|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Cross Atu
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
4372
|
Posted - 2015.04.19 18:40:00 -
[1] - Quote
I've heard it suggested that the Shield Transporter should be an active mod (new code required) That would function, very simply put, as an active mod that created a "reverse Flux" effect for a limited time span.
Thus restoring friendly shields by a substantial amount with an AoE centered around the Logi player for a brief span before going back on cool down.
This would allow for a unique more mobility / hit and run playstyle for shields (vs armor) while still giving enhanced utility. It would also be a very active tactical role because the timing of use would be very key in certain contexts.
CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
|
Cross Atu
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
4440
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 04:26:00 -
[2] - Quote
RedBleach LeSanglant wrote:Cross Atu wrote:I've heard it suggested that the Shield Transporter should be an active mod (new code required) That would function, very simply put, as an active mod that created a "reverse Flux" effect for a limited time span.
Thus restoring friendly shields by a substantial amount with an AoE centered around the Logi player for a brief span before going back on cool down.
This would allow for a unique more mobility / hit and run playstyle for shields (vs armor) while still giving enhanced utility. It would also be a very active tactical role because the timing of use would be very key in certain contexts. Even just an activated piece of equipment would be fine. Doesn't need programming or code for an active module - until we want to go there. I would simply have a recharge timer similar to the active scanner. Use once, must wait, then activate again. possible radius expansion, but a one time inverse flux would be great. No new animation. Take the cloak module and use that for the in screen animation and hud view so we don't have to build a new model. Could have a pulse module and pulsed 3x in 6 seconds allowing the carrier to run through a group :) So I have been informed that my vernacular is non-standard. In other words I think of all things that can be slotted into a frame as mods.
It seems this has caused some confusion so I'd like to clear that up.
The mod I described was meant to be an equipment mod. I hope that helps reduce any muddle I may have caused.
CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
|
Cross Atu
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
4515
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 15:36:00 -
[3] - Quote
Gyn Wallace wrote:Parity with the numbers would make shield tanks superior, since you don't die when you run out of shields. The potential for OPness isn't in the sense of shield tanks vs. armor tanks, but in the sense that when dual-tanked, you no longer have the option of fitting the right weapon to do the job of burning though a sentinel who is either shield OR armor tanked.
With a shield rep tool available, I'd plan on carrying both with my logi, and teaming up with another logi and two dual tanked sentinels.* Both logis would run with weapons out, but one switches to a shield rep tool when we make contact. If the contact is a bit heavier, both logies switch to rep tools as needed. With a Cal logi repping shields and a armor repping logi (whether its still the Min or becomes the Gal or Amarr bonus) repping armor, what weapon will the enemy use to punch through the reps?
If the enemy is carrying lots of scrambler rifles, the Cal logi switches to his armor rep tool. If the enemy is carrying lots of combat rifles, both logis switch to shield rep tools.
The potential for OPness isn't as much about shield vs. armor tanking, as the potential for dual tanking and dual reps. That's potentially much harder to counter than a pair of armor tanked sentinels and a pair of armor repping logis, which can get chewed up pretty easily by mass drivers and rail rifles.
Switching to a loadout to counter a shield tanked small sentinel/logi squad is harder than it is for their logis to switch rep tools.
*Without damage resistance modules on drop suits, I don't see a disadvantage for dual tanking, other than the opportunity cost; unlike the weakness of dual tanking in Eve Online, instead of focusing on a singular tank. Your point is well made and I think you are spot on with regards to where we could see this over performing.
That being said I can think of several counters to this group off the top of my head, before I list them let me say that each is assuming the coordinated action of more than one merc, but as they are counters to the coordinated action of several mercs that seems entirely appropriate to me.
- The first major aspect is alpha damage, conceptually speaking the counter to sustained eHP via rergen is alpha.
- The second aspect is Splash, against a tightly packed group splash becomes more effective.
- The third is dictating engagement, this is largely defined by range, mobility, and eWar.
Some examples; Counter the 4 man heavy logi combo with a HAV or DS. Even with double reps and the sentinel damage resistance the squad is not going to survive open conflict with a blaster Maddy or missile DS.
Use sniper or LR fire to pin down the squad or destroy it. Add a forge gunner to prevent use of vehicles and add even more OHK potential.
If they are in a closed environment such as the Gal socket or the Cal "train" deploy fire from above with REs, MDs, PLCs, timed Flux + Locus strikes. The Logi cannot readily keep cover or hide behind the heavy when being attacked from above.
Employ talented NK scouts, damped and fast these strikes could wipe the logi off the board regardless of reps. Lacking scouts assaults with myo/melee fits could fulfill a similar role.
For those with high gun game use of the Scram or Bolt pistols to headshot opposing forces is highly effective. Lacking high precision aiming use of coordinated commando damage provides a similar net effect, a bonused shotgun or PLC is going to be hard to rep through, 2-3 in rapid succession is withering.
If your squad is finding their squad too tough to crack due to relative gun game, composition, or socket layout use 'soft counters' by keeping them scanned as targets of opportunity (one cannot be mobile and entrenched simultaneously) and work around them to claim other objectives thus counter balancing their effect on attaining the win and giving any other squads in the game with more applicable composition the chance to counter the 'heavy squad'.
If all else fails, remain effective in the overall battle and earn an OB (side note here, I think the price on those should come down a bit).
On a closing note, none of the above is a guaranteed win against a talented squad, but even with shield reps in the game a double rep squad is not a guaranteed win either and the closer we can come to encounters being down to A) Player skill B) Player choice (i.e. which tools to bring to the field and where/when to employ them) the better off the overall game will be in my view.
However, your point also underscores for me the value of having shield reps be a cloak style active mod rather than a lock on style mod like the armor rep.
