|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
   |
Posted - 2016.01.04 03:16:00 -
[1] - Quote
Foo Fighting wrote:One Eyed King wrote:Foo Fighting wrote:They all have a lower profile than other suits and gal and cal get an additional profile bonus too. Any scout can avoid all but 1 rather gimped scanner. All scouts can beat all active and passive scans, with the exception of inner circle scans. Min, Cal and Amarr cannot beat a focused scanner on a gal logi - only a Gal scout can. And only a Gal scout can evade an amarr scouts inner circle. Any scout can evade any other suits inner circle. This all assumes fitting relavent modules for the task.
None of that is accurate, Foo.
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 04:20:00 -
[2] - Quote
Meee One wrote:No,the main thing that lead to the "overbalance" (OP) scouts was that they had enough innate dampening/eWAR built-in that they could stack eHP and break hit detection.Stealth and health,one had to go.
You're right on this point. Precisely as you said, there was a time when Scouts could stack plates and benefit from strong innate EWAR. Scouts proposed a couple different solutions to this problem, either of which would've worked. One proposed solution was to assign efficacy bonuses to EWAR modules, such that there would be no innate EWAR bonus for Assault Lite. Another proposed solution was to increase the movement penalties for plates when equipped by Scouts, or otherwise restrict plate usage on Scouts, which would've absolutely detered Assault Lite.
Instead of rolling out a fix targeted at the problem (Assault Lite), CCP decided to nerf Scout EWAR across the board. Assault Lite actually weathered this nerf better than other Scout playstyles. EWAR Scouts and Biotic Scouts (playstyles which have existed since Beta) have been largely phased out of competitive play. AM Scouts are now a joke. Intraclass parity -- which was found w/HF Charlie -- has once again been lost. And here they've left it for over a year.
To add insult to injury, CCP turbobuffed the GalLogi at the same time that they nerfed Scout EWAR. "We're nerfing Scout EWAR because permascan is bad. We're also introducing a new, more efficient form a permascan."
Mistakes were made. How to fix?
#1. First and foremost, fix GalLogi permascan.
#2. Make passive scans less bad (or) find a new job for the AM Scout (and possibly CA).
#3. Finetune Falloff mechanics (or) rework EWAR.
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 04:47:00 -
[3] - Quote
Medical Crash wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:Meee One wrote:No,the main thing that lead to the "overbalance" (OP) scouts was that they had enough innate dampening/eWAR built-in that they could stack eHP and break hit detection.Stealth and health,one had to go.
You're right on this point. Precisely as you said, there was a time when Scouts could stack plates and benefit from strong innate EWAR. Scouts proposed a couple different solutions to this problem, either of which would've worked. One proposed solution was to assign efficacy bonuses to EWAR modules, such that there would be no innate EWAR bonus for Assault Lite. Another proposed solution was to increase the movement penalties for plates when equipped by Scouts, or otherwise restrict plate usage on Scouts, which would've absolutely detered Assault Lite. Instead of rolling out a fix targeted at the problem (Assault Lite), CCP decided to nerf Scout EWAR across the board. Assault Lite actually weathered this nerf better than other Scout playstyles. EWAR Scouts and Biotic Scouts (playstyles which have existed since Beta) have been largely phased out of competitive play. AM Scouts are now a joke. Intraclass parity -- which was found w/HF Charlie -- has once again been lost. To add insult to injury, CCP turbobuffed the GalLogi at the same time that they nerfed Scout EWAR. "We're nerfing Scout EWAR because permascan is bad. We're also introducing a new, more efficient form a permascan."
Mistakes were made. How to fix? #1. First and foremost, fix active scans (i.e. GalLogi permascan). #2. Make passive scans less bad (or) find a new job for the AM Scout. #3. Finetune Falloff mechanics (or) rework EWAR. Have you seen the cooldown times of the scanners? The guy scanning sacrifices EQ slots to keep scans up. Also, the Duvolle Focused is very very hard to use, as the scanning angle is tiny, and the duration is like 7.5 seconds with GalLogi bonus(can't remember but has like a 45 second cooldown?!?!?!). Scanners have been shat upon more then enough. Be gone with you I say.
The line reads "fix GalLogi permascan". Permascan occurs at 21dB (not at 15dB).
