DUST Search - To Rattati: revamping active scanners

Vulpes Dolosus wrote:

This encourages the "spin-to-win" that was plaguing scanners before (and is still a bit of a problem today). A Gal logi with several active scanners can activate, spin, release, and use the other while the first is recharging. So long as the up-time of the scanning is longer than an instant, the limiting angle of the scan is pointless.

A few things I believe would balance active scanners:

-"Blip" results: instead of having a constant chevron over enemies' heads, a static indicator should "update" every second or so.

-Falloff: Similar to passives, longer ranged scans would be penalized considering how far they are able to scan (100% scan up to 66% max range, with a curved rise to 150-175% precision at maxed range). *Numbers are just to convey my idea, not strict

-Restrict results to HUD or Minimap only: My idea is to make passives Minimap only and actives HUD only, but the idea of limited results is worth exploring. Minimap only will benefit only those in the proximity of the scan to benefit from or those who happen to be looking at the overhead map. HUD only is very limited in the Intel it gives as well.

Pages: [1] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Alena Ventrallis Commando Perkone Caldari State 3	Posted - 2015.07.02 20:51:00 - [1] - Quote Spreadsheet The basic proposal is to make active scanners truly active. They will function similar to the cloak. You pull the trigger to scan, which begins draining it at the rate given in the spreadsheet. It turns off once it is depleted, taking time to recharge back to full given in the spreadsheet. You can stop scanning by releasing the trigger at any time before depletion, and it will begin recharging back to full. So basically the cloak if you had to hold down the trigger to keep it active. Determining if you are scanned works as it does now. If the scanner's precision is lower than your profile, you light up. Here's the big change: YOU ONLY LIGHT UP IF YOU ARE ACTIVELY BEING SCANNED. If the scanner gets off you for any reason (the scanner turned away from you, the scanner turned off, etc.) you immediately stop being scanned. This creates a whole new dynamic to active scans, and makes them more useful while requiring more effort to use. If Rattati is so inclined, I have soe suggestions as to how this can be implemented. As to other stats, I used a few principles to create the spreadsheet. As scanner range goes up, scan angle goes down. I normalized all scanners at 10s uptime with a 30s depleted uptime. The stable scanner gains longer uptime for a longer recharge, and the quantam scanner is a shorter recharge for a shorter uptime. I made the tactical scanner (is that what it's called) available at all levels, and made it a low angle, short duration scanner with a base recharge time, but it has the precision of the next higher tier. GalLogi bonus would decrease precision as now, and would increase uptime instead of duration. With these changes, scanning can be either a "snapshot" (a scanner sweeps the area, highlighting a large area but for a very very short duration) or a duration scan (a scanner provides constant intel by actively pointing his scanner somewhere and holding the trigger until it depletes) This means a scanner doesn't have to wait for the full recharge if they don't want to. They can give a quick scan of a point, say just to get a quick count of how many people are there, or he can give a long 10s scan that requires him to A) not have a weapon out, B) keep facing the same location making flanks easier. In order for scouts to have an easier time with these changes. There would be no "Some Margin of Error" message if someone beats a scanner's precision. If they aren't scanned, you will have no idea they are there. This is to make sure the Duvolle Tactical scanner becomes an almost guaranteed "Scout is here!" since even if they aren't highlighted, it would be pretty easy to figure out where a scout is by finding the margin of error and guessing where the scout could be hiding. Stealth should not be so easily circumvented. If you can't scan them, there will be nothing letting you know where they are. In short, active scanners become truly active, range and scan angle are rebalanced, and we gain tactical (?) scanners at all levels. Over thinking, over analyzing separates the body from the mind.
el OPERATOR Sinq Laison Gendarmes Gallente Federation 1	Posted - 2015.07.02 21:42:00 - [2] - Quote No, Thank You. Open-Beta Vet. CAPCRO Nomad. DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1	Posted - 2015.07.02 22:19:00 - [3] - Quote Yes, please. Everything about the proposal is reasonable, though I would say that the scan angle should be smaller base. 60 degrees is quite a large area, I'd probably suggest about 45 degrees as a standard. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.03 00:36:00 - [4] - Quote Would support. +1. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Ares 514 D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 1	Posted - 2015.07.03 01:22:00 - [5] - Quote I think this is a great idea. Overlord of Broman
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 6	Posted - 2015.07.03 01:53:00 - [6] - Quote Very interesting. I'll keep an eye on this thread and see how the discussion unfolds. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast & Blog www.biomassed.net
One Eyed King Nos Nothi 10	Posted - 2015.07.03 02:03:00 - [7] - Quote I think this looks like a very good balancing option. Especially considering team deploy in PC, and 8 man squads will have all those shared active scans, no matter what the level. Former CEO of the Land of the BIind. Any double entendre is unintended I assure you.
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.03 02:43:00 - [8] - Quote One Eyed King wrote: I think this looks like a very good balancing option. Especially considering team deploy in PC, and 8 man squads will have all those shared active scans, no matter what the level. Agreed. 15dB Focused Scans shared 8-ways (or 16!) would be a pain. Same for shared squad sight. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
Alena Ventrallis Commando Perkone Caldari State 3	Posted - 2015.07.03 02:56:00 - [9] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Yes, please. Everything about the proposal is reasonable, though I would say that the scan angle should be smaller base. 60 degrees is quite a large area, I'd probably suggest about 45 degrees as a standard. I wish there was a way to display scan area, but I think 60-¦ is reasonable. The base has half the range of the flux, so I gave it twice the angle. The proximity was given 1.5x the angle since a 120-¦ scanner sounds OP to me no matter the distance. I'll look for a visualization of the angles to post. Over thinking, over analyzing separates the body from the mind.
Aeon Amadi Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 11	Posted - 2015.07.03 03:15:00 - [10] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: One Eyed King wrote: I think this looks like a very good balancing option. Especially considering team deploy in PC, and 8 man squads will have all those shared active scans, no matter what the level. Agreed. 15dB Focused Scans shared 8-ways (or 16!) would be a pain. Same for shared squad sight. What is your proposal for finding Scouts, then? The current design was what the Barbershop submitted in the past as to let the Gallente Logi force Scouts into an all Profile Dampened fit using Active Scanners. If they can no-longer do that, than Scouts can run around with more EHP and less focus on maintaining a low profile. Some people ask us, "Where do you call home?" And we say, "Home is where the bullets fly. Where the shells land."

