DUST Search - Sticky:[Feedback] Logistics Slot Progression

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Sticky:[Feedback] Logistics Slot Progression

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 8 post(s)
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4	Posted - 2015.05.28 01:00:00 - [1] - Quote Zaria Min Deir wrote: Please, please don't reduce equipment count on any logi. 2 at standard is NOT ok, it is the same as what scouts have, how is the logi supposed to be the equipment specialist if a std scout can do the same job as a std logi? 3/3/4 as the Min has at the moment is acceptable, though I think you will find a lot of logis would support a 3/4/4 progression (if not 4/4/4), for good reasons too. The equipment is what defines the logistics class, making the 4 unlock only at proto is inelegant in my opinion (though, I assume some would say 4 at even adv is somehow OP :/). And giving logi suits only 2 equipment slots at std is worse. And yes, that is what the Cal and the Amarr have at the moment, there are reasons why so many of us logis have been asking for this slot progression balance pass for a long time ;) Personally I believe that the Caldari extra (low) slot in trade for the one equipment slot is fair, but unnecessary... It should really just have the same standard slot progression, just mirrored with the Gal, but I thing actual Cal logis should weigh in on that. With one less low slot but another equipment, it would still need some adjustment to its CPU (as you are correct, it is paying for the old sins of it's original suit bonus and the power of the tac AR). The Amarr logi trading a sidearm for an equipment is also fair enough, it should get the same amount of total slots as the others as well. Prior to bandwidth I would have voiced concerns about the unlocking of all 4 equipment slots at adv, let alone std, however now that we have BW in game and active I fully support the move to a 4/4/4 method. Fittings resources and BW with both still apply progression limits and with equipment being the defining feature of the role opening up those slots makes a lot of sense. As to the racial disparities I'll echo what others have said and what Zaria states in the quote above. Keep the total slots equal as per the Min base, give all logi save the Amarr 4 equipment (Cal to drop that extra low) and let the Amarr stay at 3 in exchange for it's possession of the sidearm slot. CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4	Posted - 2015.05.28 01:02:00 - [2] - Quote Cat Merc wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Zaria Min Deir wrote: Please, please don't reduce equipment count on any logi. 2 at standard is NOT ok, it is the same as what scouts have, how is the logi supposed to be the equipment specialist if a std scout can do the same job as a std logi? 3/3/4 as the Min has at the moment is acceptable, though I think you will find a lot of logis would support a 3/4/4 progression (if not 4/4/4), for good reasons too. The equipment is what defines the logistics class, making the 4 unlock only at proto is inelegant in my opinion (though, I assume some would say 4 at even adv is somehow OP :/). And giving logi suits only 2 equipment slots at std is worse. And yes, that is what the Cal and the Amarr have at the moment, there are reasons why so many of us logis have been asking for this slot progression balance pass for a long time ;) Personally I believe that the Caldari extra (low) slot in trade for the one equipment slot is fair, but unnecessary... It should really just have the same standard slot progression, just mirrored with the Gal, but I thing actual Cal logis should weigh in on that. With one less low slot but another equipment, it would still need some adjustment to it's CPU (as you are correct, it is paying for the old sins of it's original suit bonus and the power of the tac AR). The Amarr logi trading a sidearm for an equipment is also fair enough, it should get the same amount of total slots as the others as well. Agreed, so 3/3/4 for equipment, especially since I am also thinking of making the jack of all trades, basic mediums to have 2 eq. Why not take downgrade the light weapon from CA to sidearm and leave the EQ? that's what I was thinking. I personally don't see why it wouldn't work. Having the Cal Logi be the most survivable one, but have the worst offense, side arm being a last resort kind of thing. That's under the condition that it is indeed more survivable. Agreed this is a novel idea and hopefully there will be some constructive discussion of it within this thread. CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4	Posted - 2015.05.28 16:13:00 - [3] - Quote So in light of these two aspect from the other thread. CCP Rattati wrote: The designs need to make sense, intuitively. In order of priority, imagine a pyramid Slot progression needs to make sense, within roles and between roles PG/CPU capacity as they relate to slots and their layout HP and Speed are inverse, that's just physics and again intuitive These 3 principles form the foundation for Dropsuits. While they don't make sense, all the small things on top don't really matter. That's why I am not tackling role bonuses, because the foundation is cracked and not worth building on. CCP Rattati wrote: The rules of thumb as applied to the Medium class now: Mobility (stamina pool and recovery) CA/GA = normal Amarr= 5% lower Minmatar = 5% higher Sprint Basic = normal = 1.4x Logistics = normal-0.1 = 1.3x Assault = normal+0.1 = 1.5x eHP Basic = normal Logistics = lower Assault = higher Speed Basic = normal Logistics = higher Assault = lower I'm wondering what Stamina numbers and