| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Clone D
1291
   |
Posted - 2015.01.07 15:32:00 -
[1] - Quote
Dropsuit Upgrades > Dropsuit Core Upgrades > Dropsuit Engineering > Bandwidth Management
+10% dropsuit bandwidth per level.
What do you think? |
Soraya Xel
Abandoned Privilege
Top Men.
5251
|
Posted - 2015.01.07 15:36:00 -
[2] - Quote
Definitely wouldn't make it just a passive bonus skill that would be just common sense for everyone to have. It'd be silly to undo the whole point of bandwidth by giving everyone more bandwidth all the time. If we saw a bandwidth skill, I'd rather see it coupled with an actual module you had to use to increase bandwidth, at the cost of fitting and a low slot or something like that.
CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
|
RayRay James
Titans of Phoenix
878
|
Posted - 2015.01.07 15:37:00 -
[3] - Quote
i think its no necessary.
You want to throw equipment from dusk till dawn, get a logi.
Scouts have, what, 6 bandwidth? at lvl 5 that takes you to 9.66, so another droplink? Naah, fit a logi |
Ripley Riley
Incorruptibles
6243
|
Posted - 2015.01.07 15:42:00 -
[4] - Quote
Soraya Xel wrote:Definitely wouldn't make it just a passive bonus skill that would be just common sense for everyone to have. It'd be silly to undo the whole point of bandwidth by giving everyone more bandwidth all the time. If we saw a bandwidth skill, I'd rather see it coupled with an actual module you had to use to increase bandwidth, at the cost of fitting and a low slot or something like that. No matter what slot you decide that module should occupy, it will **** off some races because of racial tanking slots.
Bandwidth is great as it is. No skills should increase it. I'm hesitant to increase it with modules of any type. Anything that could possibly return us to the days of logi tourism should be avoided like the plague.
Just call me Ripple. Ripple Riley.
@Ripley_Riley
|
DDx77
The Exemplars
RISE of LEGION
70
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 02:10:00 -
[5] - Quote
Soraya Xel wrote:Definitely wouldn't make it just a passive bonus skill that would be just common sense for everyone to have. It'd be silly to undo the whole point of bandwidth by giving everyone more bandwidth all the time. If we saw a bandwidth skill, I'd rather see it coupled with an actual module you had to use to increase bandwidth, at the cost of fitting and a low slot or something like that.
.....,just delete bandwidth and put a limit on uplinks and nanohive pls.
I am doing many many logi things without being a logi
Tourist logi for life XD |
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4313
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 02:22:00 -
[6] - Quote
I agree with Xel, I don't see the point in adding bandwidth just to effectively reverse it with a skill.
If it was a specific bonus for a particular suit....maybe? But certainly not for everyone, it would completely defeat the purpose.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Zindorak
Nyain Chan
General Tso's Alliance
1588
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 02:42:00 -
[7] - Quote
I think bandwidth was a pointless idea to begin with. It just limits potential
Pokemon master and Tekken Lord
Give me da iskiez
Gk0 Scout yay :)
|
ishtellian
SAM-MIK
General Tso's Alliance
88
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 02:50:00 -
[8] - Quote
Maybe have a bandwidth module for high slots and low, one increases bandwidth and one decreases bandwidth on equipment.
I guess its kinda pointless but just throwing ideas around =/
My Heavy Never Dies.
Logibro In training.
|
Clone D
1295
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 02:52:00 -
[9] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:I agree with Xel, I don't see the point in adding bandwidth just to effectively reverse it with a skill.
If it was a specific bonus for a particular suit....maybe? But certainly not for everyone, it would completely defeat the purpose.
It wouldn't reverse it completely. It just adds some wiggle room. Not very much either. |
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4313
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 02:55:00 -
[10] - Quote
Clone D wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:I agree with Xel, I don't see the point in adding bandwidth just to effectively reverse it with a skill.
If it was a specific bonus for a particular suit....maybe? But certainly not for everyone, it would completely defeat the purpose. It wouldn't reverse it completely. It just adds some wiggle room. Not very much either.
If you want to deploy more equipment, use a suit that is designed to deploy more equipment. The system is working exactly as intended.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
|
|
Clone D
1295
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 02:58:00 -
[11] - Quote
Soraya Xel wrote:It'd be silly to undo the whole point of bandwidth by giving everyone more bandwidth all the time.
You're going to extremes. It wouldn't undo the whole point. It would give us a margin of room to contribute to the team in addition to performing the role of the dropsuit that we are in.
Apparently everyone is expected to contribute by deploying uplinks and PEs, when those are really things best left to the logi role. We need a little extra bandwidth to perform our role in addition to helping out the logis.
What about +1 dropsuit BW per level. |
ADAM-OF-EVE
Dead Man's Game
RUST415
1875
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 03:00:00 -
[12] - Quote
Zindorak wrote:I think bandwidth was a pointless idea to begin with. It just limits potential
doesn't limit my potential as a logistics. i actually use up more equipment now than i used to. i have been using up more proto gear than i ever did before because in the past even my standard gear wasn't being used up.
whats 50% bandwidth added to a logi with 36BW. sure suits could be adjusted but adjusting the suits bw allowance would mean that all including the lowest suits would have to be adjusted meaning those on the lower suits would have so little bw that it would be unable to deploy equipment until they train the skill.
All Hail Legion
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4313
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 03:01:00 -
[13] - Quote
Clone D wrote:Soraya Xel wrote:It'd be silly to undo the whole point of bandwidth by giving everyone more bandwidth all the time. You're going to extremes. It wouldn't undo the whole point. It would give us a margin of room to contribute to the team in addition to performing the role of the dropsuit that we are in. Apparently everyone is expected to contribute by deploying uplinks and PEs, when those are really things best left to the logi role. We need a little extra bandwidth to perform our role in addition to helping out the logis. What about +1 dropsuit BW per level?
Your missing the point. If there is a need for more equipment on the field, then people need to be fielding more Logistics suits. The whole point of bandwidth was to make Logistics more essential on the battlefield.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Clone D
1295
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 03:04:00 -
[14] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Clone D wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:I agree with Xel, I don't see the point in adding bandwidth just to effectively reverse it with a skill.
If it was a specific bonus for a particular suit....maybe? But certainly not for everyone, it would completely defeat the purpose. It wouldn't reverse it completely. It just adds some wiggle room. Not very much either. If you want to deploy more equipment, use a suit that is designed to deploy more equipment. The system is working exactly as intended.
Apparently the community consensus is that everyone is expected to help logis perform their role. For example, people say that assaults should carry an uplink instead of equipment that will actually boost their ability to perform their own role better, like an RE or hive.
If everyone is expected to help logis by deploying equipment, then all non logi roles need their BW pimped a little bit in order to do their role + a little bit of team contribution. |
Clone D
1295
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 03:07:00 -
[15] - Quote
ADAM-OF-EVE wrote:Zindorak wrote:I think bandwidth was a pointless idea to begin with. It just limits potential doesn't limit my potential as a logistics. i actually use up more equipment now than i used to. i have been using up more proto gear than i ever did before because in the past even my standard gear wasn't being used up. whats 50% bandwidth added to a logi with 36BW. sure suits could be adjusted but adjusting the suits bw allowance would mean that all including the lowest suits would have to be adjusted meaning those on the lower suits would have so little bw that it would be unable to deploy equipment until they train the skill.
No, the idea is that current BW constraints on the various suits are already too low. This would give mercs a little breathing room.
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4313
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 03:19:00 -
[16] - Quote
Clone D wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Clone D wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:I agree with Xel, I don't see the point in adding bandwidth just to effectively reverse it with a skill.
If it was a specific bonus for a particular suit....maybe? But certainly not for everyone, it would completely defeat the purpose. It wouldn't reverse it completely. It just adds some wiggle room. Not very much either. If you want to deploy more equipment, use a suit that is designed to deploy more equipment. The system is working exactly as intended. Apparently the community consensus is that everyone is expected to help logis perform their role. For example, people say that assaults should carry an uplink instead of equipment that will actually boost their ability to perform their own role better, like an RE or hive. If everyone is expected to help logis by deploying equipment, then all non logi roles need their BW pimped a little bit in order to do their role + a little bit of team contribution.