Terry Webber Molon Labe. RUST415 774	Posted - 2015.07.03 03:47:00 - [11] - Quote I'm not sure about this proposal. It would have to be in the game to see actual results. Inertial Booster Module Vehicle Installation
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 11	Posted - 2015.07.03 04:04:00 - [12] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: One Eyed King wrote: I think this looks like a very good balancing option. Especially considering team deploy in PC, and 8 man squads will have all those shared active scans, no matter what the level. Agreed. 15dB Focused Scans shared 8-ways (or 16!) would be a pain. Same for shared squad sight. What is your proposal for finding Scouts, then? The current design was what the Barbershop submitted in the past as to let the Gallente Logi force Scouts into an all Profile Dampened fit using Active Scanners. If they can no-longer do that, than Scouts can run around with more EHP and less focus on maintaining a low profile. If I were calling the shots? Hmmm ... I'd keep an eye on Scout kill/spawn efficiency. If efficiency dips in PC following squad size changes, I'd assume shared passives would be to blame. I'd immediately set inner scan ring precision equal to middle-ring precision (50% --> 100%); this would effectively disable high intensity inner rings. Then, I'd buff Range Amp output from 15% to 30% (split the difference with the former 45%). This would potentially put AM Scouts back on the map, and it would afford GA/CA Scouts who fit Range Amp(s) opportunity to better manage risk factors. I would expect Scout efficiency for all four races to improve on account of the above changes; if efficiency improved beyond acceptable bounds, I'd buff inner ring precision and monitor the situation. Rinse / Repeat until efficiency returns to within target bounds. If (on the other hand) after the above changes, Scout kill/spawn efficiency remained below acceptable bounds, I'd take a look at Focused Scanner usage in PC. If it is significant, I'd nerf its precision and watch for change in Scout efficiency. Rinse / Repeat until efficiency is within target bounds. Kill/Spawn efficiency tells us whether or not Scouts are being found; how they are being found is secondary. Low Efficiency tells us that they're being found too easily. High Efficiency tells us that they aren't easy enough to find. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
One Eyed King Nos Nothi 10	Posted - 2015.07.03 04:09:00 - [13] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: One Eyed King wrote: I think this looks like a very good balancing option. Especially considering team deploy in PC, and 8 man squads will have all those shared active scans, no matter what the level. Agreed. 15dB Focused Scans shared 8-ways (or 16!) would be a pain. Same for shared squad sight. What is your proposal for finding Scouts, then? The current design was what the Barbershop submitted in the past as to let the Gallente Logi force Scouts into an all Profile Dampened fit using Active Scanners. If they can no-longer do that, than Scouts can run around with more EHP and less focus on maintaining a low profile. Many many things have changed since then, resulting in a completely different environment. Submitted designs don't exist in a vacuum, and what was appropriate at one point isn't necessarily appropriate in another. With changes to squad sizes this needs to be addressed. If tanked scouts become a problem again, though I don't think it likely, additional speed penalties to plates can always be added as a counter. Former CEO of the Land of the BIind. Any double entendre is unintended I assure you.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1	Posted - 2015.07.03 12:41:00 - [14] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Yes, please. Everything about the proposal is reasonable, though I would say that the scan angle should be smaller base. 60 degrees is quite a large area, I'd probably suggest about 45 degrees as a standard. I wish there was a way to display scan area, but I think 60-¦ is reasonable. The base has half the range of the flux, so I gave it twice the angle. The proximity was given 1.5x the angle since a 120-¦ scanner sounds OP to me no matter the distance. I'll look for a visualization of the angles to post. My main issue with that wide an angle is, because it's able to be swept about, you can hold it on a large group of enemies at once. I guess it depends on duration and such, but it just seems a little too effective: 60 degrees as a snapshot covers an area, but this type of scanner isn't a snapshot, hence my concern. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Alena Ventrallis Commando Perkone Caldari State 3	Posted - 2015.07.03 14:39:00 - [15] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Yes, please. Everything about the proposal is reasonable, though I would say that the scan angle should be smaller base. 60 degrees is quite a large area, I'd probably suggest about 45 degrees as a standard. I wish there was a way to display scan area, but I think 60-¦ is reasonable. The base has half the range of the flux, so I gave it twice the angle. The proximity was given 1.5x the angle since a 120-¦ scanner sounds OP to me no matter the distance. I'll look for a visualization of the angles to post. My main issue with that wide an angle is, because it's able to be swept about, you can hold it on a large group of enemies at once. I guess it depends on duration and such, but it just seems a little too effective: 60 degrees as a snapshot covers an area, but this type of scanner isn't a snapshot, hence my concern. Sweeping an area only reveals enemies for an instant. Good to know they are there, but not so good for keeping track of them. The only way to keep track of them constantly is to face them and hold the scanner on them, meaning you have no weapon equipped and you are vulnerable to flanks. Thus the scan angle. Scanerinas are one way to scan, but not the only useful way. Over thinking, over analyzing separates the body from the mind.
Skullmiser Vulcansu 315	Posted - 2015.07.03 14:49:00 - [16] - Quote I am reminded of how scans used to work, when I started playing, around version 1.6. In every game I played, Scans were going constantly, and I would die almost immediately when I was scanned(I was playing Logistics). I maxed out profile dampening very early on, and even now I can't stand to not have at least one on. It was pretty miserable. I've been seeing active scanners increasingly. They're not terrible, though. I don't actually like the snapshot mechanic. I'd rather it need to actually be scanning continuously for the duration, and have the wielder the ability to change the direction of the scan. That may be too effective, though, and logistics suits may just alternate scanners, and scan forever in all 2-Ç radians. Just be careful. Scanners do a lot more than just find scouts. If this game was fun, I wouldn't be playing it.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 1	Posted - 2015.07.03 16:03:00 - [17] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Sweeping an area only reveals enemies for an instant. Good to know they are there, but not so good for keeping track of them. The only way to keep track of them constantly is to face them and hold the scanner on them, meaning you have no weapon equipped and you are vulnerable to flanks. Thus the scan angle. Scanerinas are one way to scan, but not the only useful way. What could be an issue, though, is sweeping rapidly to find where they are and then holding it on a large area for a long time. The two tactics aren't exclusive, I just think conservative estimates are better too begin with. Alt of Halla Murr. Sentinel.
Alena Ventrallis Commando Perkone Caldari State 3	Posted - 2015.07.03 20:53:00 - [18] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Alena Ventrallis wrote: Sweeping an area only reveals enemies for an instant. Good to know they are there, but not so good for keeping track of them. The only way to keep track of them constantly is to face them and hold the scanner on them, meaning you have no weapon equipped and you are vulnerable to flanks. Thus the scan angle. Scanerinas are one way to scan, but not the only useful way. What could be an issue, though, is sweeping rapidly to find where they are and then holding it on a large area for a long time. The two tactics aren't exclusive, I just think conservative estimates are better too begin with. I'll draw up a second spreadsheet with some modified uptimes and recharge values. Over thinking, over analyzing separates the body from the mind.
Alena Ventrallis Commando Perkone Caldari State 3	Posted - 2015.08.27 18:54:00 - [19] - Quote Bump Over thinking, over analyzing separates the body from the mind.
Vulpes Dolosus Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance 3	Posted - 2015.08.28 09:07:00 - [20] - Quote This encourages the "spin-to-win" that was plaguing scanners before (and is still a bit of a problem today). A Gal logi with several active scanners can activate, spin, release, and use the other while the first is recharging. So long as the up-time of the scanning is longer than an instant, the limiting angle of the scan is pointless. A few things I believe would balance active scanners: -"Blip" results: instead of having a constant chevron over enemies' heads, a static indicator should "update" every second or so. -Falloff: Similar to passives, longer ranged scans would be penalized considering how far they are able to scan (100% scan up to 66% max range, with a curved rise to 150-175% precision at maxed range). *Numbers are just to convey my idea, not strict -Restrict results to HUD or Minimap only: My idea is to make passives Minimap only and actives HUD only, but the idea of limited results is worth exploring. Minimap only will benefit only those in the proximity of the scan to benefit from or those who happen to be looking at the overhead map. HUD only is very limited in the Intel it gives as well. Dust is there! I was real! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~