HP numbers we're looking at for the new base logi profiles to keep them in line with the stated 'Speed higher, eHP lower' method outlined above (a method I'm heartily in support of btw), in light of the assault having a higher sprint speed. I must say I am really excited to see all roles game wide adhere to a consistent logical method determining how they are iterated to give equal and balanced survivability while maintaining diversity of function (I'm also looking forward to later once survival of all roles is balance, giving the assault some love via their bonuses as has long been requested, but that obviously is a project of it's own o7 ) CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4	Posted - 2015.05.29 19:40:00 - [4] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: I kind of wish we had a support weapon slot, for MD's, LR, PLC, Shotgun, Sniper and Swarm, to distinguish from "Rifles". Then Logis could be good at them, and bad at the others. Can we just make the repair tool it's own weapon type with it's own slot (and a shield type of course) and give it EVE level reps that can out pace multiple sources of incoming PDS? It'd swap a LW slot for that any day. To me the tactical value of real sustainable rep levels and no weapon is vastly superior to the status of having a mediocre weapon selection (but still weapons) and current reps. The issue with the weapons listed above being combined with support play is that they don't currently synergize. MD and LR lend themselves to setting up shop somewhere and providing area denial/zone of control. That action in and of itself is support in many lights no question, but if you're camped in a single (usually high) area you can't support your squad unless you are either A) defending a vital uplink spot, or B) they are camped right along side you. Shotgun is a viable weapon, and I enjoy running it, but I run it on my scout fit (or maybe my Min Assault if the mood strikes me) because most of the time it requires that you have more speed that the opposing forces so you can hit and run/close the distance. Get caught at rifle range with a shotgun and you're dead (even in a tanked Sent) which is fine, that's the shotgun working as intended but it makes it not very viable unless the suit in question has above average move and sprint speeds. Speed aside it becomes more iffy for a support role because it's range and type of engagement is front line not over the shoulder or 'second rank' thus requiring a choice between positioning for possible weapon use or optimal support play. Sniper has the same problems as the MD and LR only magnified due to it's range profile and proper use case. Swarms on a suit with no sidearm is simply asking to die in most cases though having a fit like that in your back pocket only for dedicated AV work is useful, you need to have someone guard you or accept that you will burn the fit. PLC is likely the most viable of all of them, for those who have the skill set to use it, because it can mimic some of the OHK of the Shotgun and the AV of the swarms, plus has enough range to give a bit of area denial, but it is far from an easy weapon to use leaving most players likely better off running an SMG or Blot Pistol for general utility. All of that being said I'm not opposed to the Assault class being more effective with rifles, that actually makes a lot of sense to me, what if the dps of the rifles themselves was pulled back somewhat and the assaults gained an added damage bonus to their racial weapons? CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4	Posted - 2015.05.29 20:21:00 - [5] - Quote Luk Manag wrote: Al the destroyer wrote: Luk Manag wrote: Weapon range is an extremely important factor. A 25% reduction in weapons range on a logi would stop the slayer logi FoTM. I'm not sure this would be the right direction to go but I see where you're coming from. With buffed speed, eHP, fittings, and a sidearm I'll be a part of the hoards of slayer logis. I asked myself what I would need to keep me in a proper Slayer Assault, with it's paltry reload bonus, and the answer is a disincentive to use light weapons on a logi. I would also favor the sidearm only option if it came with some sort of buff...like dual sidearms and a sidearm range bonus. A Scrambler Pistol and a Bolt Pistol combo would be fun. I don't do that on the Assault any more because of the range handicap vs Light Weapons. Sidearm only is bad IMO for a number of reasons. Either leave the logi with the ability to use a basic rifle or skip the weapons entirely and let logi be a full on support with no weapons but very potent reps (and add the option to bring shield reps). CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4	Posted - 2015.05.29 20:22:00 - [6] - Quote Fox Gaden wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: what if proto is "only" 7 high/lows This would be a nerf to most Logis would it not? Could you explain your reasoning behind this? Giving Assault an advantage, since total slots on logi are 2 more at proto. Well as a personal opinion, i think the differentiation between the roles, or that advantage, should be tied to secondary attributes (namely bonuses and things like a Scout's Cloak or a Commando's two weapons) rather than the defensive slots themselves. I think perhaps what is truly lacking here is "What can the Assault do that a Logistics suit will never be able to do?" and that should really be the primary focus here when trying to differentiate the two in ways the other cannot emulate. I mean if you think about it, the Assault is really the only specialty suit that doesn't have it's own gimick. Sentinels = Heavy Weapon, Commando = 2 Light Weapons, Scouts = Cloaks, Logis = Equipment. If we want to make the Assaults shine, they need to have something special that no other suit can fit/replicate. I have always felt that Assaults should have a damage bonus. My thinking is that a rifle should be more effective in the hands of a combat class such as Assault and Commando than in a support class such as Logistics. Not enough of a Damage bonus to make the logi infective in comparison, just a small (10% at level 5) to make the combat classes better at combat. Scouts and Sentinels don't need damage bonuses, because they use high damage weapons (Nova Knife, Shotgun, HMG, Forge Gun). Having Scouts or Sentinels do less damage than Assaults or Commandos using rifles is fine, because those classes are not designed for using rifles. These guys are making a lot of sense to me. CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4	Posted - 2015.05.29 20:27:00 - [7] - Quote Luk Manag wrote: Songs of Seraphim wrote: Luk Manag wrote: Well, Rattati was looking for a way to discourage Light Rifles. If you gimp the range on the rifiles, you would see a lot more support weapons. Still not the way to go... I still firmly believe that Logistics should have higher regen with the HP values they currently have. I agree about the defensive power. I just think they need an offensive tradeoff. The current Assault bonuses are passable, but the new logi slots + speed are looking pretty exciting. I could carry REs AND Nanohives...for more REs lol. New Nanohive mechanic, hive will no longer resupply their owner. Totally spitballing here, actually let's not drag the thread off topic, anyone who's interested in responding to this idea please redirect to the ward. CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4	Posted - 2015.05.29 20:31:00 - [8] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: I think it is amusing to see how many people get bent out of shape because of the mere suggestion of Logistics losing the Light Weapon slot. Personally, I think it is the best option for balancing the races as well as differentiating between dropsuit roles Either lose all weapons and go full on EVE style support, or leave the light weapon and retain some ability to legitimately defend oneself. Mid range stuff is just a way to create a less than viable set of suits and undermine the entire role. CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4	Posted - 2015.05.30 03:02:00 - [9] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: Cross Atu wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: I think it is amusing to see how many people get bent out of shape because of the mere suggestion of Logistics losing the Light Weapon slot. Personally, I think it is the best option for balancing the races as well as differentiating between dropsuit roles Either lose all weapons and go full on EVE style support, or leave the light weapon and retain some ability to legitimately defend oneself. Mid range stuff is just a way to create a less than viable set of suits and undermine the entire role. ooh! 2 Logis being able to outrep 5-6 player's combined firepower from most of the battlefield away! Let's do that one XD Yeah, that doesn't sound OP at all!! Actually, as I've stated elsewhere, it does sound improper for a FPS lobby shooter but it is more proper than the "sidearm method" because at least there is still a tactical trade-off. You still cannot lock more targets than your rep tool allows (two in some cases at proto) and you yourself are still not being repped, on top of which no amount of reps prevents getting Alpha'ed to death (and with "gotcha" tactics being so common in Dust that's a fairly common risk). If we're talking a real 'weaponless logi' in dust would we translate literal numbers directly from EVE? Of course not. But is a weaponless logi which follows in the conceptual footsteps of the EVE logi more tactically valid and viable than the deeply unfortunate "sidearm only method", yes it is every single day of the week. Being able to defend ones self with some modicum of effectiveness is great, but failing that (and let's be clear here, for most players on average having only a single side arm most certainly is failing that) having zero ability to defend ones self in exchange for being a better (if now fully dependent) support squad member is a substantially superior iteration. Making the role 'jack of all trades, mediocre at all' isn't useful or healthy role definition. CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4	Posted - 2015.06.01 00:07:00 - [10] - Quote el OPERATOR wrote: Cross Atu wrote: Sidearm only is bad IMO for a number of reasons. Either leave the logi with the ability to use a basic rifle or skip the weapons entirely and let logi be a full on support with no weapons but very potent reps (and add the option to bring shield reps). No thank you on the bolded. How does his idea even keep coming up? Reps, btw, are potent as hell already at pro. How much extra potency would you consider to be "very potent" without being just immortality beams? I ask because there are occasional calls for beam nerf since multiple logis on one target can create immortal soldiers already. It keeps coming up because it's better than the pretense that "sidearm only" is a remotely viable way for a suit to be run, especially one that is (frequently and currently) being framed has having less combat context mobility than Scouts or Assaults. If sidearms where truly a viable option for a weapon to the point where it could be the only weapon a role has access to then players who focus on the slayer role would not be so quick to say they'd abandon the assault