You're right, you have limited support abilities, but giving you more just devalues the Logi's importance.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Clone D
1295
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 03:26:00 -
[17] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Clone D wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Clone D wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:I agree with Xel, I don't see the point in adding bandwidth just to effectively reverse it with a skill.
If it was a specific bonus for a particular suit....maybe? But certainly not for everyone, it would completely defeat the purpose. It wouldn't reverse it completely. It just adds some wiggle room. Not very much either. If you want to deploy more equipment, use a suit that is designed to deploy more equipment. The system is working exactly as intended. Apparently the community consensus is that everyone is expected to help logis perform their role. For example, people say that assaults should carry an uplink instead of equipment that will actually boost their ability to perform their own role better, like an RE or hive. If everyone is expected to help logis by deploying equipment, then all non logi roles need their BW pimped a little bit in order to do their role + a little bit of team contribution. You're right, you have limited support abilities, but giving you more just devalues the Logi's importance.
It's not a lot more. Just need enough to deploy 1 uplink in addition to performing the role of the dropsuit I am in. |
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4313
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 04:37:00 -
[18] - Quote
Then you wouldn't need a logi for uplinks  Working as intended
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Everything Dies
Same Dung Different Year
1168
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 13:34:00 -
[19] - Quote
Easy solution:
Bandwidth booster equipment. I'm currently a week or so away from unlocking the proto Gal logi suit. I'm doing it because I want the suit bonus and not for the fourth equipment slot. Hell, I can't even put three types of equipment on my advanced suit, so why would I need a fourth slot? I'm able to place two advanced uplinks (which I can use with any non-heavy suit) in addition to two Allotek nanohives if needed. That's it. Two equipment slots used with only one of them utilizing proto gear.
At this point, the only reason I utilize my logi build is for a triple-scanning defensive build. Everything else can be done by other suits (assault + rep tool = better survivability and easy WP, scout + rep tool + injector = speedier, hard-to-detect medic with similar HP to a logi.)
Bandwidth, as it currently stands, has only further relegated the logi class to a niche portion of the userbase.
Mike Patton is the greatest singer in music. Proof
|
Jaysyn Larrisen
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
1452
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 15:57:00 -
[20] - Quote
Everything Dies wrote:Easy solution:
Bandwidth booster equipment. I'm currently a week or so away from unlocking the proto Gal logi suit. I'm doing it because I want the suit bonus and not for the fourth equipment slot. Hell, I can't even put three types of equipment on my advanced suit, so why would I need a fourth slot? I'm able to place two advanced uplinks (which I can use with any non-heavy suit) in addition to two Allotek nanohives if needed. That's it. Two equipment slots used with only one of them utilizing proto gear.
At this point, the only reason I utilize my logi build is for a triple-scanning defensive build. Everything else can be done by other suits (assault + rep tool = better survivability and easy WP, scout + rep tool + injector = speedier, hard-to-detect medic with similar HP to a logi.)
Bandwidth, as it currently stands, has only further relegated the logi class to a niche portion of the userbase.
You are making a good argument as to why the Logi Suits need a buff period.
"Endless money forms the sinews of War." - Cicero
Skype: jaysyn.larrisen
Twitter: @JaysynLarrisen
|
|
|
Clone D
1298
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 16:00:00 -
[21] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Then you wouldn't need a logi for uplinks Working as intended
Logis have stated time and time again that they need help deploying equipment from other roles. For example, assaults equip an uplink.
If logis need help from other roles to deploy equipment, then other roles need a small buffer of bw to assist logis in their team support. |
el OPERATOR
Capital Acquisitions LLC
Bad Intention
712
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 19:27:00 -
[22] - Quote
Clone D wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Then you wouldn't need a logi for uplinks Working as intended Logis have stated time and time again that they need help deploying equipment from other roles. For example, assaults equip an uplink. If logis need help from other roles to deploy equipment, then other roles need a small buffer of bw to assist logis in their team support.
Citations, please.
Open-Beta Vet.
Drunk Night Tree Burner.
This is my Main and Original.
DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
|
ADAM-OF-EVE
Dead Man's Game
RUST415
1879
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 20:10:00 -
[23] - Quote
Clone D wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Then you wouldn't need a logi for uplinks Working as intended Logis have stated time and time again that they need help deploying equipment from other roles. For example, assaults equip an uplink. If logis need help from other roles to deploy equipment, then other roles need a small buffer of bw to assist logis in their team support.
we don't need any help. i drop uplinks for the whole team when i'm there. if there is no logistics like me on your team its not a problem with logistics. its a problem with not having someone filling the role. the simple answer to this is fill the role to maximum effect by using a logistics or fill it in a basic capacity using your current setup. what is not the answer is allowing players to fill the role with every suit. dropping the odd piece of equipment is not role breaking.
All Hail Legion
|
Clone D
1298
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 20:12:00 -
[24] - Quote
el OPERATOR wrote:Clone D wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Then you wouldn't need a logi for uplinks Working as intended Logis have stated time and time again that they need help deploying equipment from other roles. For example, assaults equip an uplink. If logis need help from other roles to deploy equipment, then other roles need a small buffer of bw to assist logis in their team support. Citations, please. edit: include the contextual text also please, to better verify the quote as genuine and not just some Logi telling an Aassault to get his own damn link because the Logi is tired of hearing the crying.
Well, I gathered this from one thread. Imagine how much more we could find if we sorted through the forums:
put uplinks on scouts and assaults
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2559694#post2559694
put uplink on assault
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2558369#post2558369
assault put uplink, not hives
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2558586#post2558586
carry uplinks on your assault
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2558647#post2558647
scouts run uplinks
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2558744#post2558744
if you need uplinks do it yourself
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2558397#post2558397
use uplinks, not REs
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2558549#post2558549
others can carry equipment besides logis
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2558562#post2558562
logis can't do everything. Not enough logis. Everyone must pitch in.
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2559362#post2559362
There aren't enough logis
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2559511#post2559511
not enough people playing logi
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2559928#post2559928
|
Clone D
1298
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 20:15:00 -
[25] - Quote
ADAM-OF-EVE wrote:Clone D wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Then you wouldn't need a logi for uplinks Working as intended Logis have stated time and time again that they need help deploying equipment from other roles. For example, assaults equip an uplink. If logis need help from other roles to deploy equipment, then other roles need a small buffer of bw to assist logis in their team support. we don't need any help. i drop uplinks for the whole team when i'm there. if there is no logistics like me on your team its not a problem with logistics. its a problem with not having someone filling the role. the simple answer to this is fill the role to maximum effect by using a logistics or fill it in a basic capacity using your current setup. what is not the answer is allowing players to fill the role with every suit. dropping the odd piece of equipment is not role breaking.
That would force me to spec into logi and all of the equipment. If there aren't enough logis in the current meta, then why did we implement bandwidth so rigidly up front. We needed a transitional period of relaxed bandwidth until more peeps started playing logis.
I don't want to play logi. I want to play assault. I don't make you play assault for the whole match do I?