The Duvolle Focused Active Scanner is among the least problematic of the lot for precisely this reason. Even with 3-4 of them, you can't keep scans up constantly due to lengthy cooldown. By contrast, the Creodron Flux is the absolute worst as it is capable of keeping scans up constantly over vast sections of map.
Another point to ponder here is teamshare vs squadshare. Back when passives were strong, one unit sharing always-up scans with his squad was deemed sufficiently imbalanced to warrant the kneecapping of passive scans. What makes you think that one unit sharing always-up scans with his entire team is balanced?
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 05:06:00 -
[4] - Quote
Medical Crash wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:Medical Crash wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:Meee One wrote:No,the main thing that lead to the "overbalance" (OP) scouts was that they had enough innate dampening/eWAR built-in that they could stack eHP and break hit detection.Stealth and health,one had to go.
You're right on this point. Precisely as you said, there was a time when Scouts could stack plates and benefit from strong innate EWAR. Scouts proposed a couple different solutions to this problem, either of which would've worked. One proposed solution was to assign efficacy bonuses to EWAR modules, such that there would be no innate EWAR bonus for Assault Lite. Another proposed solution was to increase the movement penalties for plates when equipped by Scouts, or otherwise restrict plate usage on Scouts, which would've absolutely detered Assault Lite. Instead of rolling out a fix targeted at the problem (Assault Lite), CCP decided to nerf Scout EWAR across the board. Assault Lite actually weathered this nerf better than other Scout playstyles. EWAR Scouts and Biotic Scouts (playstyles which have existed since Beta) have been largely phased out of competitive play. AM Scouts are now a joke. Intraclass parity -- which was found w/HF Charlie -- has once again been lost. To add insult to injury, CCP turbobuffed the GalLogi at the same time that they nerfed Scout EWAR. "We're nerfing Scout EWAR because permascan is bad. We're also introducing a new, more efficient form a permascan."
Mistakes were made. How to fix? #1. First and foremost, fix active scans (i.e. GalLogi permascan). #2. Make passive scans less bad (or) find a new job for the AM Scout. #3. Finetune Falloff mechanics (or) rework EWAR. Have you seen the cooldown times of the scanners? The guy scanning sacrifices EQ slots to keep scans up. Also, the Duvolle Focused is very very hard to use, as the scanning angle is tiny, and the duration is like 7.5 seconds with GalLogi bonus(can't remember but has like a 45 second cooldown?!?!?!). Scanners have been shat upon more then enough. Be gone with you I say. The line reads "fix GalLogi permascan". Permascan occurs at 21dB (not at 15dB). The Duvolle Focused Active Scanner is among the least problematic of the lot for precisely this reason. Even with 3-4 of them, you can't keep scans up constantly due to lengthy cooldown. By contrast, the Creodron Flux is the absolute worst as it is capable of keeping scans up constantly over vast sections of map. Another point to ponder here is teamshare vs squadshare. Back when passives were strong, we pretty much all agreed that a unit sharing long-range, always-up scans with his squad was imbalanced. What makes you think that a unit sharing long-range, always-up scans with his entire team is balanced?
At the end of the day, permascan is bad for gameplay. It always has been. Fixing GalLogi permascan is a no brainer. As it relates to Scouts ... so long as the OP Eye of Sauron is in play, there will not be for passive recon units. Active and passive scans can (and should) be balanced in such a way that there's room for both roles. Honestly I don't see any problem with 24/7 scans, as the other team has the option of also doing this. The problem to me is scouts dampning. I'm not seeing how CCP can balance this properly without messing something else up. I remember when scouts were OP, completely unscannable. I don't want to go back to those days. I'd rather have everyone on both sides lit up like Christmas, than a few players 100% scan proof. I've said it once and I'll say it again, 100% scan resistance is too powerful, it should not exist. If the inner ring is all we have of preventing that, then so be it.
On 24/7 scans, I disagree, but you're certainly entitled to your opinion. If CCP decides to rubber stamp 24/7 scans, they need to rework the CA Scout and AM Scout racial bonuses to passive scans. All units deserve a competitive, meaningful bonus; on a permascanned battlefield, these units' passives are neither competitive or meaningful.
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 05:17:00 -
[5] - Quote
Medical Crash wrote:... due the incredibly severe nerfs to scanners.
