DUST Search - Scout Registry / Killboard

All Channels

General Discussions

Scout Registry / Killboard

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 178 post(s)
Daxxis KANNAH Distinct Covert Initiative 527	Posted - 2013.12.15 18:09:00 - [5251] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Scout Registry wrote: If I worked at CCP, I'd check the TQ data-feeds and ask myself ... * 4-8 tanks per ambush match. Is this OK? * Spawn trapping now more regular than ever. Thanks to tanks. Is this OK? * The side which spams tanks the hardest tends to win. Is this OK? * AV puts damage on armor, but seldom (if ever) bags a kill. Is this OK? * Tank Spam is trending upward. The "newness" certainly isn't wearing off. Is this OK? * Nyain San has swapped their overpowered Logis for Tank Spam. Is this OK? CCP may have done a great job with 1.7. It certainly seemed that way the morning of release. But right now there's really no way get a read on the improvements. Not with the current state of combat, match after match. "Slowing tanks down" isn't going to fix the problem. CCP needs to either give us tools to pop these things, or make it hurt the wallet -- badly -- when one actually gets popped. TL;DR - Tank Spam is overshadowing all the good things 1.7 has delivered. Absolutely. Honestly, tank spam and the lack of scout love are the only two problems I have with 1.7. The rest is pretty great. And hopefully this will be corrected or at east start to be addressed early in the new year.
Scout Registry 73	Posted - 2013.12.15 18:41:00 - [5252] - Quote Daxxis KANNAH wrote: And hopefully this will be corrected or at east start to be addressed early in the new year. Tank Spam is a problem; solutions are pretty straight-forward. Why wait an entire month? If 1.8 is dedicated to fixing Tank Spam, then Scouts will be pushed back. Yet again.
Django Quik Dust2Dust. 1916	Posted - 2013.12.15 18:46:00 - [5253] - Quote Scout Registry wrote: Daxxis KANNAH wrote: And hopefully this will be corrected or at east start to be addressed early in the new year. Tank Spam is a problem; solutions are pretty straight-forward. Why wait an entire month? If 1.8 is dedicated to fixing Tank Spam, then Scouts will be pushed back. Yet again. You'd hope that enough has already been done in prep for the overall dropsuit changes that fixing tank spam will be possible within the same breath - afterall, codelock is likely already happened or at least extremely imminent. Dust2Dust - Funeral arrangements for all of New Eden. Join our public channel D2D. to chat and squad with us.
Scout Registry 73	Posted - 2013.12.15 18:53:00 - [5254] - Quote Django Quik wrote: You'd hope that enough has already been done in prep for the overall dropsuit changes that fixing tank spam will be possible within the same breath - afterall, codelock is likely already happened or at least extremely imminent. "Dev Hugs are definitely coming next month, guys ... hang in there." - Shotty GoBang (Uprising 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7)
Ghost Kaisar Kinsho Swords Caldari State 1180	Posted - 2013.12.15 19:29:00 - [5255] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Scout Registry wrote: If I worked at CCP, I'd check the TQ data-feeds and ask myself ... * 4-8 tanks per ambush match. Is this OK? * Spawn trapping now more regular than ever. Thanks to tanks. Is this OK? * The side which spams tanks the hardest tends to win. Is this OK? * AV puts damage on armor, but seldom (if ever) bags a kill. Is this OK? * Tank Spam is trending upward. The "newness" certainly isn't wearing off. Is this OK? * Nyain San has swapped their overpowered Logis for Tank Spam. Is this OK? CCP may have done a great job with 1.7. It certainly seemed that way the morning of release. But right now there's really no way get a read on the improvements. Not with the current state of combat, match after match. "Slowing tanks down" isn't going to fix the problem. CCP needs to either give us tools to pop these things, or make it hurt the wallet -- badly -- when one actually gets popped. TL;DR - Tank Spam is overshadowing all the good things 1.7 has delivered. Absolutely. Honestly, tank spam and the lack of scout love are the only two problems I have with 1.7. The rest is pretty great. Completley unrelated. But I think what you did with that Orbital Awoxing was hilarious! GET BANNED SON Minmatar Faction Warfare: Let's get Organized