The problem is not playing logi. It's getting stuck in that boring role for the rest of the match. |
ADAM-OF-EVE
Dead Man's Game
RUST415
1881
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 21:10:00 -
[26] - Quote
Clone D wrote:ADAM-OF-EVE wrote:Clone D wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Then you wouldn't need a logi for uplinks Working as intended Logis have stated time and time again that they need help deploying equipment from other roles. For example, assaults equip an uplink. If logis need help from other roles to deploy equipment, then other roles need a small buffer of bw to assist logis in their team support. we don't need any help. i drop uplinks for the whole team when i'm there. if there is no logistics like me on your team its not a problem with logistics. its a problem with not having someone filling the role. the simple answer to this is fill the role to maximum effect by using a logistics or fill it in a basic capacity using your current setup. what is not the answer is allowing players to fill the role with every suit. dropping the odd piece of equipment is not role breaking. That would force me to spec into logi and all of the equipment. If there aren't enough logis in the current meta, then why did we implement bandwidth so rigidly up front. We needed a transitional period of relaxed bandwidth until more peeps started playing logis. I don't want to play logi. I want to play assault. I don't make you play assault for the whole match do I? The problem is not playing logi. It's getting stuck in that boring role for the rest of the match.
you don't have to be a logi to drop uplinks. you do not have to drop 9 uplinks to be able to support the team. all it takes is 1 uplink. that is all you need to drop to be effective at bringing teammates in.
as for there not being enough logistics. we lost most of our logistics due assault getting our role nerfed to almost uselessness. while you had our defences and offencive capabilities nerfed you continued to spam equipment which was the only thing we had left. now you have been stopped from doing that you cry foul and demand more from something that is nothing to do you. equipment is ours. there should be no competition just like there is no competition between logistics and killers
All Hail Legion
|
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
6224
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 21:16:00 -
[27] - Quote
Clone D wrote:Dropsuit Upgrades > Dropsuit Core Upgrades > Dropsuit Engineering > Bandwidth Management
+10% dropsuit bandwidth per level.
OR
+ 1 dropsuit bandwidth per level.
What do you think?
Background:
Apparently the community consensus is that everyone is expected to help logis perform their role. For example, people say that assaults should carry an uplink instead of equipment that will actually boost their ability to perform their own role better, like an RE or hive.
If everyone is expected to help logis by deploying equipment, then all non logi roles need their BW pimped a little bit in order to do their role + a little bit of team contribution.
so when are you going to quit sh*tting up the forums with new "I hate bandwidth" threads every couple hours?
EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
|
Clone D
1298
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 21:31:00 -
[28] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:Clone D wrote:Dropsuit Upgrades > Dropsuit Core Upgrades > Dropsuit Engineering > Bandwidth Management
+10% dropsuit bandwidth per level.
OR
+ 1 dropsuit bandwidth per level.
What do you think?
Background:
Apparently the community consensus is that everyone is expected to help logis perform their role. For example, people say that assaults should carry an uplink instead of equipment that will actually boost their ability to perform their own role better, like an RE or hive.
If everyone is expected to help logis by deploying equipment, then all non logi roles need their BW pimped a little bit in order to do their role + a little bit of team contribution. so when are you going to quit sh*tting up the forums with new "I hate bandwidth" threads every couple hours?
If you take the time to read my entries, then you will see that I do not hate bandwidth, but I do advocate a relaxed bandwidth during the transitional period until we see an influx of logis, at which time the transition will be over.
|
Clone D
1298
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 21:34:00 -
[29] - Quote
ADAM-OF-EVE wrote:you don't have to be a logi to drop uplinks. you do not have to drop 9 uplinks to be able to support the team. all it takes is 1 uplink. that is all you need to drop to be effective at bringing teammates in.
The idea here, is that I would rather carry an RE, but because there are not enough logis on the field, I have to carry an uplink. That trade off is due to lack of support.
I translate the lack of support to the transitional period we are now in when people will slowly migrate and spec into the logi role.
During this period it would be nice to have maybe an additional 4bw cushion for each role in order to help out the extinct logi population.
That is all I'm saying here.
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4324
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 21:35:00 -
[30] - Quote
Clone D wrote:
If you take the time to read my entries, then you will see that I do not hate bandwidth, but I do advocate a relaxed bandwidth during the transitional period until we see an influx of logis, at which time the transition will be over.
Why would allowing non-logis to better perform the support role, encourage people to spec into the support role more than they currently are?
If you want people to play Logistics, then buff Logistics. Plain and simple.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
|
|
Clone D
1298
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 21:39:00 -
[31] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Clone D wrote:
If you take the time to read my entries, then you will see that I do not hate bandwidth, but I do advocate a relaxed bandwidth during the transitional period until we see an influx of logis, at which time the transition will be over.
Why would allowing non-logis to better perform the support role, encourage people to spec into the support role more than they currently are? If you want people to play Logistics, then buff Logistics. Plain and simple.
Surely an additional 4 or 5 bw per dropsuit does not constitue a supplanting of the support role. But it is enough to let everyone contribute to the support effort without having to change roles completely. |
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4325
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 21:46:00 -
[32] - Quote
Clone D wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Clone D wrote:
If you take the time to read my entries, then you will see that I do not hate bandwidth, but I do advocate a relaxed bandwidth during the transitional period until we see an influx of logis, at which time the transition will be over.
Why would allowing non-logis to better perform the support role, encourage people to spec into the support role more than they currently are? If you want people to play Logistics, then buff Logistics. Plain and simple. Surely an additional 4 or 5 bw per dropsuit does not constitue a supplanting of the support role. But it is enough to let everyone contribute to the support effort without having to change roles completely.
Ok lets break this down.
Bandwidth makes Logistics more essential.
You're complaining there are not enough logistics on the field
Because they're so essential, you feel you need to help more in the support role to make up for lack of Logistics.
So if there were more Logistics, this would fix the issue, as you would no longer feel the need to assist in the Support role.
That makes a lot of sense.
What doesn't make sense is your solution.
You want to make Logistics *less* important, so they're less essential, so the lack of Logistics is less detrimental to the gameplay.
This will *not* encourage people to play Logistics at all, in fact it will discourage them more than they already are, because now the need for logistics is lessened.
This is bad.
So if you true goal is to have more Logistics on the field, then buff to suit so that people are more encouraged to actually play it. That is how you fix the problem.
What you should *really* be advocating for, if you want flexibility, is a proper overhaul of the Frame suits so that they can perform the middleground you seem to want so you can play both roles (to a weaker extent) at the same time.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
6227
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 21:47:00 -
[33] - Quote
Clone D wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Clone D wrote:
If you take the time to read my entries, then you will see that I do not hate bandwidth, but I do advocate a relaxed bandwidth during the transitional period until we see an influx of logis, at which time the transition will be over.
Why would allowing non-logis to better perform the support role, encourage people to spec into the support role more than they currently are? If you want people to play Logistics, then buff Logistics. Plain and simple. Surely an additional 4 or 5 bw per dropsuit does not constitue a supplanting of the support role. But it is enough to let everyone contribute to the support effort without having to change roles completely.
and lets you giggle madly while taking your lack of any need for logistics support to the bank.
Please do tell us how you think none of us can do basic arithmetic some more.
Logis get the goods.
Everyone else can f*ckoff.
No, I don't play logi unless I'm doing things that make spkr4thedead and godin mad with cheap jeeps.
EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
|
Clone D
1298
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 22:03:00 -
[34] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Clone D wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Clone D wrote:
If you take the time to read my entries, then you will see that I do not hate bandwidth, but I do advocate a relaxed bandwidth during the transitional period until we see an influx of logis, at which time the transition will be over.
Why would allowing non-logis to better perform the support role, encourage people to spec into the support role more than they currently are? If you want people to play Logistics, then buff Logistics. Plain and simple. Surely an additional 4 or 5 bw per dropsuit does not constitue a supplanting of the support role. But it is enough to let everyone contribute to the support effort without having to change roles completely. Ok lets break this down. Bandwidth makes Logistics more essential. You're complaining there are not enough logistics on the field Because they're so essential, you feel you need to help more in the support role to make up for lack of Logistics. So if there were more Logistics, this would fix the issue, as you would no longer feel the need to assist in the Support role. That makes a lot of sense. What doesn't make sense is your solution. You want to make Logistics *less* important, so they're less essential, so the lack of Logistics is less detrimental to the gameplay. This will *not* encourage people to play Logistics at all, in fact it will discourage them more than they already are, because now the need for logistics is lessened. This is bad. So if you true goal is to have more Logistics on the field, then buff to suit so that people are more encouraged to actually play it. That is how you fix the problem. What you should *really* be advocating for, if you want flexibility, is a proper overhaul of the Frame suits so that they can perform the middleground you seem to want so you can play both roles (to a weaker extent) at the same time.
