Varoth Drac
Dead Man's Game
Preatoriani
2404
   |
Posted - 2017.05.21 10:50:00 -
[1] - Quote
I love the idea, and I think there would be no need for a PG or CPU stat in this case (though obviously it also works with them included).
There is just one change I would strongly suggest. There is no need for type A equipment. When you think about it, anything that passively draws power will only effect the cap regen, not the total capacity. So shield extenders and armour plates would be type B.
I suggest that all passive bonus modules should reduce your cap regen. As you originally suggested, the total capacity can be adjusted with the type C modules (as well as cap regen).
This would not only streamline things but also make it more intuitive without really losing depth. |
Varoth Drac
Dead Man's Game
Preatoriani
2404
|
Posted - 2017.05.21 17:30:00 -
[2] - Quote
One Eyed King wrote:Nomex Gallatin wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:... If you want to properly make the Assault classes be top killers, (Assaults, Vanguard, Infiltrator) then give those classes appropriate "slaying" bonuses and abilities. Don't do it by taking a **** on support classes. This. I don't even buy this. Assaults should have a role, but in any class based FPS you should never just decide out of the gate that one role should be the "top killers." Talk about reducing the depth and strategy. If one class is the "top killer" why bother using anything else? Each class should have it's own circumstance where they are "top killers" that do not significantly overlap, or else you not only minimize Logi's, but every other non Assault class.
I agree, though Pokey mentions multiple killing roles, Assaults, Vanguard annd Infiltrator.
I think the key thing is that in Dust there were multiple ways to build and play the various classes, which was one of the best things about the game. A number of those builds focussed on killing, unsurprisingly since the game was an fps.
If a build's purpose is killing, there's no reason it should be better or worse at it than another build/class, so long as it accomplishes it in a different way, so as not to invalidate another class.
The issuse with slayer-logis and slayer-scouts, was that they did the same as an assault, and so invalidated that archetype by being a better assault than an assault.
For example, a scout performed a number of roles such as:
Uplink runner
Speed hacker
Assassin
Light assault
Neither an uplink runner or speed hacker were very good at killing. They could transition into the other roles, since you need something to do after dropping a link or hacking a point, but they weren't terribly effective at it.
An assassin is a role that existed in Dust since open beta and was one of the most fun and interesting playstyles, despite being underpowered for the majority of the duration of Dust. This was a role that focussed on killing and so there was no reason for it to be significantly less effective than any other class at killing since it accomplishes it's task in a different way and so doesn't invalidate any other class.
The light assault was a role similar to the assault. Again, there's no reason this would have to be bad, but there was a time when assaults were underpowered and scout suits made better assaults than assault suits. This is an example of a role that CCP has be careful with as it overlaps with the assault role and so runs the risk of invalidating it.
Consider the sentinel.
This had two main roles, AV and point control (i.e. taking and holding a specific objctive).
The point control role was one that focussed on killing. However, since this was accomplished in a significantly different way to the assault role, there was no reason they should be less effective at killing than assaults.
Logis.
Logis only really had a support role in Dust. A very varied and extremely important, game-winning support role. However I would argue there wasn't really a common killing role for the logi.
The only common way a logi was used for killing was as a type of assault. Similarly to the light-assault-scout, it was a little risky to make this too powerful as it's combat method was very similar to the assault, and so there was a risk of the "slayer-logi" invalidating the assault role. As was the case post release of Uprising. Not that support roles shoudl be defensless, they just need to not invalidate any other role.
If logis could play a role focussed on killing that differered from the assault methods, for example a build focussing mainly on offensive equipment such as mines, there's no reason such a role shouldn't be highly effective at it's goal, killing.
Basically what i'm saying is, there doesn't need to be one role that's good at killing, but multiple roles over multiple classes that do the killing in different ways. There can also be support roles which don't focus on killing, which shouldn't be as good at killing as the combat roles. Some classes should be able to be built for various roles. |