Arkena Wyrnspire Turalyon 514 Turalyon Alliance 6261	Posted - 2013.12.15 19:39:00 - [5256] - Quote Ghost Kaisar wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Scout Registry wrote: If I worked at CCP, I'd check the TQ data-feeds and ask myself ... * 4-8 tanks per ambush match. Is this OK? * Spawn trapping now more regular than ever. Thanks to tanks. Is this OK? * The side which spams tanks the hardest tends to win. Is this OK? * AV puts damage on armor, but seldom (if ever) bags a kill. Is this OK? * Tank Spam is trending upward. The "newness" certainly isn't wearing off. Is this OK? * Nyain San has swapped their overpowered Logis for Tank Spam. Is this OK? CCP may have done a great job with 1.7. It certainly seemed that way the morning of release. But right now there's really no way get a read on the improvements. Not with the current state of combat, match after match. "Slowing tanks down" isn't going to fix the problem. CCP needs to either give us tools to pop these things, or make it hurt the wallet -- badly -- when one actually gets popped. TL;DR - Tank Spam is overshadowing all the good things 1.7 has delivered. Absolutely. Honestly, tank spam and the lack of scout love are the only two problems I have with 1.7. The rest is pretty great. Completley unrelated. But I think what you did with that Orbital Awoxing was hilarious! GET BANNED SON Haha, thank you! It brightened my day when I realised I could do it. Level 6 Forum Warrior Lenin of the glorious armoured revolution Gallente FW - 'Turalyon'
Daxxis KANNAH Distinct Covert Initiative 527	Posted - 2013.12.15 19:40:00 - [5257] - Quote Scout Registry wrote: Daxxis KANNAH wrote: And hopefully this will be corrected or at east start to be addressed early in the new year. Tank Spam is a problem; solutions are pretty straight-forward ... * Dramatically increase price of tanks (all tiers). * Increase effectiveness of all AV (i.e. nerf reversal). * Find another way to equalize Risk / Reward. If it can be hotfixed now, why wait an entire month? Edit: FF hotfix inbound for Mon/Tue. Fingers crossed for an included HAV fix. No I meant in everything. I expect changes to tanks stuff to be done this Tuesday and maybe another update in December. The Scout stuff plus some other racial weapons will start to roll out in 1.8 - Jan onwards.
Scout Registry 75	Posted - 2013.12.15 20:31:00 - [5258] - Quote @ Brave Sinboto Your brother presents as Tourist. Tourist, I can ignore. This math, I cannot: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1614676#post1614676
Llast 326 An Arkhos 832	Posted - 2013.12.15 23:10:00 - [5259] - Quote Something happened I don't know what it was But I went 20/8/8 in FW with my MinjaGÇª and salvage was a pile of Proto suitsGÇª like 4 of them KRRROOOOOOM
Sinboto Simmons SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 3157	Posted - 2013.12.15 23:16:00 - [5260] - Quote Scout Registry wrote: @ Brave Sinboto Your brother presents as Tourist. This fact I can ignore. His math, however, I cannot: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1614676#post1614676 :P Thank you sir, I'll be having a word with him. Sinboto - The True Blood Minja Forum Warrior level 3 STB-Infantry (Demolition)

Scout Registry 80	Posted - 2013.12.16 02:03:00 - [5261] - Quote Monday, Dec 16th - Question of the Day: If you were put in charge of QA for a day, what measures would you take to fix tank spam? Saturday, Dec 14th - Question of the Day: If most Scouts ran cloak, would most Logis run 15 dB scanners? Explain. Matticus Monk: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1610129#post1610129 Shakti Ishi: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1612550#post1612550 Haerr: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1612951#post1612951 Friday, Dec 13th - Question of the Day: If cloak were your only Equipment, would your Scoutly squad functions be affected? Explain. Shakti Ishi: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1604916#post1604916 Ruthless Lee: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1605181#post1605181 Haerr: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1609197#post1609197 Matticus Monk: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1610129#post1610129 Appia Vibbia: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1610316#post1610316
Quil Evrything Triple Terrors 550	Posted - 2013.12.16 02:17:00 - [5262] - Quote [quote=Cass Caul Also, the discription by CCP Remnant to Knight Soiare's question implies it is going to be High (most likely) or Low slot module. [/quote] Oooh! Missed that hidden gem. Well, it would "make sense", to be high slot, since it should basically be warped shield tech. WIll be interesting to see how they implement it. It will be perfect for basic scout fits, if it is high slot :) THe perfect vehicle for uplink deployment, and.... other things
Llast 326 An Arkhos 840	Posted - 2013.12.16 02:31:00 - [5263] - Quote My invoiced concern, is that CCP Remnants statement also leaves me with an impression that our stealth bonus will be replaced with a fitting cost bonusGÇª. Edit: How do you folks feel about the loss of 5% profile/level Role bonus for improved fitting cost on Cloaks? KRRROOOOOOM
Scout Registry 82	Posted - 2013.12.16 03:18:00 - [5264] - Quote Llast 326 wrote: My invoiced concern, is that CCP Remnants statement also leaves me with an impression that our stealth bonus will be replaced with a fitting cost bonusGÇª. Edit: How do you folks feel about the loss of 5% profile/level Role bonus for improved fitting cost on Cloaks? In my opinion, "Stealth" wouldn't be buffed by exchanging one vulnerability for the other. Surely, this isn't what Remnant has in mind.
