New Numbers!

Google Doc: Falloff 2.0.2

Design Goals
* Restore Range Amps to functional state without going overboard
* Return AM Scout's role as "Scout Hunter" without throwing the MN Scout under the bus
* Require greater investment to scan dampened units at close range
* Reign in potentially too potent passives of AM and CA Scouts proposed in 1.0.1

Looking forward to your thoughts, gents.

---

By and large, we're weakening passives across the board with this one. As passives are already far weaker than actives, I wouldn't anticipate any meta shifts in terms of competitive recon; that said, this version does solve more than a few existing problems and makes investment in Precision Enhancers and Range Extenders much more meaningful. I'm of the opinion that 2.0.2 would dovetail nicely with a nerf package for active scans.

I think you should include a Profile table in it for reference.

For Pokey's EWAR Workshop ...

Google Doc: Active Scan Proposal
Google Doc: Passive Scan Propsal

Thoughts?

Edit: If you guys aren't shooting holes in this, is it safe for me to assume you're OK with it?

For Pokey's EWAR Workshop ...

Google Doc: Active Scan Proposal
Google Doc: Passive Scan Propsal

Thoughts?

Edit: If you guys aren't shooting holes in this, is it safe for me to assume you're OK with it?

For active scanners i like it with the following additional suggestion below.

Make the different decibel scanners available at all tiers. Currently standard/advanced scanners are useless at times while proto scanners are too powerful. So if you have say a 46/30/21dB scanners (no clue on actual real values currently), have them available at all tiers with the advanced / proto ones lasting longer / recharging faster... i.e. like cloaks a bit. The standard cloak isn't useless it just doesn't last long.

For active scanners i like it with the following additional suggestion below.

Make the different decibel scanners available at all tiers. Currently standard/advanced scanners are useless at times while proto scanners are too powerful. So if you have say a 46/30/21dB scanners (no clue on actual real values currently), have them available at all tiers with the advanced / proto ones lasting longer / recharging faster... i.e. like cloaks a bit. The standard cloak isn't useless it just doesn't last long.

Not sure that I'm following. Currently, STD Scanners scan at 46dB, ADV at 36dB, PRO at 28dB and Focused at 20dB. GalLogis get at 25% bonus to precision.

Can you give an example with specific numbers?

For Pokey's EWAR Workshop ...

Google Doc: Active Scan Proposal
Google Doc: Passive Scan Propsal

Thoughts?

Edit: If you guys aren't shooting holes in this, is it safe for me to assume you're OK with it?

Some quick random numbers to demonstrate:

Tier, Precision, Duration, Recharge
Standard, 46dB, 15s, 10s
Standard, 36dB, 15s, 20s
Standard, 28dB, 5s, 20s
Standard, 20dB, 1s, 30s

Advanced, 46dB, 15s, 7.5s
Advanced, 36dB, 15s, 15s
Advanced, 28dB, 5s, 15s
Advanced, 20dB, 1s, 22.5s

Proto, 46dB, 25s, 7.5s
Proto, 36dB, 25s, 15s
Proto, 28dB, 10s, 15s
Proto, 20dB, 2s, 22.5s

A beam with a 1-2 second duration would not be sufficient to net recon assists.

To recap (just in case) my thinking is that Duration would be changed to "Reserves" and (like cloak) measure how long a scan beam can be maintained between recharges. "Lingering" Target Visibility will be removed altogether in favor of "lasing" targets; scan duration will last only as long as the target remains lased; units killed while lased will net recon assist WP.

Also, would the scanners above have the same scan range and scan angles?

2.1 OK. Logis probably won't agree to having their scan range reduced. You probably won't be able to nerf the inner ring quite that much.

2.2 OK. Interesting. Same problem with logis though. This might be good with 20m range logis. It's quite a big shift though, which makes me worry.

Might I suggest, as an alternative, 70% precision inner ring, 30% range extenders, everything else as now. Mega scan logis would be possible, but at least they'd have to sacrifice nearly all modules. Perhaps a 10% precision penalty to range mods.

RatMan finally talks: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2928353#post2928353

In my opinion, it was a mistake to give Logis better range than Scouts in the first place. They've since been buffed in other, more significant ways; meanwhile, Scout usage rates have declined drastically. From my own anecdotal in-game observations, I presume Scout performance/efficiency has declined alongside usage. Scouts have mobility, EWAR, and not much else. If there's going to be a special EWAR snowflake, I believe it should be the Scout. The Progression Tab says so :-) Logis don't need the range buff, and range buff absolutely bleeds allover AM Scout's role.

Scouts do have superior EWAR than logis.

Assaults have average profile, precision and range.

Logis have poor profile, average precision and superior range.

Scouts have superior profile, superior precision and average range.

[I like everyone having the same base scan range. Balances out range extenders and gives a solid foundation IMO.

Edit: I also agree with shotty they never should have had better range then scouts. Note that his suggestion nerfs scout scan range to.

Scouts do have superior EWAR than logis.

Assaults have average profile, precision and range.

Logis have poor profile, average precision and superior range.

Scouts have superior profile, superior precision and average range.

The AM Scout took a big hit with Falloff 1.0, and Scout intra-class parity was lost. If we have the chance, I think we should at minimum propose fixing what was broken and make an honest effort at restoring parity. So long as multi-tasking, ass-kicking Logis are providing competent short-range passives, there will be no room or demand for the AM Scout's short-range passives. This is a clear case of role overlap.

If we're content to accept this instance of role bleed, perhaps we should pitch another instance to the Triage Ward: Let's restore Scout Parity by adding a 3rd EQ slot to the otherwise unpopular and role-less AM Scout.

(not really)

Might I suggest, as an alternative, 70% precision inner ring, 30% range extenders, everything else as now. Mega scan logis would be possible, but at least they'd have to sacrifice nearly all modules. Perhaps a 10% precision penalty to range mods.

Added ... though without the 10% precision penalty (for apple/apple purposes). Do you see anything you'd like to tweak?

If range amps are buffed, then I accept that there will be a degree of overlap, as both will be able to provide passive scans to their squad. They do not do this in the same way though. Logi scans are more defensive, scouts should be out flanking. But yes, a degree of overlap.

I feel that you would have a case for nerfing the range on the basis that if range amps are buffed, it might be both OP, and there may be some overlap with scout's recon abilities. The fact logis would be OP at scanning in general is the main issue though. Don't make it just about scouts.

I think you are going to run into a lot of resistance if you just say, "scanning logis will replace Amarr scouts". They have a different role, even if both involve scanning.

Sounds good, though I don't think passives are too powerful at the moment, except possibly the inner rings.

By the way, I don't necessarily prefer my proposal over yours. It's just an alternative. There is so much to consider after all.

Sounds good, though I don't think passives are too powerful at the moment, except possibly the inner rings.

By the way, I don't necessarily prefer my proposal over yours. It's just an alternative. There is so much to consider after all.

Maybe i wasn't clear, but those were just random numbers i threw in quickly.

You're right i was framing it in the current context not your new Reserves (which i like). Basically keep what you have but allow all tiers to have each precision level variants and don't have scan precision be the variable that changes by tier.

RatMan is mad with us! He chose 4!