frame, and it's side arm slot, bonus to fitting side arms, LWs and nades, and bonus to LWs in favor of the logi frame however this very thing happened with merely the suggestion of swapping speed profiles. Speaking as someone who's been using Reps since before Codex build of closed beta even during the dark times when they gave no WP whatsoever I know exactly how potent they are and when compared with actual grown up EVE level reps they're pretty laughable. The simple reality of logistics is that either A) they are supposed to be in the combat zone with the ability to meaningfully defend themselves B) they are supposed to be in the combat zone without the ability to defend themselves but meaningfully (more) potent support action and/or exclusive access to support equipment. The pallid psudo option of "C leave them with support options that can be virtually replicated by any class with an equipment slot but nerf their ability to survive/defend themselves so they're not meaningful able to exist in the combat zones where they're supposed to be to supply support" is deeply conceptually flawed and needs to be abandoned entirely. We have an example in New Eden right now of how support/logistics play looks if said logistics play is not meant to have combat capacity. It looks like having the ability to counter multiple streams of incoming damage and having functionally exclusive access to the support actions/mods. So either logi need to be "non-combat" and follow the EVE method, including more exclusive access to equipment (and by more it could very well mean total, depending on how things are done) and lose all weapons as well as having the virtues of said support action (specifically reps, with a possible look at others) scaled up. Or, logi are accepted as combat mercs who are supposed to be combat mercs and have a focus on providing more support than their counterparts at the expense of less on board support for their dps output (i.e. lack of role bonuses to damage). This is following the method established for other roles like Sentinels and Scouts both of whom are combat mercs who havea focus on providing field assets other than a specialization on dps, while the Commandos and Assaults are combat roles that specialize in providing above mechanical average dps output with their racial weapons. To be sure the actual mechanics for all of these things could use a look, but the concepts are pretty straight forward. CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!

Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4	Posted - 2015.06.01 00:09:00 - [11] - Quote Sequal's Back wrote: I'd just copy & past the assault layout for each race, take out the sidearm from every logi, and put a 3/3/4 EQ slot progression. Base HP stats not being as good as assault suits wouldn't bring back the slayer logi + no sidearms. Do this CCP, make things simple. Assuming that they still fit their proper place in the role/game wide Speed/HP curve this seems pretty reasonable. CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4	Posted - 2015.06.01 00:19:00 - [12] - Quote Vitharr Foebane wrote: MINA Longstrike wrote: Vitharr Foebane wrote: MINA Longstrike wrote: I want to address an elephant in the room here: I do not think people arguing for keeping the sidearm on the amarr logi (in exchange for a high slot) are arguing in good faith or without conflicts of interest. Making a 'trade' of ~70 non-primary tank or a single 'utility' slot (without much that can actually go there) for a sidearm is a non-choice. You'd have to be ***ing dumb to not want the options that sidearm presents, especially if you're getting buffed up to 4 equipment anyways. It comes down to a question of "Will ccp actually let me have the same layout as my racial assault, but with 3 more equipment slots and one lower high slot". I firmly feel that logistics should be standardized and that the amarr should be losing the sidearm, as carried equipment buffs have largely addressed some of the concerns present to them. the increased carried equipment is a non factor if you are dead. no pulse, no bonus. Amarr Logi needs the ability to defend itself and it's bonus Logistics are team oriented - their first line of defense should be their team, their last line should be their own light weapon. You do not need a sidearm. is staying alive and defending your links so that your squad can spawn back in not team oriented? This is a more relevant point that it may seem to some who are not directly familiar with the mechanics of the Amarr bonus to uplinks. Specifically the fact that the bonus does not function* while the logi player is dead, meaning that every moment the Amarr logi spends dead is a moment that the entire racial support bonus of the Amarr logi provides no benefit for the logis team. As long as the "turned off while dead" mechanic remains in place, the Amarr logi defending itself so it is able to stay alive and thus providing it's racial bonus, actually is supporting it's squad. (I personally have long wanted to "off while dead" mechanic to be removed, which would also remove the above argument for the sidearm, but while it remains the reasons for an Amarr - and perhaps Caldari who's bonus works in a similar way - to have a sidearm likewise remains). CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4	Posted - 2015.06.01 06:42:00 - [13] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Vitharr Foebane wrote: MINA Longstrike wrote: Logistics are team oriented - their first line of defense should be their team, their last line should be their own light weapon. You do not need a sidearm. is staying alive and defending your links so that your