Alena Ventrallis Commando Perkone Caldari State 3	Posted - 2015.08.28 09:43:00 - [21] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: This encourages the "spin-to-win" that was plaguing scanners before (and is still a bit of a problem today). A Gal logi with several active scanners can activate, spin, release, and use the other while the first is recharging. So long as the up-time of the scanning is longer than an instant, the limiting angle of the scan is pointless. A few things I believe would balance active scanners: -"Blip" results: instead of having a constant chevron over enemies' heads, a static indicator should "update" every second or so. -Falloff: Similar to passives, longer ranged scans would be penalized considering how far they are able to scan (100% scan up to 66% max range, with a curved rise to 150-175% precision at maxed range). *Numbers are just to convey my idea, not strict -Restrict results to HUD or Minimap only: My idea is to make passives Minimap only and actives HUD only, but the idea of limited results is worth exploring. Minimap only will benefit only those in the proximity of the scan to benefit from or those who happen to be looking at the overhead map. HUD only is very limited in the Intel it gives as well. Scanerinas should be a valid tactic, but more of a "what's around me" instead of "have ALL the Intel" That's why my proposal only gives you constant Intel if you are constantly scanning. If you're just spinning around, sure you're going to know so.done is there, but nothing else like where they are going. Over thinking, over analyzing separates the body from the mind.
Isa Lucifer Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 385	Posted - 2015.08.28 15:56:00 - [22] - Quote I like the idea. It has merit. Worth to play around. Amarr Victor Join "PIE Ground Control" for secure Amarr FW syncing and orbital support
Jakkal Shoobah Eternal Beings Smart Deploy 214	Posted - 2015.09.01 07:57:00 - [23] - Quote I like the idea. I think it would make scanners quite enjoyable . As long as they remain as easy to swap from as a rep tool. None of that long delay cloak stuff. I think not holding a gun is vulnerable enough. While slow to anger and occasionally indecisive, they are also capable of harnessing enormous resolve when truly tested.


Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page