My goal is not to have more logistics on the field. It is to make the game fun and stop using governance and policy to enforce public behavior. If nobody wants to be a logi, then it is self evident in the meta. Open your eyes to what is happening.
I understand that you have an ideal, but you are trying to force feed it to the community, when the players' behavior clearly shows how they feel and how they want to play.
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4325
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 22:06:00 -
[35] - Quote
Clone D wrote:My goal is not to have more logistics on the field. It is to make the game fun and stop using governance and policy to enforce public behavior. If nobody wants to be a logi, then it is self evident in the meta. Open your eyes to what is happening.
I understand that you have an ideal, but you are trying to force feed it to the community, when the players' behavior clearly shows how they feel and how they want to play.
Have you stopped to consider why the Logi player count is low? And I'm not talking about the derpy WP farmers, I'm talking about *real* Logistics. Why do you think there are so few of them?
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Clone D
1298
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 22:17:00 -
[36] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Clone D wrote:My goal is not to have more logistics on the field. It is to make the game fun and stop using governance and policy to enforce public behavior. If nobody wants to be a logi, then it is self evident in the meta. Open your eyes to what is happening.
I understand that you have an ideal, but you are trying to force feed it to the community, when the players' behavior clearly shows how they feel and how they want to play.
Have you stopped to consider why the Logi player count is low? And I'm not talking about the derpy WP farmers, I'm talking about *real* Logistics. Why do you think there are so few of them?
Because people don't want to logi for various reasons. If it were family feud, then I'd guess the #1 answer is .... boredom. |
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4325
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 22:36:00 -
[37] - Quote
Clone D wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Clone D wrote:My goal is not to have more logistics on the field. It is to make the game fun and stop using governance and policy to enforce public behavior. If nobody wants to be a logi, then it is self evident in the meta. Open your eyes to what is happening.
I understand that you have an ideal, but you are trying to force feed it to the community, when the players' behavior clearly shows how they feel and how they want to play.
Have you stopped to consider why the Logi player count is low? And I'm not talking about the derpy WP farmers, I'm talking about *real* Logistics. Why do you think there are so few of them? Because people don't want to logi for various reasons. If it were family feud, then I'd guess the #1 answer is .... boredom. It is a first person shooter, not a first person healer.
That may the reason for you, but I can assure you that is not the reason for most people. The main reason people are discouraged from playing Logistics is that not only is by far the most expensive class (Both in ISK and SP) but it is also the weakest combat frame in the game. It has bad speed, bad stamina, bad HP, and extremely limited bonuses. High level Logi suits run upwards over 250k ISK, and die faster than anything else in the game.
I'm not saying you should balance around ISK cost, but who the hell is going to want to get in a stumpy weak and slow suit that's going to cost them an arm and a leg and die faster than another role which can still get most of the job done with a suit which is FAR more survivable. You can't play the Support Role if you're dead, no matter how good your gear is, so why would I want to run Logistics? If I die too easily, then I can't play the support role at all. So people realized it was better to just play a non-logi role because it was better to run a gimped support fit on a better class of suit and survive, rather than run a full support fit, die, and be useless.
The fact that you can't even recognize the true problem behind the lack of Logistics, and insist on simply buffing your own class, shows that what you're more interested in cramming your own playstyle down everyone's throat rather that actually fixing a serious problem in the game. So don't sit there and spew crap like "This is what the players want so we should just make the class I don't play be less important" as some lame excuse.
It's clear you have no idea what you're talking
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Clone D
1298
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 22:54:00 -
[38] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Clone D wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Clone D wrote:My goal is not to have more logistics on the field. It is to make the game fun and stop using governance and policy to enforce public behavior. If nobody wants to be a logi, then it is self evident in the meta. Open your eyes to what is happening.
I understand that you have an ideal, but you are trying to force feed it to the community, when the players' behavior clearly shows how they feel and how they want to play.
Have you stopped to consider why the Logi player count is low? And I'm not talking about the derpy WP farmers, I'm talking about *real* Logistics. Why do you think there are so few of them? Because people don't want to logi for various reasons. If it were family feud, then I'd guess the #1 answer is .... boredom. It is a first person shooter, not a first person healer. That may the reason for you, but I can assure you that is not the reason for most people. The main reason people are discouraged from playing Logistics is that not only is by far the most expensive class (Both in ISK and SP) but it is also the weakest combat frame in the game. It has bad speed, bad stamina, bad HP, and extremely limited bonuses. High level Logi suits run upwards over 250k ISK, and die faster than anything else in the game. I'm not saying you should balance around ISK cost, but who the hell is going to want to get in a stumpy weak and slow suit that's going to cost them an arm and a leg and die faster than another role which can still get most of the job done with a suit which is FAR more survivable. You can't play the Support Role if you're dead, no matter how good your gear is, so why would I want to run Logistics? If I die too easily, then I can't play the support role at all. So people realized it was better to just play a non-logi role because it was better to run a gimped support fit on a better class of suit and survive, rather than run a full support fit, die, and be useless. The fact that you can't even recognize the true problem behind the lack of Logistics, and insist on simply buffing your own class, shows that what you're more interested in cramming your own playstyle down everyone's throat rather that actually fixing a serious problem in the game. So don't sit there and spew crap like "This is what the players want so we should just make the class I don't play be less important" as some lame excuse. It's clear you have no idea what you're talking
If people wanted to play logistics, then they would have been doing it all along, regardless of the drawbacks. There is a thing called the defiant power of the human spirit. It basically drives this game. When something challenges us, we strive hard to overcome it.
We would have to poll people as to why they have not been playing logi all of this time. Neither you nor I know the real reason until we get some data to work with.
When they nerfed the flaylock, a small group of loyalists continued to tote it as their sidearm. Those are the people who wanted to use flaylocks because they were flaylocks.
The rest of the flaylock users migrated elsewhere because they wanted something more effective to get what they wanted out of the game.
People play this game for myriad reasons. Policies like bandwidth, especially enforced so strictly, assert that the design is more important than the fun of the player base.
When the mob fotm club doesn't even want to play logi, even after it has been chosen as the golden child of 1.10, then that's gotta tell ya something. Nobody wants to do it because it doesn't have the appeal of the other roles.
So then people say, buff logis. Instead of letting it be what it is, you're trying to mashup the logi role with the shooter role and say, "hey everybody it's not so bad! Get in here and try this out now." But you had to add the functionality of the other roles to the logi role. The logi role alone was not attractive nor desirable. |
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4327
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 23:02:00 -
[39] - Quote
Clone D wrote:
If people wanted to play logistics, then they would have been doing it all along, regardless of the drawbacks. There is a thing called the defiant power of the human spirit. It basically drives this game. When something challenges us, we strive hard to overcome it.
We would have to poll people as to why they have not been playing logi all of this time. Neither you nor I know the real reason until we get some data to work with.
When they nerfed the flaylock, a small group of loyalists continued to tote it as their sidearm. Those are the people who wanted to use flaylocks because they were flaylocks.
The rest of the flaylock users migrated elsewhere because they wanted something more effective to get what they wanted out of the game.
People play this game for myriad reasons. Policies like bandwidth, especially enforced so strictly, assert that the design is more important than the fun of the player base.
When the mob fotm club doesn't even want to play logi, even after it has been chosen as the golden child of 1.10, then that's gotta tell ya something. Nobody wants to do it because it doesn't have the appeal of the other roles.
So then people say, buff logis. Instead of letting it be what it is, you're trying to mashup the logi role with the shooter role and say, "hey everybody it's not so bad! Get in here and try this out now." But you had to add the functionality of the other roles to the logi role. The logi role alone was not attractive nor desirable.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0
I'm out.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
el OPERATOR
Capital Acquisitions LLC
Bad Intention
716
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 23:07:00 -
[40] - Quote
LOL
No, dude.
Just No.
Open-Beta Vet.
Drunk Night Tree Burner.
This is my Main and Original.
DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
|
|
|
Clone D
1298
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 23:26:00 -
[41] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Clone D wrote:
If people wanted to play logistics, then they would have been doing it all along, regardless of the drawbacks. There is a thing called the defiant power of the human spirit. It basically drives this game. When something challenges us, we strive hard to overcome it.