squad can spawn back in not team oriented? *Vae victis* Are logi stealing mottos from Blood Omen now? I mean I'm down, but I didn't know we were ready to air those publicly yet (yes I'm aware that this has a historical context that pre-dates those games, but where's the fun in that ) CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4	Posted - 2015.06.01 06:43:00 - [14] - Quote Sequal's Back wrote: Cross Atu wrote: Sequal's Back wrote: I'd just copy & past the assault layout for each race, take out the sidearm from every logi, and put a 3/3/4 EQ slot progression. Base HP stats not being as good as assault suits wouldn't bring back the slayer logi + no sidearms. Do this CCP, make things simple. Assuming that they still fit their proper place in the role/game wide Speed/HP curve this seems pretty reasonable. EDIT: The debate about the Amarr layout aside Agreed about the Amarr Logi ^^ Some tweaks will probably have to be done but that's a good and simple way. Shayz did a quite good thread about the Amarr Logi btw. Indeed, also interested in the results of that poll. CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4	Posted - 2015.06.01 16:19:00 - [15] - Quote As a quick - but relevant - sidebar; the discussion of the Amarr sidearm and how it (and the Cal) interact with the racial bonuses is much like the Assault conversation as well and labors under the same basic flaw. That being the notion that slot layouts should be defined/redefined based on the racial or role skills which are in both cases lack luster for providing merit and incentive to run the role itself. The slot layout, or basic stat profile, of either medium frame should not be defined (or re-defined) but the value (or lack there of) of the current bonuses. The skills need work, that's a given, but the slots and stats should be balanced within each role and within the medium line, in light of a context where the racial and role skills are presumed to be in a proper state. If they are not balanced within that presumed framework all balance that is applied to them will have to be re-worked once again when the bonuses are addressed. So, while considering proper slot layout assuming the following at all times. The assault is better at providing DPS due to it's racial skills The logi is better at providing support (aka using equipment) due to it's racial skills Survivability should be defined by a equal (but NOT identical) speed/eHP ratio game wide Slots should be balanced with role vision in mind, but largely against each other not against aspects covered by racial skills et al Without this framework for the discussion it is very easy to spend functionally limitless amounts of time presenting theory crafting (and counter theory crafting) "what if" scenarios, essentially running in circles rather than moving towards any form of constructive context or resolution. 0.02 ISK Cross CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4	Posted - 2015.06.01 18:09:00 - [16] - Quote Kaze Eyrou wrote: Back on topic, I too would like to see the slot progression similar to what we have on Assaults. However, I'm against having Logistics natively faster than Assaults. I believe doing so would cause another Logi Slayer era. At least that's my 2 ISK on the issue. Be it faster with lower HP, or slower with higher HP, the relative placement of any role on the HP to Speed ratio should never define their 'slayer' status on average (unless the curve is broken, in which case it would need fixed). If fast, low HP logi are so potent that they become better slayers than assaults (properly bonused assaults) then there is a fundamental problem with speed that reaches well beyond the scope of balance between a couple roles and it needs to be addressed. Simply put, the stats of logi shouldn't be defined by making them inferior to assaults, rather both the assault and logi should have their stats defined by being survivable and stable within their role and then specialization applied (via racial skills et al) to make the roles attractive for their specialized use. We don't, for example, nerf the HP of all other roles to make the Sentinel properly resilient, rather we apply damage resistance to the Sentinel so that it's properly specialized. (but we certainly do want to make sure that, skills included, the assault is a robust dps slayer class, just as the logi should provide meaningful support value above and beyond what a squad of non-logi could supply for themselves, there's some work to be done to reach either goal) I suppose my point here is speed and HP of each role should be defined through a game wide method, role balance should be advised by the presence of all the other roles most certainly, but not outright defined by it (IMO anyway) as out right definition of one role by another risks the "one role to rule them all" situation we've faced in the past. EDIT: Just to be clear, assault being faster and lower HP as you seem to suggest is every bit as valid as assault being slower with high HP, and I don't mean to imply otherwise. Simply stating that "because slayer logi" shouldn't be any kind of concern when formulating the conceptual shape of a game state where there will be solid racial bonuses for the assault and logi and where a proper Speed/HP ratio exists. CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4	Posted - 2015.06.01 19:38:00 - [17] - Quote Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: Cross Atu wrote: As a quick - but relevant - sidebar; the discussion of the Amarr sidearm and how it (and the Cal) interact with the racial bonuses is much like the Assault conversation as well and labors under the same basic flaw. That being