mollerz Minja Scouts 1342	Posted - 2013.12.16 03:24:00 - [5265] - Quote I like how a cloak is scary for balance, but a medium suit with 5H and 4L slots along with 3 EQ slots and CPU/PG for days was never a concern. I mean, give me a ******* break with this introduce a cloak as nerfed as possible boolshit. #shittycoding
Llast 326 An Arkhos 842	Posted - 2013.12.16 03:59:00 - [5266] - Quote Scout Registry wrote: Llast 326 wrote: My invoiced concern, is that CCP Remnants statement also leaves me with an impression that our stealth bonus will be replaced with a fitting cost bonusGÇª. Edit: How do you folks feel about the loss of 5% profile/level Role bonus for improved fitting cost on Cloaks? In my opinion, "Stealth" wouldn't be buffed by exchanging one vulnerability for the other. Surely, this isn't what Remnant has in mind. Quote: The Scout role will get very high PG/CPU bonuses to fitting cloak equipment, making it just about the only role that can feasibly fit a cloak field without having to sacrifice the rest of its fit. Individual race skill bonuses will create opportunities for cloaked scouts to scan further and longer than other dropsuits, to have less GÇ£shimmerGÇ¥ as they move, and have lower innate scan profiles so that they can be visually and electronically invisible. Link even though we know where it came from. The first line is the part that brought on this thought for me. "The Scout role will get very high PG/CPU bonuses to fitting cloak equipment, making it just about the only role that can feasibly fit a cloak field without having to sacrifice the rest of its fit." It's the scout role portion, that makes me think that the role bonus would change, in order to make the cloak viable. Perhaps the current bonus was simply place holding for this feature? The mention of Race bonuses is interesting as well, because he mentions the lower innate scan profile, though this simply refers to the base db I believe. Does this mean we have a lower one and that is good? Or does this mean a future reduction to offset the loss of the bonus? "they can be visually and electronically invisible" indicates that the cloak will independent from Profile. Also this tells us what the other two racial bonuses are likely to be -Increased scan time for active scanners? -Have less shimmer Of course this is all theory and one can't hold the language used as full Dev disclosure. KRRROOOOOOM
Scout Registry 84	Posted - 2013.12.16 04:00:00 - [5267] - Quote mollerz wrote: I like how a cloak is scary for balance, but a medium suit with 5H and 4L slots along with 3 EQ slots and CPU/PG for days was never a concern. I mean, give me a ******* break with this introduce a cloak as nerfed as possible boolshit. Given what we've seen in 1.7, I'm somewhat concerned that CCP may go overboard on Scouts. They've buffed armor to such a degree that the only counter to a Tank is another Tank. If they buffed us along similar lines, we'd lose our identity. No one wants HardMode to be EZ. Frankly, I like earning my kills, so I'll be the first to take issue if we were somehow rendered FoTM. That said, I'd also take issue with a halfhearted "this-for-that", of the likes Llast is concerned. If there's one thing that sets us apart, its that we like a challenge. Regardless of what may come, one thing's for sure ... If CCP made Scouts FoTM, we sure wouldn't behave like Tankers are behaving right now. Legend345 is the only one I've seen to stand up and object to his class being made FoTM.