We would have to poll people as to why they have not been playing logi all of this time. Neither you nor I know the real reason until we get some data to work with.
When they nerfed the flaylock, a small group of loyalists continued to tote it as their sidearm. Those are the people who wanted to use flaylocks because they were flaylocks.
The rest of the flaylock users migrated elsewhere because they wanted something more effective to get what they wanted out of the game.
People play this game for myriad reasons. Policies like bandwidth, especially enforced so strictly, assert that the design is more important than the fun of the player base.
When the mob fotm club doesn't even want to play logi, even after it has been chosen as the golden child of 1.10, then that's gotta tell ya something. Nobody wants to do it because it doesn't have the appeal of the other roles.
So then people say, buff logis. Instead of letting it be what it is, you're trying to mashup the logi role with the shooter role and say, "hey everybody it's not so bad! Get in here and try this out now." But you had to add the functionality of the other roles to the logi role. The logi role alone was not attractive nor desirable.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0I'm out.
You can post insults all you want. It doesn't change the fact that there are people in the world who think differently than you. You'll have to learn to live with them. |
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
6239
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 06:41:00 -
[42] - Quote
And the majority of us seem to think you are wrong and need to quit sh*tting up the forums.
EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
|
Clone D
1298
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 06:44:00 -
[43] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:And the majority of us seem to think you are wrong and need to quit sh*tting up the forums.
I don't care how many people think that I'm wrong. It is okay to have a different point of view and express my experience with the game.
If you don't like a thread, then either politely express your opposition or don't bump it by responding. |
Breakin Stuff
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
6239
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 08:43:00 -
[44] - Quote
Clone D wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:And the majority of us seem to think you are wrong and need to quit sh*tting up the forums. I don't care how many people think that I'm wrong. It is okay to have a different point of view and express my experience with the game. If you don't like a thread, then either politely express your opposition or don't bump it by responding.
It's not that you're making a thread. It's making ten of them in rapid succession that is bloody juvenile.
EVE Online is what you get when engineers attempt to create "fun" without consulting someone who comprehends the word.
|
Clone D
1298
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 13:03:00 -
[45] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:Clone D wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:And the majority of us seem to think you are wrong and need to quit sh*tting up the forums. I don't care how many people think that I'm wrong. It is okay to have a different point of view and express my experience with the game. If you don't like a thread, then either politely express your opposition or don't bump it by responding. It's not that you're making a thread. It's making ten of them in rapid succession that is bloody juvenile.
They are about distinct issues. It's not my fault that the mob cannot stay on topic and makes every thread end up sounding like another one.
|
Skullmiser Vulcansu
233
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 14:22:00 -
[46] - Quote
I still play logistics. It's my only prototype suit. I think that there would be more uplinks around if Logistics suits were faster, or could otherwise better survive the trip to any objective. I'm not sure that a vehicle would solve that problem.
I think that all of the other roles should carry nanite injectors, because people in logistics suits are way more likely to be killed than any other mercenary. I am almost never defended by team mates, so I usually end up killing people myself with my sidearm.
If this game was fun, I wouldn't be playing it.
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4334
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 16:39:00 -
[47] - Quote
Clone D wrote:
People play this game for myriad reasons. Policies like bandwidth, especially enforced so strictly, assert that the design is more important than the fun of the player base.
So are you against 'strict Policies' like "Only Commandos get 2 Light Weapons" "Only Heavies & Sentinels get Heavy Weapons" "Sentinels Can't use Equipment" "Only Scouts Can readily fit Cloaks"? Because you're clearly against "Only Logistics can readily fit uplinks". They're all 'strict policies' to prevent roles from doing certain things, so surely you must be against all of them, right?
Clone D wrote:
When the mob fotm club doesn't even want to play logi, even after it has been chosen as the golden child of 1.10, then that's gotta tell ya something. Nobody wants to do it because it doesn't have the appeal of the other roles.
Chosen by who? People who think Bandwidth was a Buff to Logistics are sadly confused. Bandwidth did not in any way make Logistics better at what it does in any way. All it did was make other roles less effective in faking the Logistics role, which make the Logistics more necessary, but It did not make them any better.
I'm not sure how long you've been playing, I don't want to bother looking up your background history, but Logistics used to be a commonly played class because it *was* fun and desiriable. But it got nerfed over and over, all out of this irrational notion that they should be worthless in a fight. It's not that the Support role is not desirable, it's because dying constantly because your suit is so ******, is not fun. Literally throwing away more ISK more often than everyone else, is not fun.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Clone D
1299
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 16:55:00 -
[48] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Clone D wrote:
People play this game for myriad reasons. Policies like bandwidth, especially enforced so strictly, assert that the design is more important than the fun of the player base.
So are you against 'strict Policies' like "Only Commandos get 2 Light Weapons" "Only Heavies & Sentinels get Heavy Weapons" "Sentinels Can't use Equipment" "Only Scouts Can readily fit Cloaks"? Because you're clearly against "Only Logistics can readily fit uplinks". They're all 'strict policies' to prevent roles from doing certain things, so surely you must be against all of them, right?
Granting limitations to a dropsuit defines the dropsuit. The problem is when bandwidth is so tight that other roles can not perform a minimal amount of team support in addition to the demands of their role. There will be times when no logis are around. During those times, everyone must do their part. My recommendation to slightly loosen bandwidth allows everyone to do their minor support contribution in addition to their chosen role.
Pokey Dravon wrote:Clone D wrote:When the mob fotm club doesn't even want to play logi, even after it has been chosen as the golden child of 1.10, then that's gotta tell ya something. Nobody wants to do it because it doesn't have the appeal of the other roles.
Chosen by who? People who think Bandwidth was a Buff to Logistics are sadly confused. Bandwidth did not in any way make Logistics better at what it does in any way. All it did was make other roles less effective in faking the Logistics role, which make the Logistics more necessary, but It did not make them any better.
There needs to be a disambiguation between "faking the logistics role" and "margin of team contribution".
A scout dropping one or two uplinks on the outskirts of an objective in addition to planting a few REs is not taking over the logistics role. |
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4334
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 17:12:00 -
[49] - Quote
Clone D wrote:
Granting limitations to a dropsuit defines the dropsuit. The problem is when bandwidth is so tight that other roles can not perform a minimal amount of team support in addition to the demands of their role. There will be times when no logis are around. During those times, everyone must do their part. My recommendation to slightly loosen bandwidth allows everyone to do their minor support contribution in addition to their chosen role.
Things That You can Do to Support Your Team with equipment
Repair Tool - Doesn't use Bandwidth
Active Scanner - Doesn't use Bandwidth
Nanite Injector - Doesn't use Bandwidth
Nanohives - Requires Bandwidth
Demolitions - Requires Bandwidth
Uplinks - Requires Bandwidth
So, half of the support functions that Logistics do, don't even require bandwidth, so even if you have 0 badwidth, you could still perform half of possible support options with your equipment slot. So how exactly can you "not perform a minimal amount of team support" when there are 50%+ of the available options are open to you?
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Clone D
1299
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 17:17:00 -
[50] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Clone D wrote:
Granting limitations to a dropsuit defines the dropsuit. The problem is when bandwidth is so tight that other roles can not perform a minimal amount of team support in addition to the demands of their role. There will be times when no logis are around. During those times, everyone must do their part. My recommendation to slightly loosen bandwidth allows everyone to do their minor support contribution in addition to their chosen role.
Things That You can Do to Support Your Team with equipment Repair Tool - Doesn't use Bandwidth Active Scanner - Doesn't use Bandwidth Nanite Injector - Doesn't use Bandwidth Nanohives - Requires Bandwidth Demolitions - Requires Bandwidth Uplinks - Requires Bandwidth So, half of the support functions that Logistics do, don't even require bandwidth, so even if you have 0 badwidth, you could still perform half of possible support options with your equipment slot. So how exactly can you "not perform a minimal amount of team support" when there are 50%+ of the available options are open to you?