the notion that slot layouts should be defined/redefined based on the racial or role skills which are in both cases lack luster for providing merit and incentive to run the role itself. The slot layout, or basic stat profile, of either medium frame should not be defined (or re-defined) but the value (or lack there of) of the current bonuses. The skills need work, that's a given, but the slots and stats should be balanced within each role and within the medium line, in light of a context where the racial and role skills are presumed to be in a proper state. If they are not balanced within that presumed framework all balance that is applied to them will have to be re-worked once again when the bonuses are addressed. So, while considering proper slot layout assuming the following at all times. The assault is better at providing DPS due to it's racial skills The logi is better at providing support (aka using equipment) due to it's racial skills Survivability should be defined by a equal (but NOT identical) speed/eHP ratio game wide Slots should be balanced with role vision in mind, but largely against each other not against aspects covered by racial skills et al Without this framework for the discussion it is very easy to spend functionally limitless amounts of time presenting theory crafting (and counter theory crafting) "what if" scenarios, essentially running in circles rather than moving towards any form of constructive context or resolution. 0.02 ISK Cross If we assume that we get (through either iteration or part of a comprehensive update) solid logistics bonuses focused on direct support, then there should be no meaningful reason for the Amarr Logi to keep its sidearm (Other than traditional flavor, or if the bonus is focused on a deploy-able, where that bonus goes away if the logi dies). My point is, that the bonus as is right now has been tied to the slot layout, they are not independent variables under current conditions, we have to assume that changes. Additionally, there should be no issue with Logi's having Light Weapons if we assume that the Assaults get a proper bonus to their light weapons (Something more similar to the Amarr/Min Assault bonuses...or possibly in addition to bonuses along those lines). There is no issue with Logi having Light Weapons never has been despite the many flawed attempts to assume otherwise. A weakness in one thing (the dps output of the assault in this case) is not a reason to nerf another separate thing (be that scouts, heavies, logi, as have all happened... the commandos have been safe in that they are currently pre-nerfed). The sidearm on the Amarr could go either way, there is no specific reason why it must be there with the properly assumed case, but there is also no clear reason why it should not (presuming we account for the rest of the slot layout to be balanced). It is every bit as much tradition to assume that logi have no sidearm as it is to assume that the Amarr is the exception to that, there is no explicit reason for or against it which is largely why it is still so frequently debated. The major impacts that make the slot itself - or rather it's value - so subjective is that only one weapon can be employed at a time thus limiting the utility of the side arm to a sub-set of use cases (for example when you run out of ammo during a gun fight). Further, 'the thing' that it is commonly weighed against is an equipment slot but those don't hold an absolute value either as their net value decreases as you gain more of them. Sound odd? Let me elaborate. How much value would a single slot be to a Sentinel? Having one rep tool is of value, having 3 is not three times as valuable. Bringing a stack of hives on an assault suit provides a great deal of utility, most slayers are however not going to be able to use up a full payload of 3-4 slots worth of hives before they die. Having uplinks on the field is valuable, and more to prevent loss of all holds merit, but if you're trying to spawn into a location having 1 present is vital, having 12 present is primarily useful in that it ensures you retain that 1 which you actually need 4 Injectors serves no purpose Now of course you can diversify your slots and that does provide value, I do not mean to imply otherwise, but you can only use so much at a single time so even there the value is throttled. Just as it is throttled in the case of running - for example - multiple active scanners. Are 4 scanners useful in certain situations? Sure. But the value gained from a 3rd or 4th scanner is not as large of an upswing as the value gained from the first, or even second. CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4	Posted - 2015.06.01 19:43:00 - [18] - Quote Ran out of characters, but the point being that nothing is an independent variable, nor does anything once context is applied, hold a 100% static value, not slots, not stats, not the mods your suits are fitted with. So while obviously taking an approach that focuses on fewer things at a time will not account for everything right out of the gate, neither will an approach that vainly attempts to look to widely at everything simultaneously. The differences being that the somewhat more simplified approach provides better context for the tuning that will likely be required either way. It's very useful in complex systems to try and maintain as many apples to apples comparisons as one is able. Building from them to address the wider more nuanced implications is required no doubt, but trying to do everything at once is not actually very viable. 0.02 ISK CPM 1 mail me your feedback and remember to have fun!

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.