No changes for this in 1.4, we also get more armor to repair with the same WP-cap due to balancing of armor-plates, any thoughts about this?

I've been saying this since closed beta, maybe the memo got lost...?

So I've started using the Core Focus repair tool a bit more.

I've noticed that I can get more +25s faster than a STD tool. Have you noticed this?

In my opinion WP gained by supporting should come from HP delivered alone, not cycles or gear quality.
Assign X WP value to Y HP value.
This enables cycles and amount of HP delivered per cycle to stay the same, yet better gear grants you more points quicker and enables you to complete that task and go back to shooting (for example) faster, thus awarding better equipped players with less time lost.
Logi A uses Militia Nanite Injector and Militia Repair Tool, Logi B uses both Proto: when reviving and fully healing a player, they both gain exactly the same WP, yet the better equipped one will earn that in way less time. It's exactly like an AR: with better gear you earn time, because with the same aiming skill, you'll kill the enemy faster, yet earn the same WP.

"Balance WP to healing given"

I imagine a counter to this point of view is that you must also balance WP and healing given to the advantage that MORE healing gives to the team. At some point healing more HP from revives/triage could disproportionately favor the higher level healing, which WOULD help armor tankers' meta eventually, but this could tip balancing.

A direct X HP = Y WP may not be the BEST from a balance perspective because eventually it could induce farming. What you may have said earlier, but I didn't catch would be a higher limit on when the cooldown kicks in for each tier of good.

For example:

STD repair tool (+2 WP/ HP healed up to 200 HP every 2 mins)
ADV repair tool (+2 WP/HP healed up to 400 HP every 2 mins)
PRO repair tool (+2 WP/HP healed up to 600 HP every 2 mins)

So you would increase the max WP you can get per cooldown period, and the rate you get WP at because of the nature of repair tools' scaling up their repair rate.

For injectors you could pair HP repaired/revived in a period as well, although a militia injector on an armor heavy may give just as many WP as a proto injector used on a shield scout. So its harder to balance risk/reward.

I still like the idea of WP for injections tied to events following the revive. So a revive could be +10 WP, then if the receiver gets a kill within 10 seconds after being revived the injector could get a kill assist. And if the receiver also recovers their shields before dieing again, the injector also gets another +10 pts.

I disagree here, it was billed as a utility for Mercs on the field and making it as slow/slower than the manual method removes the utility of the feature. Even were I to be persuaded that it should be no faster than the manual method it should most certainly not be slower than the manual method which is where things stand now. The 'old' manual method is substantially faster than the new "O" method, so much so that the new method is getting Mercs killed and in its current state borders on completely useless. This is a shame because the concept of the new method is a great one, it just requires a more polished (in this case quicker) iteration to become useful.

It is also incorrect that use of the "O" method is more combat viable due to weapons. The cycle does not easily break once triggered which takes your weapon out of the action, but actually does so for longer than a manual switch because the cycle time on the "O" animation is slower than manually swapping to the needle, using it, and then swapping back to a weapon. Furthermore it is even easier to 'break' a revive cycle through use of the manual method because the 'cycle animation' begins upon injection not upon weapon swap, thus allowing a quick switch back to a weapon when called for where the "O" method has the Merc bound into a longer animation cycle.

To reiterate, currently the "O" method is on balance slower than the manual method and is also more cumbersome to use due to the time the merc will spend locked into the injection process. It should be neither slower, nor more cumbersome, both these aspects need a fix.

Will explain my opinion better on this:
The advantage with combat is before the animation for reviving starts: If youGÇÖre trying to use GÇ£circle methodGÇ¥ on a fallen merc, spamming it, if someone engages you before the animation starts (before you actually hit the right spot), you have your weapon out and can shoot straight away. But if you have your needle out, youGÇÖll need to perform a switch before you can shoot the enemy, losing more time that with GÇ£circle methodGÇ¥. After the animation starts, itGÇÖs all the same, the advantage is lost.
So, I still see as fair that said minor advantage would have a minor delay to compensate. But itGÇÖs not game breaking whatsoever, so itGÇÖs probably for the best that no delay is introduced, seen that it may cause more problems for the worth of it.

P.S.: A question just crossed my mind while writing this, did the GÇ£circle methodGÇ¥ ever conflicted with a hack point (merc fallen right next to an enemy objective)?

P.S.: A question just crossed my mind while writing this, did the GÇ£circle methodGÇ¥ ever conflicted with a hack point (merc fallen right next to an enemy objective)?

I'm not sure of this as I have not had the bug which you are referencing even with the manual method (although I have read about it on the forums). That is an interesting question and I wonder if anyone else can shed further light on it.

Seems it does create problems:
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=105952&find=unread

You've done a fantastic job, Cross. Thank you!

Hmm...not reward related, but curious to see if the repair tool gets aim assist/friction.

I've been testing the Active Scanner lately, and am now very interested in how the WP earnings on it will work. So far all my theories seem off base because they would lead to certain types of scanner having better earnings than others.

For example if the scanner awards WP based on hostiles killed while they are 'lit up' by the scan then the scanners with longer range or longer duration would both on average earn higher WP than those with the highest precision but lowest range.

Similarly if the WP are earned based on number of targets highlighted certain scanners will be more effective earners than others.

The one method which might scale properly that I've come up with so far would be earnings based on the profile of the object/merc scanned. The drawback here is that if scanning itself earns the WP rather than an action taken against a scanned target, the scanner becomes even more farmable than the closed beta repair tool.

0.02 ISK
Cross

Why couldn't they have it balanced in terms of max points per minute, like triage? One question would be too, if you illuminate equipment, and IT is destroyed, do you get a few points for that?

They would have to be careful how they program scanners though too. What if 5 people scan the same target and he dies? Are there 5 bonuses? Do you split one bonus? I know that you can have more than one scan's illumination active at a time, so could you get double or quadruple the points for scanning all at once?

1.5 has the new WP system so this thread is going to undergo a huge renovation once the results of that testing are received.
I invite anyone who consistently deploys with equipment on their fits to join in the testing and discussion.
A focus on the scaling of WP and whether that mirrors the risk vs reward scaling will of course remain central, but mechanical aspects that impact earnings will also be included.

Looking forward to hearing from all of you regarding your results in the new system.

Cheers,
Cross

I will want to pay close attention and will provide input. I think special care should be paid to the supposedly incoming squad order changes as well. They should be a way to try and get maximum WP when possible.

This issue becomes even more relevant and problematic if the new equipment related logistics bonuses CCP is leaning towards are actually applied. A DevBlog on this subject (or at least an update) would be very appreciated.

Cheers,
Cross

Just a quick SiSi update:

Logistics suits have been left as previously discovered, making me a very disappointed Logi.