One scenario: redline battles. Need uplink in addition to demands of role. I go set one uplink, then go change into my preferred role. I should be able to perform my role specific duties using the equipment that meets the demands of my role, in addition to my minor team contribution of having one uplink deployed.
There are other scenarios, but this one best illustrates the point. |
|
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4334
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 17:33:00 -
[51] - Quote
What class, tier of Suit, and tier of uplink are you trying to use?
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Clone D
1299
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 17:50:00 -
[52] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:What class, tier of Suit, and tier of uplink are you trying to use?
EDIT: You know it doesn't even matter. What you're basically saying is "I want an uplink and something else deployed at the same time" even though you suit has one equipment *for a reason*. If you want to make use of multiply types of equipment simultaneously *use a Logistics suit* that's why they exist! So you can do that!
I understand the current design. What I'm suggesting is that it is too restrictive. |
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4334
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 17:52:00 -
[53] - Quote
What you're effectively asking for is Assaults to have two equipment slots. Further devaluing the Logistics role.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Clone D
1299
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 18:00:00 -
[54] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:What you're effectively asking for is Assaults to have two equipment slots. Further devaluing the Logistics role.
No an assault would have one equipment slot as it does now, the amount of bw would be expanded to let an uplink exist while the assault performs his regular duties using the equipment demanded by the role.
That would allow for a minor team contribution that would not infringe on the logis role, especially since the team would most likely be redlined before this extra bandwidth were used anyway, meaning that no logis would have existing uplinks out on the field to be competing with the one uplink dropped by the assault who does not want to have to drop uplinks but is willing to contribute one uplink to his team's welfare, but who subsequently would like to go back to playing his own role with the ability to use the equipment he/she needs to do so. |
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4334
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 18:04:00 -
[55] - Quote
You're just repeating yourself, but your end goal is to be able to deploy uplinks and keep them active at the same time as whatever other piece of equipment you want to use. The end result is that you want two equipment at the same time, uplinks, and something else.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Clone D
1299
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 18:40:00 -
[56] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:You're just repeating yourself, but your end goal is to be able to deploy uplinks and keep them active at the same time as whatever other piece of equipment you want to use. The end result is that you want two equipment at the same time, uplinks, and something else.
I am repeating myself because you are repeating yourself. See?
You are being coy, and you're being extreme. The ability to deploy one uplink in addition to a role's traditional duties does not infringe upon the logi role.
This is not the ability to deploy poppy fields of nanohives. We're talking one uplink to prevent redlining. |
Clone D
1299
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 18:59:00 -
[57] - Quote
This is the question that I think needs to be addressed.
Hypothetically, if every role were able to deploy 1 uplink in addition to their standard duties:
1. Would it cause uplink spam?
2. Would logis be out of a job?
If the answer to both of those is no, then there is not a problem with the idea, and we have avoided being extreme. |
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4334
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 19:06:00 -
[58] - Quote
Clone D wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:You're just repeating yourself, but your end goal is to be able to deploy uplinks and keep them active at the same time as whatever other piece of equipment you want to use. The end result is that you want two equipment at the same time, uplinks, and something else. I am repeating myself because you are repeating yourself. See? You are being coy, and you're being extreme. The ability to deploy one uplink in addition to a role's traditional duties does not infringe upon the logi role. This is not the ability to deploy poppy fields of nanohives. We're talking one uplink to prevent redlining.
You do not *have* to use equipment to perform your role as an assaulting class. Your equipment slot is designed for minor support. If that minor support role is an uplink for you, sweet, that's fine. This is no different from how the Logistics serves a minor Assaulting role, which is why it has a Light Weapon.
Well well whatever, its clear you're only interested in buffing your own class rather than fixing the underpowered support role. As you put, if you dislike the playstyle of the Assault because it can't have uplinks and nanohives deployed at the same time, then you should just migrate away from it.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Clone D
1299
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 19:11:00 -
[59] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Well well whatever, its clear you're only interested in buffing your own class rather than fixing the underpowered support role. As you put, if you dislike the playstyle of the Assault because it can't have uplinks and nanohives deployed at the same time, then you should just migrate away from it.
I play all classes and am interested in allowing an additional margin of bandwidth devoted to team support apart from their traditional role. It is not an extreme or biased view. It is a well adjusted, global perspective.
Can you answer this for me?
Hypothetically, if every role were able to deploy 1 uplink in addition to their standard duties:
1. Would it cause uplink spam?
2. Would logis be out of a job? |
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4334
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 19:15:00 -
[60] - Quote
Clone D wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Well well whatever, its clear you're only interested in buffing your own class rather than fixing the underpowered support role. As you put, if you dislike the playstyle of the Assault because it can't have uplinks and nanohives deployed at the same time, then you should just migrate away from it. I play all classes and am interested in allowing an additional margin of bandwidth devoted to team support apart from their traditional role. It is not an extreme or biased view. It is a well adjusted, global perspective. Can you answer this for me? Hypothetically, if every role were able to deploy 1 uplink in addition to their standard duties: 1. Would it cause uplink spam? 2. Would logis be out of a job?
1. It would increase the number of uplinks on the field by 1 for every assault. Propagating the problem further.
2. It would make the logis less important, when they're already too unimportant. Propagating the problem further.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
|
|
Clone D
1299
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 19:27:00 -
[61] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Clone D wrote:Hypothetically, if every role were able to deploy 1 uplink in addition to their standard duties:
1. Would it cause uplink spam?
2. Would logis be out of a job? 1. It would increase the number of uplinks on the field by 1 for every assault. Propagating the problem further. 2. It would make the logis less important, when they're already too unimportant. Propagating the problem further.
Okay, now we have somewhere to start from. If you would be so kind as to discuss these in depth, then I think we will both be showing our willingness to hear each other out.
Pokey Dravon wrote:1. It would increase the number of uplinks on the field by 1 for every assault. Propagating the problem further.
We need to establish a baseline. How many uplinks are a healthy amount, and how many are spam? Is this determined subjectively? Is it determined by the technical constraints of the game?
Pokey Dravon wrote:2. It would make the logis less important, when they're already too unimportant. Propagating the problem further.
This is a highly subjective area. I just had a logi tell me that he wouldn't mind if everyone else contributed an uplink: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2561768#post2561768
How can we determine this in a community-centric way?
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4334
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 19:44:00 -
[62] - Quote
Clone D wrote:
We need to establish a baseline. How many uplinks are a healthy amount, and how many are spam? Is this determined subjectively? Is it determined by the technical constraints of the game?
It doesn't matter. Simply put, if a suit has a single equipment slot, it's intention is allow it to make use of a single equipment at a time. If it was supposed to have 2 at a time, it would have had 2 equipment slots. I have no issue with Assaults carrying Uplinks. What I have an issue with is them dropping uplinks then just getting around their intended limitation of 1 equipment by swapping fits to deploy a second equipment type.
We've already established that there is a lack of Logistics on the field. The current usage is significantly lower than it used to be, and this is because of subsequent nerfs to the Logistics class time and time again. Even the Logi you linked to stated that this is the case. Let me clarify:
RayRay James wrote:Combat oriented people pushed to have the needle nerf installed. Sure WP Farming happened, but get over it.
People stopped playing logi because of it.
Bandwidth was introduced because CCP wanted it, not Logi's
Loss of logis from previous nerfs means less logis on the field.
People stopped playing Logi *because of nerfs* not because they found the role to be boring. Nerfs --> Less Logis --> Less Uplinks. You have stated yourself that the lack of logis on the field is problematic in that there is insufficient equipment being dropped to support the battle. Therefor it is painfully clear that in order to reverse a negative effect, you reverse the cause of said effect. The solution is to buff Logistics.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Clone D
1299
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 19:48:00 -
[63] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Clone D wrote:
We need to establish a baseline. How many uplinks are a healthy amount, and how many are spam? Is this determined subjectively? Is it determined by the technical constraints of the game?