0.02 ISK Cross
CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
|
Cross Atu
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
4545
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 17:11:00 -
[4] - Quote
Gyn Wallace wrote:Cross Atu wrote:That being said I can think of several counters ... However, your point also underscores for me the value of having shield reps be a cloak style active mod rather than a lock on style mod like the armor rep.
0.02 ISK Cross I think those all work, even though they're a little more effective in the current system, where you can expect heavies to be either/or (but mostly armor) tanks instead of dual tanked; but I hadn't been thinking about shield reps in the context of: Certainly, if they were not more effective in the current system it would be indicative of a fundamental flaw in either the current system, the shield rep idea, or both.
I don't see 'bite' in over all balance with that however, in part due to the counters listed. In part due to the nature of allocating cooperative play assets (it's much easier to say "then they just switch to armor reps" than it is to actually switch reps and lock mid fire fight in a rapid enough manner to be significant when enough sufficient fire to have stripped shields that were being repped. Just as one example).
Also due to the increased utility for Assaults. Broadly speaking Assaults rely on mobility, need mobility, more than Sententials, all of which leads to shields being a proportionally more valuable asset for them. Recently I was in squad with an Amarr Assault who had a single Logi as support, pulling down kills upwards of 30 per match we few deaths and even fewer suit losses, now granted the Assault in question has solid gun game but with the inclusion of shield reps this type of scenario is more likely to occur. Put more simply reps are not just of use to Heavies and shield reps are on average going to be more widely useful than armor currently tend to be. As such comparisons of groups with logi support fighting groups without it aren't fundamental balance they're more a matter of player choice, in the same way as groups fighting with only long or short range weapons suffer in certain contexts against those using the other.
Gyn Wallace wrote:Imp Smash wrote: However, that is easily avoided making it so that a suit can only be repped Shields OR Armor at any given time. ...] when only one of type of rep is allowed simultaneously. Your 2nd point does not address this. That idea would be huge for mitigating the potential for OPness. Without that, one specific example illustrates the problem with simultaneous shield and armor reps, a plasma cannon being fired at that hypothetical small squad of two heavies and two shield and armor repping logies. The plasma cannon can OHK most suits and take away most of a heavies shields and armor in one hit. Usually that puts the heavy in cover, and he has to be careful about exposing himself to that plasma cannon again, even if his armor is repped to full. He has to wait til his shield regen, if he doesn't want to be exposed to a OHK if the plasma cannon hits him again. With simultaneous remote shield and armor reps, those heavies could take turns eating plasma cannon rounds at a very quick pace. There would be no need to lower the threshold for orbitals...if logis get shield rep warpoints. All Cross's counters work, but they'd work a little bit less well than they already do. I don't hate the idea of shield reps at all; new features are generally good. I don't suppose its a foregone conclusion that shield reps would be OP, but the danger is there. I think we'd have a decent chance of Ratatti balancing them, right after he gets around to buffing logi survivability. :D Soon. I'm pretty fundamentally opposed to the notion of hard line lockouts such as only one set of reps being applied at a time (or required fitting slots et al). A couple examples include
- Being able to troll more often (use a MLT tool of one kind on someone with a tank of the opposing kind thus blocking their own squad mates from supporting them).
- Certain players being locked out from even trying to earn WP/use their equipment because someone else is using similar equipment (what if the presence of a sniper rifle on the field caused the RR to no longer apply damage because the two combined provide a more powerful ranged application of damage than either one alone?)
As to the example squad presented above there are a few aspects to consider. 1. You are talking about 1 merc (PLC user) shutting down a squad of 4 in the current context. 2. As outlined the hypothetical does not account for the PLC user wisely targeting the Logi. That is somewhat like targeting the RR user in a CQC situation where there is also a Shotgunner or NK'er present. Of course bad target priority will often result in a poor outcome, as will attempting to engage hostile forces when out numbered 4 to 1.
If two heavies using tactical movement while supported by two Logi can forcefully push against the applied fire of a single merc with a PLC (or other LW) that is not at all OP, that is utterly reasonable. What would be OP is if that heavy/logi combo when confronted with equal numbers of opposing forces who are also using effective coordinated action where still able to push/sustain as readily as you describe. But what would happen to one of those heavies of 4 PLC rounds landed on him? Or if two PLC were applying sustained fire to the group while two CQC flanked and ganked the logi (as just one ready example).
CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
|
Cross Atu
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
4545
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 17:15:00 -
[5] - Quote
The question of WP earnings deserves it's own focus IMO so here goes.
If we have a shield transporter that functions identical to the current rep tool then we can simply apply the current earnings logic. So that's simple enough.
However we have heard cases made for very different mechanics for how a shield transporter could function, and it begs the question how would WP be assigned in those cases?
What would be the earnings mechanism for a transporter that did not actually rep but just turned on the native rep of the suit? (and how would higher tiers of such an equipment mod provide enhanced functionality?)
What would be the earnings mechanism for a transporter that used the 'active bubble' method to apply shield reps?
Should the WP earnings for both "rep tools" be reworked to one unified method with the addition of shield reps or is having differing mechanics grand different earnings types be the most appropriate option?
Thoughts?
CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
|
Cross Atu
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
4579
|
Posted - 2015.04.26 02:59:00 -
[6] - Quote
Devadander wrote:As a pure Caldari, this is a topic I have thought much about.
[sic] Pulses don't work. Had them on shield tanks of old. They will be garbage, and people won't use them after the release rush.
Same for active equipment suggestions. They will be clunky and annoying to use.
[sic]
Please elaborate on why you believe this to be true about each one. The more details presented the more issues could be worked around or others persuaded as to why those options should be bypassed in favor of others.
Looking forward to hearing back from you on the specifics
~Cross
CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
|
|
|
|