What nerfs? When they fixed 360 spinscanning?
Other than that -- which happened a long time ago -- the only other change to active scanners that I recall is the buff from squad-share to team-share.
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 05:32:00 -
[6] - Quote
Medical Crash wrote:I haven't checked the patch notes...
Warlords
Warlords 1.0 - https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2592509
Warlords 1.1 - https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2734048
Warlords 1.2 - https://dust514.com/news/2015/07/warlords-1.2-overview-patch-notes/
Warlords 1.3 - Soon(TM)
Hotfixes
Hotfix Alpha | Numbers
Hotfix Bravo
Hotfix Charlie | Numbers
Hotfix Delta | Numbers | Dev Blog
Hotfix Echo | Numbers
Unnamed Update (Scotty 2.0)
Unnamed Update (1.1 Patch)
Warlords 1.1.3
Hotfix Foxfour
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 15:09:00 -
[7] - Quote
Mortishai Belmont wrote:
You can either be speedy, tanky, or stealthy. You don't get to have it all.
I'll take that bait!
Say I'm a MinScout who has chosen to be "stealthy". I've committed all 3 of my 3 three low slots to complex dampeners. My scan profile is 16dB. What happens when I get within knife range of an Assault or Logi who's committed 1 high slot to precision? These units have the highest module slot count in the game; is it reasonable that their single-module investment trumps my 100% investment in stealth? I've forgone speed and tank to be stealthy; why is it that my stealth is so easily trumped at so little investment?
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 15:31:00 -
[8] - Quote
Foo Fighting wrote:How do you come to the conclusion the sentinel's inner circle is 25dB? According to this the inner circle is 90% i.e. 45dB - 10% =41.5dB and the outer circle is 110% i.e. 45dB +10% = 49.5dB. Have things changed since the circles were introduced?
The diagram you've referenced was for illustrative purposes. They ended up implementing falloff precision values at 50%, 100%, 130% (dB) and range at 20%, 50%, 100% (meters). This is why range extenders got the ax; inner rings are extremely strong at nominal investment. With falloff values and range extenders as they are, Recon Scouts got the shaft (and have since remained shafted).
To further obfuscate the matter, today's Eye of Sauron GalLogi was birthed at the same time that Recon Scouts were put to pasture. One flavor of permascan was ruled bad-for-gameplay and removed, but it was immediately replaced by another, far more efficient flavor. To further, further obfuscate the matter, Logis were also given stronger base scan range than Scouts.
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 15:55:00 -
[9] - Quote
One Eyed King wrote:Foo Fighting wrote:Appreciate your reply do you have a source for this data, looks like my spreadsheet needs updating. I think its somewhere later in that same thread. That thread is going to be a pain to sort through however. Found it: http://dustsearch.com/thread/181381/author/CCP#5Actually wasn't too hard with using the Dust Search. Much easier to find than the forum search.
It's toward the end. Rattati linked to a spreadsheet. I think the details can also be found in the Uprising 1.10 (Dec 2014) patch notes. Digging ...
http://dust514.com/news/2014/12/uprising-1.10-overview-patch-notes/
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 16:30:00 -
[10] - Quote
One Eyed King wrote:P.S. I miss that kind of dialogue and feedback...
The kind of dialogue where self-serving members of CPM flat-out lie to get what they want? I don't miss that kind of dialogue. Here's to hoping it never happens again. And should it, here's to hoping Rattati is able to part fact from fiction.
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
|
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 16:39:00 -
[11] - Quote
One Eyed King wrote:
Personally, I don't think that there is much that can be done on EWAR while we have the old code and old hardware to deal with.
They could easily tune existing parameters to make for better balanced EWAR interplay. For instance ...
* Active Scanners: Set to squad-share; double recon assist WP.
* Creodron Flux Active Scanner: Reduce angle from 90 to 60 and range from 200m to 150m.
* Passive Scans: Swap Logi and Scout base scan range.
* Falloff: Dialback inner ring precision intensity.
* Range Extenders: Buff slightly (i.e. 15% to 25%).
Voila! Fewer instances of permascan in pubs and room on the battlefield for both passive and active recon.
