ok since most shots are at 10 meters.
think even the gall scout with 2 complex damps and a proto was unscannable but with this it will take 4 complex damps and a proto cloak. and that is to stay under an assault. well if I remember right there was a topic about how the cald assault was better at ewar this will change it to gall & amarr by a huge jump. |
Joel II X
Bacon with a bottle of Quafe
4873
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 04:46:00 -
[12] - Quote
Fox Gaden wrote:Once the system is introduced, then we can work on convincing Rattati to teak the numbers. Better to bring in a new system with numbers close to what we have already, and look at how that plays out, so we understand the unanticipated consequences of the system a little more before we start making major changes to the numbers.
In other words, you are probably right, but making major changes when the new system is deployed could lead to major OP or UP consequences that no one expected, so one step at a time is safer.
Agreed. |
iWanderer
PT-BR
21
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 19:33:00 -
[13] - Quote
Can someone please post here a link of the final numbers?
The was a sheet and a post and the two didn-Št seem the same and Rattati said he would clarify.
Has this been done? Please post if so... |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |