Hmm.. Looking at how the slot layouts and bonuses work, I like the way this is headed. If you want max precision, you go Amarr, if you want decent precision with excellent range, you go Cal.

I also noticed that you made the PRO cloak a 15% reduction instead of 10%

Using that number.....

My min Scout with 2x Damps and PRO cloak has a profile of 15.71. This rounds up to 16 (Stupid rounding)

I can dodge 1x Amarr Scans, and 2x Cal Scans (3x rounds up to 16, and tie goes to scanner)

3x Damps and PRO cloak and I have a profile of 13.47. Rounds up to 14.

I can dodge everything.

Normally, I would be saying "This doesn't change anything" but since Min Scout gets codebreakers to high, I can still do my job. I can Speed hack AND be invisible, meaning that I can get onto the objective undetected and hack.

What fit's will I run?

2x Damp Min Scout:

1x Shield
2x Codebreaker

1x Speed
2x Damp

Hacks in 3.81s, dodges most scans while cloaked.

The 3x Damp will be the same, except just with 3x damps and 3x codebreakers.

---

I suspect that Cal Scouts will still be slightly more popular, but Amarr scouts will have a role as point defense specialists. They can Tank both precision and armor and be tough to take down.

Granted, we can walk under his scans, but he still has a huge HP advantage.

Caldari will be more popular due to those 87-120m scans. This guy will LOCK DOWN the city for everyone not running damps.

So scouts damp and everyone else has to duke it out with the wall hack on.

No reason to run active scanners anymore. This guy does it better. Scanners will solely be used for the focused to scan scouts.

eWAR is slightly better for scouts, but still f'd up overall.

I'm scared that Rattati doesn't realize how terribly over powered having a Static Precision for Amarr that needs a Complex Dampener just to get under.

Worse is that he's making the same mistake that every other DEV has made and ignored the community- not just scouts but this is the whole of the forums- on their consensus.
Amarr precision is a bad idea

Or that only requiring 2 High Slots on an Armor tanking suit is just dumb.


As far as we've all been able to tell, numbers round to the closest whole number for Scanning.

I'm just flabbergasted at why Rattati would even bother entertaining the idea that 2 high slots at 26CPU, 0PG is balanced against needing more low slots than that.

Seriously, omni-vision is just dumb.

The cloak is useless for actually being invisible because if you're scanned you have this ******** chevron pointing over your head. You aren't even invisible so anyone with a lick of visual awareness knows where the **** you are so it doesn't help you travel across the far too many open fields the game has.

Being able to see someone on radar is so much more ******* powerful than being able to avoid scans. Scanning someone reduces the need for skill at the game

Oh. Wait. Right, reduces the need for skill at the game, no wonder a devs like that idea, they're all ******* terrible players

---

The math looks bad. Tie goes to the scanner, so even if a MIN stacks 3 cPD and a proto cloak they get spotted. Amarr need 4cPD and a Cloak. and Gal needs 3 PD.

We really want EWAR to be less binary, so I want to play with bonuses so that a dedicated scout with all slots, can evade even the best precision, but only while cloaked, but the gallente would retain the ability to be unscannable out of cloak.

The numbers in the document are just something I was playing around with last night while proof reading the calculations, but they should be correct.

Let's iterate on this over the weekend and early next week and see if we can't make it a little better then "ok".

EWAR Calculations

The cloak is there for reference at the bottom.

We can also reduce the dampening bonus of the cloak to zero.

From a "I want all scouts to be unscannable in some way even by sacrificing all slots and cloak" point of view, I think we need to have that discussion. I think we can tune these numbers to an acceptable resolution.

The cloak is there for reference at the bottom.

We can also reduce the dampening bonus of the cloak to zero.

From a "I want all scouts to be unscannable in some way even by sacrificing all slots and cloak" point of view, I think we need to have that discussion. I think we can tune these numbers to an acceptable resolution.

The cloak is there for reference at the bottom.

We can also reduce the dampening bonus of the cloak to zero.

From a "I want all scouts to be unscannable in some way even by sacrificing all slots and cloak" point of view, I think we need to have that discussion. I think we can tune these numbers to an acceptable resolution.

It also removes the waves of opportunity discussion, such as Minja activating cloak to bypass the resident precision scanner at objective.

Why do you think ratio of precision to dampening should not be 1:1?
This is the biggest problem with perceiving any sense of balance in giving Amarr Scout a bonus to precision.

I don't understand the question.

This game is played in absolutes. I want to have the lowest Scan Precision possible on one suit and the lowest Scan Profile possible on another.

The question is if the best Scan Precision can be acquired in only 2 modules (Amarr Scout with 2 Complex Precision Enhancers) why shouldn't the best Scan Profile be similarly acquired with the same number of modules?

Any possibility of hitting do over and going back to 1.7?

Let's start building the premises and agree on them one by one.

Let's also remember that the focused GA pro logi has 15dB.

Best precision should therefore be 14dB or less

Let's start building the premises and agree on them one by one.

Let's also remember that the focused GA pro logi has 15dB.

Best precision should therefore be 14dB or less

Best dampener only needs an equal amount of dampeners to amount of precision modules on best precision to beat him. Appias suggestion.