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 16:40:00 -
[12] - Quote
One Eyed King wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:
The kind of dialogue where self-serving members of CPM flat-out lie to get what they want? I don't miss that kind of dialogue. Here's to hoping it never happens again. And should it, here's to hoping Rattati is able to part fact from fiction.
That is what it devolved to, but it didn't happen with every topic, and it is certainly better than silence. I think you have to take the good with the bad, and on the whole having dialogue and discussion is better than silence.
Agreed 100%.
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 22:29:00 -
[13] - Quote
MexXx Dust-Slayer wrote:maybe deadcatz wrote:
Problem is the creodron flux active scanner and gallente logistics destroys any stealth the scouts may have. So unless the precision on the flux active scanner is nerfed or all scouts get a bonus to scan profile then the never ending cycle will just continue.
But all scouts get under the creodron flux with 1 damp (Gal, Cal) or 2 damps (min, amarr)... Am I missing something? It would make more sense if you were complaining from a non-scout suit's perspective.
You're correct. Not sure what Deadcatz is getting at, but he is right that the Creodron Flux needs work. Its scan area is 5x - 6x greater than the next in line, and it is the primary source of permascan. Last we heard from the Devs, permascan is bad for gameplay. Assuming they haven't since changed their minds, tuning the Creodron Flux would be a big step in the right direction.
Would love to see Active Scan mechanics changed such that Active Scanning involved more of an active effort; something like a reptool. If that's off the table, permascan could just as readily be reigned in by simply nerfing the base stats of problematic scanners. For instance, drop the Creodron Flux scan angle from 90 degrees to 60 and its range from 200m to 150m.
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 22:48:00 -
[14] - Quote
MexXx Dust-Slayer wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:Mortishai Belmont wrote:
You can either be speedy, tanky, or stealthy. You don't get to have it all.
I'll take that bait! Say I'm a MinScout who has chosen to be "stealthy". I've committed all 3 of my 3 three low slots to complex dampeners. My scan profile is 16dB. What happens when I get within knife range of an Assault or Logi who's committed 1 high slot to precision? These units have the highest module slot count in the game; is it reasonable that their single-module investment trumps my 100% investment in stealth? I've forgone speed and tank to be stealthy; why is it that my stealth is so easily trumped at so little investment? 1. Aren't you only completely trumped at what.. 6 meters? 2. You're almost overlapping blips on tacnet, it's somewhat fair game at that point - if he happens to be looking at tacnet at that point, you both have a chance to kill each other, knifer with the upper hand most likely, You have your cloak to stalk and strike at an opportune moment when he is preoccupied to.
1. Correct; 6 meters is the most common, though inner ring range varies by unit (5-9 meters without range extenders; up to 12 meters with range extenders).
2. In a 1v1 setting, perhaps you're right; but it is no longer a 1v1 setting once the Scout is painted to squad tacnet. MedFrames get an "incoming backstab" warning even against a max damp'd MinScout at a nominal investment of 1 precision enhancer. In the case of a single damp'd Scout, they get the "incoming backstab" warning for free (0 precision enhancers). I'd argue that the MedFrame's "incoming backstab" warning should come at greater investment than the current. I'd also argue backstab gameplay would be better balanced if inner ring returns were not be shared with squad.
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 23:39:00 -
[15] - Quote
MexXx Dust-Slayer wrote:
I don't know how people took this thread seriously in the first place, that's the sad part. I thought you were QQ trolling.
Because GalLogi permascan, Scouts and EWAR are all fine?
MexXx Dust-Slayer wrote:I agree that scouts need some reworking, and scans need a nerf
Oh, wait.
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.05 02:33:00 -
[16] - Quote
Medical Crash wrote:Jesus Christ people, do NONE of you remember the period of time when Gal Scouts Dampning was OP? Why do some of you want to go back to those days? The scanner is not the biggest issue it's dampnings strength. Anytime CCP messes with this it screws everything else up.
I say scanners are fine as is, leave dampners and scanning as is. It can and will get worse if altered.
You know if CCP starts messing with this again they WILL break something. I sometimes wonder if they do this intentionally.
You people want 100% scan immunity, and it's not happening, just accept it. That is too powerful, 100% scan proof fits should NOT exist. Doesn't matter if a scout has only 10 HP, scan immunity in good hands is the most dangerous thing in DUST, and you all know that.
This thread is reminding of the tank/AV threads, the debate never ends...... (Take out fuel injectors out of the game and watch tank use plummet)
You act as though even a slight adjustment would somehow return us to Scout 514. Do you have any clue how much has changed since 2014 when Scouts were last OP?
* Nerfs to cloak active damp bonus.
* Nerfs to cloak pool.
* Nerfs to cloak recovery.
* Cloakblind (passive scan range reduced by 85% while cloaked).
* Fire-from-cloak fix ... plus a wonky, 3-second equip/unequip delay.
* Massive nerfs to passive scans and Scout EWAR (via Falloff).
* Get-out-of-jail-free, squad-shared inner rings (via Falloff).
* Massive buffs to Active Scans.
* Removal of directional indicator on passives.
* Buffs to Assault base HP.
* Buffs to Assault slot count.
* Buffs to Assault regen.
* Buffs to Assault DPS.
* Buffs to Logi EWAR.
* Delayed RE fuses.
* Myofibs.
* Bandwidth.
* ...
The Scout witch hunt is over. It's been over for a very long time. People are finally realizing that the mounding Scout nerfs might've been a bit overdone. You're telling us that there can't possibly be functional middle ground between overpowered Scouts of yesterday and what we have today? That any minor tweak will somehow circumvent all of the changes above? And that anyone who says otherwise just wants Scouts to be OP?
Sounds to me like you're grasping at straws.
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.05 17:35:00 -
[17] - Quote
Sbundo'D wrote:The result would be to even the dampening for each scout, so 1 damp = hard to scan, 2 damps = invisible.. The problem doing this is players like Saxonmish/Rafa/LHughes may decide to go back to slayer Scouts *sigh* CCP can balance the suits, but they have no control over the scrubs  
Should they, those slayer scouts would find themselves far less efficient than the imbalanced slayer scouts from times past. I think it important to point this out to those who might otherwise associate the phrase "slayer scout" with the mess we witnessed following Uprising 1.8. While mercs in Scout suits killing things does not necessarily translate to imbalance, mercs in Scout suits killing more efficiently than anything else on the field absolutely translates to imbalance. This is what we observed following 1.8. Assaults were displaced as Scouts were more efficient at killing things.
Which brings us to another major difference between now and then. Assaults today are much stronger than the Assaults from Uprising 1.8. More hitpoints. More slots. Better regen. Better DPS. And better mobility for those running myofibs.
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.06 03:21:00 -
[18] - Quote
A 700HP Scout? That can't be true.
Whatever you think you saw, good sir, it can't possibly have happened. I have it on good authority from CPM1 that the high-hitpoint Scouts referred to as "Assault Lite" did not really exist. Assault Lite was fable cooked up by the Barbershop. Zatara Rought himself said so. Why would he lie?
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.06 04:02:00 -
[19] - Quote
But if he was lying ...
It certainly wouldn't have hurt to implement a class-wide efficacy bonus to profile dampeners. No damps? No profile bonus. Want to stack HP modules on your Scout suit and pretend to be an Assault? That's fine, but you're going to get scanned like an Assault.
Should profile normalization gain any traction, it might not be a bad idea to bundle dampener efficacy alongside it. Just in case.
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.06 12:49:00 -
[20] - Quote
shaman oga wrote:That is what a scout should be. An invisible provider of problems for the enemy team, not a slayer.
Any chance I could get you to qualify this statement? "Scouts should not be slayers" could mean a variety of different things to different people.
To those players who don't like Scouts or perhaps more accurately, don't like getting killed by Scouts ... "Scouts should not be slayers" could mean that Scouts should not kill things (especially not [insert class]) and shouldn't even aspire to kill things.
To those players like Rattati who feel that all unit types should be capable of killing ... "Scouts should not be slayers" could mean that Scouts should not kill things with greater efficiency than Heavies or Assaults.
To those players who can appreciate the effort of setting and luring an enemy into an RE trap or those who are addicted to the edge-of-your-seat thrill of stalking and shanking an enemy with 3-4 times your HP and the power to vaporize you in a split second ... to those players, "Scouts should not be slayers" could mean that Scouts are supposed to kill in a different way than the frontal slayer roles.
So what's your translation? And why?
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
|
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.06 14:28:00 -
[21] - Quote
4 cmp shields + cmp damp + cmp kincat does not make for a particularly strong or competitive calscout. You aren't going to fit much else on it and you're instagib bait for every flavor of AR, ScR or shotgun. Armor is still king for a reason, and you have next to none. As for fast shield recovery, sure it is nice so long as you aren't instagibbed, but it isn't unique anymore. Everyone has fast shield recovery now. Even GA Assaults.
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.06 15:23:00 -
[22] - Quote
MexXx Dust-Slayer wrote: I'm just here bullying scouts that don't know what they should complain about.
Not gonna lie. I laughed when I read this.
PS: If precision enhancers are indeed useless on a CalScout (of all things), EWAR's even more borked than I'd realized!
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.08 16:37:00 -
[23] - Quote
MexXx Dust-Slayer wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:You're also going to be scanned and painted to squad tacnet every time you get within shotgun range of a MedFrame. They don't even need a precision enhancer. Doesn't the proto damp get you under this? As I said before, it's fair game at that point, but with squad share I don't feel the same.
Nope. One proto damp on a max-skilled CalScout gets your profile down to 20dB. If you want to beat an Assault or Logi's unenhanced inner ring, you'll need to run damps in both of your lows. Logis and Assaults -- with those module slots -- get this for free. Who's having cake?
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.08 16:46:00 -
[24] - Quote
maybe deadcatz wrote:MexXx Dust-Slayer wrote:maybe deadcatz wrote:How long will the sh!t stay in the fan? You made a scout thread, what did you expect? I expected a sh!tstorm. That's why I made it. Didn't expect it to actually go this far with my halfassed stirs to keep it going.
High fives all around, guys! Now that we have our facts straight and a good for what needs fixin', would now be a good time to fix EWAR? Or should we plan to redo this dance periodically, like we did for the whole of 2015?
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.08 17:02:00 -
[25] - Quote
Echo 1991 wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:maybe deadcatz wrote:MexXx Dust-Slayer wrote:maybe deadcatz wrote:How long will the sh!t stay in the fan? You made a scout thread, what did you expect? I expected a sh!tstorm. That's why I made it. Didn't expect it to actually go this far with my halfassed stirs to keep it going. High fives all around, guys! Now that we have our facts straight and a good feel for what needs fixin', would now be a good time for an EWAR tuneup? Or should we plan to redo this dance periodically, like we did for the whole of 2015? How would you change it up exactly? I mean we don't want scouts to be completely invisible but at the same time, we don't want Gal logis perma-scanning.
I've got numbers and ideas, Echo, but I also have to run off to work. Can I get back to you on this a bit later?
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.09 18:57:00 -
[26] - Quote
Echo 1991 wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:maybe deadcatz wrote:MexXx Dust-Slayer wrote:maybe deadcatz wrote:How long will the sh!t stay in the fan? You made a scout thread, what did you expect? I expected a sh!tstorm. That's why I made it. Didn't expect it to actually go this far with my halfassed stirs to keep it going. High fives all around, guys! Now that we have our facts straight and a good feel for what needs fixin', would now be a good time for an EWAR tuneup? Or should we plan to redo this dance periodically, like we did for the whole of 2015? How would you change it up exactly? I mean we don't want scouts to be completely invisible but at the same time, we don't want Gal logis perma-scanning.
GalLogi permascan is an EWAR-related balance problem, but it isn't the only EWAR balance problem. There are a few of other things in the EWAR department which could use some polish. If I were calling the shots, below are the changes I'd implement (assuming my goal was balanced EWAR interplay). The changes are broken into two groups: the first assumes that mechanical changes are on-the-table, the second assumes that we have to stay within the bounds of hotfix ...
[i]Finetuning EWAR (w/ mechanical changes)
Active Scan Mechanics - Fix permascan via new scan mechanics. Lots of different, good ideas out there. Beam scanners. Blip scanners. Etc. Probably best to put up a thread and weigh all the different options. No particular preference here so long as permascan is fixed once-and-for-all. It'd also be nice if the new mechanic did not afford KB/M special benefits (i.e. 360 spinscanning).
Active Scanner Stats - Buff recon assist WP by +10 points (all scanners). Buff STD scanner precision from 46dB to 40dB. Buff ADV scanner precision from 36dB to 32dB. Nerf Creodron Flux scan angle from 90 to 60 degrees and range from 200 to 150 meters.