mollerz Minja Scouts 1344	Posted - 2013.12.16 04:05:00 - [5268] - Quote Llast 326 wrote: Also this tells us what the other two racial bonuses are likely to be -Increased scan time for active scanners? -Have less shimmer Of course this is all theory and one can't hold the language used as full Dev disclosure. -Increased scan time for active scanners = Ganja (btw Cass- until you explain why that is a bad nickname I'm going to use it -signed a minmatar) -Have less shimmer = Minja I would think? Of course this is all theory and one can't hold the language used as full Dev disclosure = build 2.4 #shittycoding
Scout Registry 84	Posted - 2013.12.16 04:15:00 - [5269] - Quote Llast 326 wrote: :snip: I think I get your meaning, but I'm not as troubled in my reading between the lines. In the second quote, notice Remnants' use of the word "AND" rather than "OR" ... I take this to mean "inclusive" rather than "choose between" ... but who knows? ... like you, I'm speculating. We'll see when we see :-)
Llast 326 An Arkhos 843	Posted - 2013.12.16 04:20:00 - [5270] - Quote mollerz wrote: Llast 326 wrote: Also this tells us what the other two racial bonuses are likely to be -Increased scan time for active scanners? -Have less shimmer Of course this is all theory and one can't hold the language used as full Dev disclosure. -Increased scan time for active scanners = Ganja (btw Cass- until you explain why that is a bad nickname I'm going to use it -signed a minmatar) -Have less shimmer = Minja I would think? Of course this is all theory and one can't hold the language used as full Dev disclosure = build 2.4 While those bonuses would make senseGÇª I think that this may be indicators for the new suits (whenever that happensGÇª 2.4) What would make sense is Gal= scan time (as much as I hate the idea, it is Gal tech) Cal= Range enhancement (they do like to remain at a distance) Min= Combat Knife bonus (cause it should exist by then, and we don't want to take Mustards knives from him ) Amarrogance= less shimmer (cause they will be slow as all hell, they will need it) Not my personal idea of what would be ideal, but something that makes sense. Which means it's not what will happen. KRRROOOOOOM

KING CHECKMATE Scions of Athra 3240	Posted - 2013.12.16 04:21:00 - [5271] - Quote Llast 326 wrote: My unvoiced concern, is that CCP Remnants statement also leaves me with an impression that our stealth bonus will be replaced with a fitting cost bonusGÇª. Edit: How do you folks feel about the loss of 5% profile/level Role bonus for improved fitting cost on Cloaks? BAD,since Logis dont have problems fitting anything and they will probably abuse this mechanic too. AV-TANK BALANCE = https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1612446#post1612446
Llast 326 An Arkhos 843	Posted - 2013.12.16 04:24:00 - [5272] - Quote Scout Registry wrote: Llast 326 wrote: :snip: I think I get your meaning, but I'm not as troubled in my reading between the lines. In the second quote, notice Remnants' use of the word "AND" rather than "OR" ... I take this to mean "inclusive" rather than "choose between" ... but who knows? ... like you, I'm speculating. We'll see when we see :-) Yes, I also noticed the "and" as well, but the inclusion of the word "innate" leads me to believe it is a reference to our lower starting profile. I hope you are right though. KRRROOOOOOM
mollerz Minja Scouts 1347	Posted - 2013.12.16 04:29:00 - [5273] - Quote Scout Registry wrote: Given what we've seen in 1.7, I'm somewhat concerned that CCP may go overboard on Scouts. They've buffed armor to such a degree that the only counter to a Tank is another Tank. If they buffed us along similar lines, we'd lose our identity. No one wants HardMode to be EZ. The problem with approaching our path to being "fixed" as it were, is that CCPs development style makes asking for balance from the start a dead in the water proposition. The only way they know how ot balanc eis to either go super UP or super OP... I'd rather see the scotus go OP and then get scaled back vs going UP in some misguided sense of fairness only to get the shaft for a longer period of time than has already taken place. It's better to go OP and then dial it down. Scout Registry wrote: Frankly, I like earning my kills, so I'll be the first to voice concern if we are rendered FoTM. That said, I'd also take issue with a halfhearted "this-for-that", of the likes Llast is concerned. If there's one thing that sets us apart, its that we like a challenge. A romantic notion to be sure. But let's be real. We are scoundrels. We are rotten to the core. Can we please be true to thine ownselves? Scout Registry wrote: Regardless of what may come, one thing's for sure ... If CCP made Scouts FoTM, we sure wouldn't behave like Tankers are behaving right now. Legend345 is the only one I've seen to stand up and object to his class being made FoTM. We will be fotm one day. It won't be because we are OP. Just look at this thread. It will be fotm once it is fixed because there is so much latent desire to play scouts, but people are holding off because they hold values such as K/D and whatnot sacred and won't play scouts until it is viable. TL;DR You can find this thread based on views alone because it DWARFS other thread view counts. What does that tell you about scouts? #shittycoding