It doesn't matter. Simply put, if a suit has a single equipment slot, it's intention is allow it to make use of a single equipment at a time. If it was supposed to have 2 at a time, it would have had 2 equipment slots. I have no issue with Assaults carrying Uplinks. What I have an issue with is them dropping uplinks then just getting around their intended limitation of 1 equipment by swapping fits to deploy a second equipment type. We've already established that there is a lack of Logistics on the field. The current usage is significantly lower than it used to be, and this is because of subsequent nerfs to the Logistics class time and time again. Even the Logi you linked to stated that this is the case. Let me clarify: RayRay James wrote:Combat oriented people pushed to have the needle nerf installed. Sure WP Farming happened, but get over it.
People stopped playing logi because of it.
Bandwidth was introduced because CCP wanted it, not Logi's
Loss of logis from previous nerfs means less logis on the field.
People stopped playing Logi *because of nerfs* not because they found the role to be boring. Nerfs --> Less Logis --> Less Uplinks. You have stated yourself that the lack of logis on the field is problematic in that there is insufficient equipment being dropped to support the battle. Therefor it is painfully clear that in order to reverse a negative effect, you reverse the cause of said effect. The solution is to buff Logistics.
For someone who prides his/herself on logic, you managed to completely skirt the question. Please answer the questions directly without changing the topic or we can't hold a rational conversation. |
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4335
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 20:04:00 -
[64] - Quote
Ok I'll read between the lines for you. The maximum number of uplinks should be directly proportional to the total number of equipment slots of all dropsuits currently on the field with bandwidth as an additional level of protection against overuse. Obviously I can't give you an exact number as the types of suits will vary depending on the match and situation. However, if I recall the maximum number of deployed uplinks from a single stack is 3 at prototype level.
If we assume everyone has a single equipment slot, you have 32 Equipment Slots on the field, so the absolute maximum would be 96. Obviously this is an extreme case, as not everyone has an equipment slot, and some have more, and it is extremely unlikely that everyone on the team will be using uplinks at the same time.
The point to take away from this is not the number of uplinks, its the number of intended equipment types on the field. If 32 Assaults want to drop 3 uplinks each and have 96 uplinks on the field? I have zero issue with that. I think it's not very practical but its fine if they want to do that. What I do have an issue with is if they say "Ok, I want to use my *single* equipment slot, but I'm going to get around the system by dropping my uplink, and then swapping to another equipment to I can gain the benefit from that too.
Secondly, you simply proved my point by linking me to a Logistics player who mirrored my sentiments that *the reason there isn't enough logistics is because they got nerfed* which your solution isn't to buff logis, it's to buff yourself so you can do their job them. And yes he said "Use your uplinks" but he didn't say "Use your uplinks, and hives, and then maybe even switch to a needle once you're all set up. What he's saying is "You've got limited support abilities, if you're going to ***** that we don't do our job, then help us support". He said nothing about "And abuse the system to get around your lack of equipment slots"
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Clone D
1299
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 20:42:00 -
[65] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:If we assume everyone has a single equipment slot, you have 32 Equipment Slots on the field, so the absolute maximum would be 96. Obviously this is an extreme case, as not everyone has an equipment slot, and some have more, and it is extremely unlikely that everyone on the team will be using uplinks at the same time.
The point to take away from this is not the number of uplinks, its the number of intended equipment types on the field. If 32 Assaults want to drop 3 uplinks each and have 96 uplinks on the field? I have zero issue with that.
Okay, so that answers #1. Spam is not an issue, according to you. ^^^^^
Pokey Dravon wrote:Secondly, you simply proved my point by linking me to a Logistics player who mirrored my sentiments that *the reason there isn't enough logistics is because they got nerfed* which your solution isn't to buff logis, it's to buff yourself so you can do their job them. And yes he said "Use your uplinks" but he didn't say "Use your uplinks, and hives, and then maybe even switch to a needle once you're all set up. What he's saying is "You've got limited support abilities, if you're going to ***** that we don't do our job, then help us support". He said nothing about "And abuse the system to get around your lack of equipment slots"
#2. As long as we don't abuse the system ^^^^, then logis will not be devalued and they won't lose their jobs.
Seeing as how the proposition meets both criteria, then the only real impediment is that you don't like the idea of the margin of supporting contribution.
I cannot argue with an opinion. We have a difference of opinion and neither of us is right or wrong.
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4337
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 20:50:00 -
[66] - Quote
In this particular case, I'm not concerned with spam. Im concerned with you effectively gaining a second equipment slot.
Tell me, why are you so against simply buffing the Logis in order to encourage their use and thus get the intended effect of better support on the field?
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Clone D
1299
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 21:04:00 -
[67] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:In this particular case, I'm not concerned with spam. Im concerned with you effectively gaining a second equipment slot.
Tell me, why are you so against simply buffing the Logis in order to encourage their use and thus get the intended effect of better support on the field?
Excerpt from another thread:
Clone D wrote: If you make logis more like assaults, then essentially, you'll make a super assault plus - fun for fighting and can carry/deploy a bunch of equipment. Then people will leave assault behind and play super assault because it offers the same fun with more options. Then the assault fanboys will say, hey we need more incentives as assaults, etc. It is a downward spiral. Why can't we leave the suits alone, admit they are what they are and that the number of people who want to play them will vary with the context of the game/meta.
I, personally don't care what they do with the game or the roles or what have you. If it stops being fun, then I'll quit.
I simply wanted to offer up a middle-of-the road compromise between absolutely no bandwidth and hardcore bandwidth. Those appear to be two extremes, and there is room in the middle that wouldn't upset the gameplay, but could offer a comfort zone for all, at least until we get some more logis up in here.
I hadn't seen this "margin of supporting contribution" idea proposed anywhere else in the forums and thought it might add some perspective to the community and get people thinking about the variations on bandwidth. It doesn't have to be all or nothing. |
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4337
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 21:09:00 -
[68] - Quote
Slayer Logi fear is irrational.
What you're trying to do is buff a class which is actually in a pretty solid spot, sans some tweaks to its attacking bonuses.
You're also ignoring a class which is innately underpowered.
I don't see how it makes any sense at all to buff the Assault class and leave the Logi underpowered.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
el OPERATOR
Capital Acquisitions LLC
Bad Intention
725
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 21:11:00 -
[69] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:
The solution is to buff Logistics.
/thread, topic and QQ
Open-Beta Vet.
Drunk Night Tree Burner.
This is my Main and Original.
DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
|
Clone D
1299
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 21:34:00 -
[70] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Slayer Logi fear is irrational.
What you're trying to do is buff a class which is actually in a pretty solid spot, sans some tweaks to its attacking bonuses.
You're also ignoring a class which is innately underpowered.
I don't see how it makes any sense at all to buff the Assault class and leave the Logi underpowered.
Here's what is curious to me. It seems that some individuals are trying to entice people to play certain roles. From my perspective that is an artificial motivator.
When I make a game, I make some basic rules, and then observe how people play it, and watch them have fun in the ways that make sense to them. I am often surprised by the things people do. You know, sometimes people just have fun without trying to win at all. They are simply experiencing some mystifying intrinsic reward from being involved in their own way. That is what I like about Dust. Frequently even the guys on my own team are intentionally working hard against me, and they're having a lot of fun trying to sabotage my game; like friendly tankers that smash your dropship the moment it is deployed. I don't get bent out of shape, I just watch what people do and try to understand what is going on in their minds.
If we take that principle and apply it to Dust, we will see a rainbow of appeal to this game when it allows for ingenuity. They say that this is the smart person's FPS. I think that is because of the level of customization this game affords players. When we start binding players to memes like the five immutable roles, then imo we lose something that was once quite valuable to us all.
So, in alignment with my free rein philosophy, I think that continually rebalancing things for the purpose of changing human behavior is underhanded, while rebalancing things because an object becomes an obvious impediment to gameplay, thereby preventing progress and accomplishment would be ok.