Passive Scan Mechanics - Disable shared passives.
Passive Scan Stats - Set base scan range of all units to 20m. Buff commando base precision from 55dB to 50dB. Buff range extender output from 15% to 30%.
Cloak Mechanics - Keep decloak delay at 3 seconds, but set all other usage delays (equip, unequip, etc) to 1 second. If this for whatever reason can't be accomplished, reduce the current "universal" delay from 3 to 2 seconds.
Cloak Stats - Buff profile reduction from 0-5-10 to 5-10-15. (This will not benefit CA or GA Scouts but will give MN and AM Scouts an alternative means and opportunity by which to duck 21dB active scans, assuming they have good timing and are running a proto cloak.)
AM Scout - Rework racial bonus from +precision to something else. Biotic Efficacy -- which Rattati has been considering since HF Alpha -- is a personal favorite; ScP headshot and reload speed is another fun option.
Scout Racial Bonus - Apply full cloak fitting reduction bonus at Level 1 racial Scout (rather than incrementally).
[i]Finetuning EWAR (w/out mechanical changes)
Active Scan Mechanics - Fix permascan via use limitations and decreased potency. Disable team-shared scans. Limit all suits to one scanner of each type per suit (for instance, Flux + Proximity + Focused + Stable would be permitted while Flux x4 would not be permitted). Nerf active scanner cooldown (all) by 20% to increase downtime between scans.
Active Scan Stats - Buff recon assist WP by +10 points (all scanners). Buff STD scanner precision from 46dB to 40dB. Buff ADV scanner precision from 36dB to 32dB. Nerf Creodron Flux scan angle from 90 to 60 degrees and range from 200 to 150 meters.
Passive Scan Mechanics - Adjust Falloff Inner Rings such that a Medframe with X (or more) complex precision enhancers detects a Scout with X (or fewer) complex dampeners ... in other words, implement a 1:1 ratio with ties favoring the scanner.
Passive Scan Stats - Set base scan range of all units to 20m. Buff commando base precision from 55dB to 50dB. Buff range extender output from 15% to 30%.
Cloak Mechanics - Keep decloak delay at 3 seconds, but set all other usage delays (equip, unequip, etc) to 1 second. If this for whatever reason can't be accomplished, reduce the current "universal" delay from 3 to 2 seconds.
Cloak Stats - Buff profile reduction from 0-5-10 to 5-10-15. (This will not benefit CA or GA Scouts but will give MN and AM Scouts an alternative means and opportunity by which to duck 21dB active scans, assuming they have good timing and are running a proto cloak.)
AM Scout - Rework racial bonus from +precision to something else. Biotic Efficacy -- which Rattati has been considering since HF Alpha -- is a personal favorite; ScP headshot and reload speed is another fun option.
Scout Racial Bonus - Apply full cloak fitting reduction bonus at Level 1 racial Scout (rather than incrementally).
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
18
|
Posted - 2016.01.09 19:00:00 -
[27] - Quote
Ankbar Latrommi wrote:I feel like my participation in thread will get me shat on, but here goes another post... Adipem Nothi wrote:Mortishai Belmont wrote:
You can either be speedy, tanky, or stealthy. You don't get to have it all.
I'll take that bait! Say I'm a MinScout who has chosen to be "stealthy". I've committed all 3 of my 3 three low slots to complex dampeners. My scan profile is 16dB. What happens when I get within knife range of an Assault or Logi who's committed 1 high slot to precision? These units have the highest module slot count in the game; is it reasonable that their single-module investment trumps my 100% investment in stealth? I've forgone speed and tank to be stealthy; why is it that my stealth is so easily trumped at so little investment? Because if it takes getting into knife range before you show up...I have been paying attention to something else--since I didn't know you were coming--and you are in no danger in the small gap of time it takes for you to knife me in the back. (not from me at least)
You're missing a critical component. Passive scans are shared with your squad. Stabbing a merc (and getting away with it) is a much riskier prospect that it'd seem. There's a reason why nova knife kills are uncommon in PC and why nova knife kill spawn efficiency is (and always has been) disproportionately low.
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
|
|
| |
|