All scouts should be able to beat the best precision, with cloak? Without cloak? Discuss.

Complex plates will have the same signature penalty as a complex dampener so each plate cancels out a dampener. This is something I want to explore, it will also make brick sentinels stand out like christmas trees.


Let's keep working on this.

It seems the spreadsheet has changed to a more moderate approach.

Cal: 10% range per level. Seems ok but is in danger of making active scanners pointless (still) with such a high range, although range amps compete with damps to they probably won't have too large a range. At least with the removal of the precision bonus it removes the 3 - 4 precision super scans you can get now, that are prohibitively difficult for non-Gal scouts to avoid.

Amarr: 5% precision per level. Like the current Cal bonus. 2 precision mods will require to 2 damps plus pro cloak to avoid, unless you are Gal in which case you will just need 2 damps. This seems fair to me. Although they can utilise the bonus without loosing their armour tank, without a range bonus they are heavily incentivised to equip range amps. Seems quite balanced. The whole premise of scout suits is that they avoid radar, it's silly to have a situation where this can't be achieved.

Gal: 3% damp 3% range per level. I don't agree with buffing their range. Dampening is a good enough bonus on it's own. Just remove the range bonus and things will be fine.

Min: seems ok, can avoid scans other than Gal logo focused with 2 damps and an active pro to cloak. Whilst they may not be quite as good at combat as the others, the move or code breakers to high slots would help them enhance their hacking abilities and fulfil the hacker role.

Let's start building the premises and agree on them one by one.

Let's also remember that the focused GA pro logi has 15dB.

Best precision should therefore be 14dB or less

Best dampener only needs an equal amount of dampeners to amount of precision modules on best precision to beat him. Appias suggestion.

All scouts should be able to beat the best precision, with cloak? Without cloak? Discuss.

Complex plates will have the same signature penalty as a complex dampener so each plate cancels out a dampener. This is something I want to explore, it will also make brick sentinels stand out like christmas trees.

Let's keep working on this.

The cloak is there for reference at the bottom.

We can also reduce the dampening bonus of the cloak to zero.

From a "I want all scouts to be unscannable in some way even by sacrificing all slots and cloak" point of view, I think we need to have that discussion. I think we can tune these numbers to an acceptable resolution.

It also removes the waves of opportunity discussion, such as Minja activating cloak to bypass the resident precision scanner at objective.

It seems the spreadsheet has changed to a more moderate approach.

Cal: 10% range per level. Seems ok but is in danger of making active scanners pointless (still) with such a high range, although range amps compete with damps to they probably won't have too large a range. At least with the removal of the precision bonus it removes the 3 - 4 precision super scans you can get now, that are prohibitively difficult for non-Gal scouts to avoid.

Amarr: 5% precision per level. Like the current Cal bonus. 2 precision mods will require to 2 damps plus pro cloak to avoid, unless you are Gal in which case you will just need 2 damps. This seems fair to me. Although they can utilise the bonus without loosing their armour tank, without a range bonus they are heavily incentivised to equip range amps. Seems quite balanced. The whole premise of scout suits is that they avoid radar, it's silly to have a situation where this can't be achieved.

Gal: 3% damp 3% range per level. I don't agree with buffing their range. Dampening is a good enough bonus on it's own. Just remove the range bonus and things will be fine.

Min: seems ok, can avoid scans other than Gal logo focused with 2 damps and an active pro to cloak. Whilst they may not be quite as good at combat as the others, the move or code breakers to high slots would help them enhance their hacking abilities and fulfil the hacker role.

Let's start building the premises and agree on them one by one.

Let's also remember that the focused GA pro logi has 15dB.

Best precision should therefore be 14dB or less

Best dampener only needs an equal amount of dampeners to amount of precision modules on best precision to beat him. Appias suggestion.

All scouts should be able to beat the best precision, with cloak? Without cloak? Discuss.

Complex plates will have the same signature penalty as a complex dampener so each plate cancels out a dampener. This is something I want to explore, it will also make brick sentinels stand out like christmas trees.


Let's keep working on this.

The GA pro logi with a focused scanner isn't very effective though on account of the limited scan zone and huge cooldown time for a very short operating period.
14dB is low. Why should it be that low? Will touch on this again in a moment.


No, I think the point is that dampening should be able to beat out precision amping in a more favourable ratio than 1:1. The ability to scan a target is inherently much stronger than the ability to evade a scan. If you're scanned as a scout, you lose.


If they try then yes, all scouts should be able to beat the best precision. Not sure on whether they should have to be cloaked or not.



I'm unsure how that'll make any difference to the visibility of brick sentinels.
Any passive scanner can already pick them up. Any of them. Having a massive scan profile doesn't affect the range of the scan, so the visibility on scan for a bricked sentinel is exactly the same as normal.

I'm concerned about the damage a dampening penalty on plates will do. I think it'll utterly destroy armour tanking scouts because they won't be able to tank up (and a baseline tank is necessary) but reducing the ability to brick tank scouts is necessary.

Would you introduce such a penalty for all types of plate? Ferroscale and reactive as well? Would there be such a penalty on shield extenders?