Llast 326 An Arkhos 843	Posted - 2013.12.16 04:31:00 - [5274] - Quote KING CHECKMATE wrote: Llast 326 wrote: My unvoiced concern, is that CCP Remnants statement also leaves me with an impression that our stealth bonus will be replaced with a fitting cost bonusGÇª. Edit: How do you folks feel about the loss of 5% profile/level Role bonus for improved fitting cost on Cloaks? BAD,since Logis dont have problems fitting anything and they will probably abuse this mechanic too. I dream that the Chosen Ones (logi) are beaten with the Nerf Hammer before this happensGÇª but it's just a dream KRRROOOOOOM
Quil Evrything Triple Terrors 550	Posted - 2013.12.16 04:32:00 - [5275] - Quote Scout Registry wrote: Given what we've seen in 1.7, I'm somewhat concerned that CCP may go overboard on Scouts. They've buffed armor to such a degree that the only counter to a Tank is another Tank. If they buffed us along similar lines, we'd lose our identity. No one wants HardMode to be EZ. I'm kinda wondering if at this point, cloak will be overkill. so to speak :) if I can wreak havok in a valor scout as-is... and I'm not mr. FPS .... adding a cloak will be ... potentially terrifying to the other side. (what makes me successful, is range and damping) (well, that, and an AR, apparently :-/ )
mollerz Minja Scouts 1347	Posted - 2013.12.16 04:44:00 - [5276] - Quote Quil Evrything wrote: Scout Registry wrote: Given what we've seen in 1.7, I'm somewhat concerned that CCP may go overboard on Scouts. They've buffed armor to such a degree that the only counter to a Tank is another Tank. If they buffed us along similar lines, we'd lose our identity. No one wants HardMode to be EZ. I'm kinda wondering if at this point, cloak will be overkill. so to speak :) if I can wreak havok in a valor scout as-is... and I'm not mr. FPS .... adding a cloak will be ... potentially terrifying to the other side. (what makes me successful, is range and damping) (well, that, and an AR, apparently :-/ ) This is what I am talking about. Not to you, but ... Let's not forget this game will supposedly grow over time. Keep in mind CCPs dreams when you ask for balance to the now. Their dev cycle is brutal. All that aside- If a high tech society developed cloaking technology and deployed it in a combat zone where entire planets and life itself mattered- the cloak would be combat worthy. I think, we as a community and CCP as a developer, needs to figure out a cloak that would fit the bill given the deadly nature of new eden. And the deadly nature of the foes we've been up against. We mean to be deadly. Let's act like it guys (and gals). #shittycoding
Llast 326 An Arkhos 843	Posted - 2013.12.16 04:51:00 - [5277] - Quote mollerz wrote: We mean to be deadly. Let's act like it guys (and gals). Yes Gonna go add to my Proto Logi salvage collection KRRROOOOOOM
Morathi III Policeman of the Federation 83	Posted - 2013.12.16 08:32:00 - [5278] - Quote mollerz wrote: I like how a cloak is scary for balance, but a medium suit with 5H and 4L slots along with 3 EQ slots and CPU/PG for days was never a concern. I mean, give me a ******* break with this introduce a cloak as nerfed as possible boolshit. With cloak, scout will be the FOTM it is sure
Django Quik Dust2Dust. 1924	Posted - 2013.12.16 08:49:00 - [5279] - Quote I said it somewhere else earlier but I'll say it again here - one day scouts will be amazing and everyone and their gran will want to play as one but then they'll find out that scouts are only awesome when you've honed your scoutly tactics as much as all us hardcorers have. The EZ mode masses will flock and then they'll realise they have no idea what they're doing and that as soon as the decloak to shoot someone in the face that they get gunned down in a millisecond because they didn't plan properly or tried to play as an invisible assault and then they'll go home to their wimpy flacid med suits with their tear soaked tail drooping between their flabby legs. Scouting is simply not something anyone can just pick up and be instantly good at. You have to learn over time and that takes patience that EZ mode just does not have. Dust2Dust - Funeral arrangements for all of New Eden. Join our public channel D2D. to chat and squad with us.
Ghost Kaisar Kinsho Swords Caldari State 1183	Posted - 2013.12.16 14:46:00 - [5280] - Quote Django Quik wrote: I said it somewhere else earlier but I'll say it again here - one day scouts will be amazing and everyone and their gran will want to play as one but then they'll find out that scouts are only awesome when you've honed your scoutly tactics as much as all us hardcorers have. The EZ mode masses will flock and then they'll realise they have no idea what they're doing and that as soon as the decloak to shoot someone in the face that they get gunned down in a millisecond because they didn't plan properly or tried to play as an invisible assault and then they'll go home to their wimpy flacid med suits with their tear soaked tail drooping between their flabby legs. Scouting is simply not something anyone can just pick up and be instantly good at. You have to learn over time and that takes patience that EZ mode just does not have. And THAT is why we love this suit! Minmatar Faction Warfare: Let's get Organized



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.