and to compensate for commandos, you just buff their damage bonus to 20%.

Please don't. I know your suggestion is intended well but this will have serious consequences in the AV side. The kind that mean more vehicle rebalancing than we already have to do.

There are three parts to EWAR: infiltration, counter-infiltration and recon.

Between HF Alpha and HF Charlie, there were two competitive EWAR Scouts:
GA Scout - Infiltration
CA Scout - Counter-Infiltration, Recon (long-range / low-precision)

Between HF Charlie and Falloff, there were three competitive EWAR Scouts:
GA Scout - Infiltration
AM Scout - Counter-Infiltration (short-range / low-precision)
CA Scout - Recon (long range / high-precision)

Following Falloff, there remains one competitive EWAR Scout:
GA Scout - Infiltration

---

Today, passive counter-infiltration and passive recon are both insufficiently potent to compete with GalLogi long-range / low-precision active scans. Since Falloff, the GalLogi has replaced 2 of 3 EWAR Scouts and has become the only source of competitive recon and competitive counter-infiltration.

Whether or not this is good or bad is up for debate, but if our thinking is like John Psi's in that "Scouts should be out scouting" then our thinking is out-dated. Scouts are still good for sneaking, but they are no longer good for scouting.

I would be interested in seing the data about the most used weapons in general. I wouldn't be surprised to see the remote explosives to be just after the HMG. However no need to nerf them right...

stuff

The range amp nerf was... excessive. Possibly unnecessary, too.

I believe the proliferation of MinASS has a lot to do with how powerful assaults have become as a whole while leaving two without meaningful bonuses. While also being effected by the proliferation of heavy armor.

If we can break the blob the reasoning for the nerf is obsolete.

there is absolutely ample reason to change/nerf the HMG.

My problem is this particular "solution" proposed has been done four times already, and all it did was shift the pendulum the other way.

So why not kick sentinels out of CQC and into the open where they can both excel, and be vulnerable to weapons that can kill them rapidly?

Not necessarily.

For reasons, we ruled that "360 wallhacks" were OP. Whatever those reasons were (ask Zatara), they very likely still exist as nothing else has changed.

Further, there's an issue with backstab viability. Today's 5-10m inner ring often gives me time to spot, insta-spin and insta-gank the would-be knifer on my heels. If that 5-10m were to become 10-20m, no one would ever knife me again. This would be kinda crappy and broken, in my book at least. For this reason, I think we should fix inner scan rings at a set value, then pursue extending middle / outer scan rings with Range Amps. All assuming, of course, we want to return range amps and longer range passive scans to play.

I was talking solely range amp nerf.

I have no issue with the inner ring

Right. Will retry with fewer words:

Reverse Range Amp Nerf = Bigger Inner Rings = Imbalance
Reverse Range Amp Nerf = Stronger Scout Passives = "OP Wallhacks"