Currently, I can use a logi dropsuit to accomplish a whole lot and come out #1 on the rankings, as I am sure that other logis can. Just because there are less people who choose to logi than would be preferred by some, doesn't mean to say that it is broken or out of balance. In my mind, trying to get more people to play logi is unjustified. Let the community play the game how they want to. Each person will find their own identity in the game environment. Coercing someone into a new identity can have adverse affects like reversions (downward spiral), or large scale identity migrations like we see with fotm chasers.
Ultimately, I'm not the game designer, but I find it interesting learning how the developers and the community ruminate and why they make policies. |
|
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4338
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 21:43:00 -
[71] - Quote
You don't get it. There are quite a few people whom I talk to on a regular basis who don't play the game at all because the Logi is in such a ****** place. They're only interested in playing the support role and nothing else, so until that role is more viable, they're not interested at all. There are also many other players who respecced out of Logi or simply trained something else, myself included, because they no longer felt viable on the battlefield after countless nerfs.
Buffing the Logi isn't going to make people who had no interest in Support previously to spec into it, that's not my intention. The whole point is to make those who actually want to play the support role but don't because their suits suck, actually want to pick the suit back up again. So you want to make the game fun? Great. Then let people who want to run support actually have a fighting chance at doing so instead of just handing off the leftovers to everyone else.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Clone D
1299
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 21:48:00 -
[72] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:You don't get it. There are quite a few people whom I talk to on a regular basis who don't play the game at all because the Logi is in such a ****** place. They're only interested in playing the support role and nothing else, so until that role is more viable, they're not interested at all. There are also many other players who respecced out of Logi or simply trained something else, myself included, because they no longer felt viable on the battlefield after countless nerfs.
Buffing the Logi isn't going to make people who had no interest in Support previously to spec into it, that's not my intention. The whole point is to make those who actually want to play the support role but don't because their suits suck, actually want to pick the suit back up again. So you want to make the game fun? Great. Then let people who want to run support actually have a fighting chance at doing so instead of just handing off the leftovers to everyone else.
I hope the coming buffs to the logi dropsuits will bring back your buds  |
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4338
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 21:49:00 -
[73] - Quote
Clone D wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:You don't get it. There are quite a few people whom I talk to on a regular basis who don't play the game at all because the Logi is in such a ****** place. They're only interested in playing the support role and nothing else, so until that role is more viable, they're not interested at all. There are also many other players who respecced out of Logi or simply trained something else, myself included, because they no longer felt viable on the battlefield after countless nerfs.
Buffing the Logi isn't going to make people who had no interest in Support previously to spec into it, that's not my intention. The whole point is to make those who actually want to play the support role but don't because their suits suck, actually want to pick the suit back up again. So you want to make the game fun? Great. Then let people who want to run support actually have a fighting chance at doing so instead of just handing off the leftovers to everyone else. I hope the coming buffs to the logi dropsuits will bring back your buds
And then you won't need that extra bandwidth for your Assault since there will be more, better logis on the field.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Clone D
1299
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 21:55:00 -
[74] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Clone D wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:You don't get it. There are quite a few people whom I talk to on a regular basis who don't play the game at all because the Logi is in such a ****** place. They're only interested in playing the support role and nothing else, so until that role is more viable, they're not interested at all. There are also many other players who respecced out of Logi or simply trained something else, myself included, because they no longer felt viable on the battlefield after countless nerfs.
Buffing the Logi isn't going to make people who had no interest in Support previously to spec into it, that's not my intention. The whole point is to make those who actually want to play the support role but don't because their suits suck, actually want to pick the suit back up again. So you want to make the game fun? Great. Then let people who want to run support actually have a fighting chance at doing so instead of just handing off the leftovers to everyone else. I hope the coming buffs to the logi dropsuits will bring back your buds And then you won't need that extra bandwidth for your Assault since there will be more, better logis on the field.
Indeed and agreed and I'm keeping my fingers crossed.
This alludes to my comments about a transitional period between now and then. I will tough it out, though, and I won't bring up temporarily relaxing bandwidth anymore. |
pumping up
Crux Special Tasks Group
Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 21:56:00 -
[75] - Quote
could anyone tell me exactly what was nerfed for logis or a link? thanks. |
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4338
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 21:59:00 -
[76] - Quote
Clone D wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Clone D wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:You don't get it. There are quite a few people whom I talk to on a regular basis who don't play the game at all because the Logi is in such a ****** place. They're only interested in playing the support role and nothing else, so until that role is more viable, they're not interested at all. There are also many other players who respecced out of Logi or simply trained something else, myself included, because they no longer felt viable on the battlefield after countless nerfs.
Buffing the Logi isn't going to make people who had no interest in Support previously to spec into it, that's not my intention. The whole point is to make those who actually want to play the support role but don't because their suits suck, actually want to pick the suit back up again. So you want to make the game fun? Great. Then let people who want to run support actually have a fighting chance at doing so instead of just handing off the leftovers to everyone else. I hope the coming buffs to the logi dropsuits will bring back your buds And then you won't need that extra bandwidth for your Assault since there will be more, better logis on the field. Indeed and agreed and I'm keeping my fingers crossed. This alludes to my comments about a transitional period between now and then. I will tough it out, though, and I won't bring up temporarily relaxing bandwidth anymore.
I understand your intention, but I prefer to just fix the source of a problem rather than place temporary measures in. I apologize for being agressive earlier, I just get frustrated with the lack of action on CCP's part to fix the issue at hand.
*bro hugz*
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Clone D
1301
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 22:02:00 -
[77] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Clone D wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Clone D wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:You don't get it. There are quite a few people whom I talk to on a regular basis who don't play the game at all because the Logi is in such a ****** place. They're only interested in playing the support role and nothing else, so until that role is more viable, they're not interested at all. There are also many other players who respecced out of Logi or simply trained something else, myself included, because they no longer felt viable on the battlefield after countless nerfs.
Buffing the Logi isn't going to make people who had no interest in Support previously to spec into it, that's not my intention. The whole point is to make those who actually want to play the support role but don't because their suits suck, actually want to pick the suit back up again. So you want to make the game fun? Great. Then let people who want to run support actually have a fighting chance at doing so instead of just handing off the leftovers to everyone else. I hope the coming buffs to the logi dropsuits will bring back your buds And then you won't need that extra bandwidth for your Assault since there will be more, better logis on the field. Indeed and agreed and I'm keeping my fingers crossed. This alludes to my comments about a transitional period between now and then. I will tough it out, though, and I won't bring up temporarily relaxing bandwidth anymore. I understand your intention, but I prefer to just fix the source of a problem rather than place temporary measures in. I apologize for being agressive earlier, I just get frustrated with the lack of action on CCP's part to fix the issue at hand.
Amen to that! No apologies necessary bro. You gotta fight for the right to parrrrrtayyyy!!! |
Fizzer XCIV
Tal-Romon Legion
Amarr Empire
2110
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 22:14:00 -
[78] - Quote
Zindorak wrote:I think bandwidth was a pointless idea to begin with. It just limits potential
If by "limits potential", you mean limits potential uplink spam, then you'd be correct.
Logis can still place plenty of equipment currently, while the other suits can't. It seems to be working great to me.
Home at Last <3
|
Fizzer XCIV
Tal-Romon Legion
Amarr Empire
2110
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 22:17:00 -
[79] - Quote
Alright. So Soraya hit the nail on the head.
We don't want another "Chromosome Sharpshooter" skill. What I mean by that is, we don't want another skill that is so supremely useful, that anyone and everyone is expected to take it regardless of their play style.
Make it unlock modules that have the effect, not a passive skill.
Home at Last <3
|
Jaysyn Larrisen
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
1455
|
Posted - 2015.01.09 23:38:00 -
[80] - Quote
Fizzer XCIV wrote:Zindorak wrote:I think bandwidth was a pointless idea to begin with. It just limits potential If by "limits potential", you mean limits potential uplink spam, then you'd be correct. Logis can still place plenty of equipment currently, while the other suits can't. It seems to be working great to me.
There were other ways of directly addressing uplinks than bandwidth that would have had less severe consequences.
"Endless money forms the sinews of War." - Cicero
Skype: jaysyn.larrisen
Twitter: @JaysynLarrisen
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |