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) |
Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p
Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance
1298
|
Posted - 2014.07.12 23:20:00 -
[17251] - Quote
You know, after reading all of this (and please at least hear me out, this is going to be a bit of a tinfoil hat stretch), what needs to happen is PG/CPU based balancing. There is no other way about it.
Modules will need to be classified into 3 categories-Utility, Light Combat, and Heavy Combat (note: these are just what I'm calling them, they mean absolutely nothing)
Ill try to compile a spreadsheet later for the modules, but the idea is that utility modules require next to nothing to fit, light combat would cost more, and heavy combat a lot more.
From there, scouts would have their fittings severely reduced (but the cloak bonus would increase to 20% per level), assaults/commandos/logis would get a slight buff, and sentinels stay the same.
Scouts would be able to fit mostly utility and some light combat modules, with maxed skills the ratio could be as great as 1:1
Assaults/Logis could fit mostly light combat modules with some heavy and some utility mixed in as well (in equal ratios), probably something like 1:4:2 or 1:3:3
Commandos could fit mostly light and and heavy modules, perhaps occasionally utility and heavy as well. Light and heavy would be 1:1
Sentinels would be able to fit almost all heavy modules with perhaps one light with maxed skills. Ratio would be 4:1
From there, we can completely rebalance the entire CPU/PG system so that scouts can no longer brick without screwing over their fits, in as much the same way that Assaults/Logis/Commandos can't fit a cloak without screwing over their whole fit
Please consider this; I know its very conceptual right now, but if we can get the community to work together, i feel this is the correct direction to move in
"Minmitar Scout" and "Masochist" are synonyms.
Kills-Archduke Ferd1nand
|
Bayeth Mal
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
710
|
Posted - 2014.07.12 23:21:00 -
[17252] - Quote
Does scanning round to the nearest integer? So a profile of 21.3 and precision of 21.7 would result in actual values of 21 and 22 respectively meaning the scan wouldn't show anything?
I copied the document and I'm fiddling with some ideas but there's no point presenting them if they don't work.
Also Rattati what are some key ideals you've already made your mind up on? I don't want to present you something you're going to dismiss out of hand for reasons not apparent to me at the time, when I could have spent my time doing something constructive.
Heading over to Destiny Beta and a few others
Hit me up for Skype and PSN
|
DeathwindRising
ROGUE RELICS
425
|
Posted - 2014.07.12 23:21:00 -
[17253] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:DeathwindRising wrote:Cat Merc wrote:To further discourage bricking, how about increasing medium frame scan range to 15m? This puts it at max skills at 21m.
If a scout decides to brick, assaults and logis will be able to see it. The current 15m at max range isn't enough, as by the time you react, you already have a buckshot in your face. scans used to be much higher, then they got nerfed. now we cant even spot heavies at reasonable distance And that's why we need falloff.
explain how falloff would work compared to simply increasing base scan range? |
Spademan
The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY
2154
|
Posted - 2014.07.12 23:26:00 -
[17254] - Quote
DeathwindRising wrote:Cat Merc wrote:DeathwindRising wrote:Cat Merc wrote:To further discourage bricking, how about increasing medium frame scan range to 15m? This puts it at max skills at 21m.
If a scout decides to brick, assaults and logis will be able to see it. The current 15m at max range isn't enough, as by the time you react, you already have a buckshot in your face. scans used to be much higher, then they got nerfed. now we cant even spot heavies at reasonable distance And that's why we need falloff. explain how falloff would work compared to simply increasing base scan range? Because then it would mean that the higher the profile of the scanned, the further away he's detected from. Rather than everything is detected in a 100m radius (if you had that range) So those tanks? Gonna come up on your radar a klom away.
I am part shovel, part man, full scout, and a little bit special.
Official Time Lord of the Scout Community
|
Appia Vibbia
Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance
3299
|
Posted - 2014.07.12 23:28:00 -
[17255] - Quote
At 30m we have precision of 24. From there, every 5m would increase the precision by either a percentage or a static number. I'd prefer it to be a constant increase of say 3dB/5M but that's just me
Appia Vibbia for CPM1
Empress of Alts
|
DeathwindRising
ROGUE RELICS
425
|
Posted - 2014.07.12 23:29:00 -
[17256] - Quote
Spademan wrote:DeathwindRising wrote:Cat Merc wrote:DeathwindRising wrote:Cat Merc wrote:To further discourage bricking, how about increasing medium frame scan range to 15m? This puts it at max skills at 21m.
If a scout decides to brick, assaults and logis will be able to see it. The current 15m at max range isn't enough, as by the time you react, you already have a buckshot in your face. scans used to be much higher, then they got nerfed. now we cant even spot heavies at reasonable distance And that's why we need falloff. explain how falloff would work compared to simply increasing base scan range? Because then it would mean that the higher the profile of the scanned, the further away he's detected from. Rather than everything is detected in a 100m radius (if you had that range) So those tanks? Gonna come up on your radar a klom away.
yep. you got my vote |
Bayeth Mal
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
710
|
Posted - 2014.07.12 23:36:00 -
[17257] - Quote
*sigh* stop wasting time discussing pie in the sky ideas. He's asking us a direct question and we're babbling incoherently about stuff we're likely to never get. He's probably already left.
If you are still here I'm working on a copy of the doc, but as I said before. I need to know what principles you're trying to base this balance on. What should scan what etc. Are you flexible on reducing Gal logi precision in exchange for range and angle?
Heading over to Destiny Beta and a few others
Hit me up for Skype and PSN
|
|
CCP Rattati
C C P C C P Alliance
4094
|
Posted - 2014.07.12 23:43:00 -
[17258] - Quote
Bayeth Mal wrote:Does scanning round to the nearest integer? So a profile of 21.3 and precision of 21.7 would result in actual values of 21 and 22 respectively meaning the scan wouldn't show anything?
I copied the document and I'm fiddling with some ideas but there's no point presenting them if they don't work.
Also Rattati what are some key ideals you've already made your mind up on? I don't want to present you something you're going to dismiss out of hand for reasons not apparent to me at the time, when I could have spent my time doing something constructive.
I was trying to gather the ewar pillars earlier. Feel free to expand on them.
"As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"
|
|
Ghost Kaisar
Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance
5869
|
Posted - 2014.07.12 23:45:00 -
[17259] - Quote
Wow. Leave to do other things to find 100+ notifications.
First things first:
hfderrtgvcd wrote:
Gallente should beat best precision with one damp and cloak active, all other scouts should reach it with two damps. Also, will you be giving signature penalties to all plates or just complex. I recommend the latter, because otherwise assaults will be impacted negatively.
This is bad and you should feel bad. Allowing scouts to dodge scans WITHOUT using more than 2 modules is bait for the old Gal Problem. With one damp, I can give you a Gal scout with around 700 HP, be invisible, sprint at over 9m/s and run full proto.
THIS IS BAD.
2.) Here is the main problem we are trying to address. eWAR. eWAR is in a VERY sorry spot right now, mainly due to the fact that there is no BALANCE to scanning/precision.
One is king, and the other is USELESS in these scenarios.
IF we have to have one be useless, let's make precision useless. Back in the old days, scouts were nigh impossible to detect to eachother. Scout battles became "Fighting in the Dark". Lots of skill involved.
I want to move back to that stage.
Scouts can't do their job if scanned. Scouts should not counter scouts.
Active Scanners should counter scouts, but in waves of opportunity (Scans being unable to perma-scan).
It would follow this:
Scout beats heavy (Slow target that is blind to the scout) Heavy beats Med (Tons of HP and DPS.) Med beats scout (Only a bit slower, can dodge scans with damps, and has an HP advantage)
Notice how I mention med frames running damps. Meds used to run TONS of damps in PC, due to the fact that they could avoid scouts. This gave them their place in the above statement. Heavies were then PROTECTED by the Med frames.
Med frames and heavies engaged each other, with scouts running along the edges of the skirimish and eliminating lone targets and assassinating heavies if they could get away with it.
THIS is the goal we should be working towards IMO.
I would love to hear a response from you on this Rattati. I would go into detail, but it's dinnertime.
How I Imagine I look when running Minmatar Scout
PSN: EVL_Elgost105
|
mollerz
3803
|
Posted - 2014.07.12 23:47:00 -
[17260] - Quote
So the general rule here is there can be no changes requiring client side updates?
You're Welcome... see their you go, Appia!
|
|
Bayeth Mal
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
711
|
Posted - 2014.07.12 23:49:00 -
[17261] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote: I was trying to gather the ewar pillars earlier. Feel free to expand on them.
Yep, the forum was moving pretty fast earlier but I found them. What about the rounding, have we established how that works? Because EWAR is all or nothing this can actually make a big difference.
I remember looking into it ages ago and nobody was sure. Does it round to an integer? To the nearest 0.5? What?
Heading over to Destiny Beta and a few others
Hit me up for Skype and PSN
|
Bayeth Mal
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
712
|
Posted - 2014.07.12 23:58:00 -
[17262] - Quote
Ghost Kaisar wrote: IF we have to have one be useless, let's make precision useless. Back in the old days, scouts were nigh impossible to detect to eachother. Scout battles became "Fighting in the Dark". Lots of skill involved.
I want to move back to that stage.
AMEN BROTHER! *High 5*
Those of you who actually live in the barbershop know my problem with the principle of Scout being the counter to scout. But I'll state it again.
We called BS on Tanks being the counter to Tanks, why is this any different?
I'm trying to make this document work but I'm having to give random little bonuses (like 1% damps per level) to random suits like Caldari and Min to make them not get reamed by Amarr, but still make Amarr force Gal to dampen. And having any suit that without mods can scan a scout using advanced damps is silly.
We're just swapping the OPness from one suit to another here and rendering everything below proto useless.
Heading over to Destiny Beta and a few others
Hit me up for Skype and PSN
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
2658
|
Posted - 2014.07.13 00:22:00 -
[17263] - Quote
@ Bayeth Profile and precision values round to the nearest whole number. We've tested this exhaustively.
@ Brothers Could we not solve our most glaring problems by implementing the proposed plate/profile penalty and increase cloak's active dampening bonus?
Rattati said he'd like to stick with two bonuses. Assuming the above, why not:
GA: profile / range (later damps, extenders) CA: precision / range (later prec, extenders) AM: stamina / range (later biotics, extenders) MN: no bonus change
Thoughts?
Shoot scout with yes...
- Ripley Riley
|
Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p
Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance
1302
|
Posted - 2014.07.13 00:24:00 -
[17264] - Quote
Ghost Kaisar wrote:Wow. Leave to do other things to find 100+ notifications. 1.) hfderrtgvcd wrote:
Gallente should beat best precision with one damp and cloak active, all other scouts should reach it with two damps. Also, will you be giving signature penalties to all plates or just complex. I recommend the latter, because otherwise assaults will be impacted negatively.
This is bad and you should feel bad. Allowing scouts to dodge scans WITHOUT using more than 2 modules is bait for the old Gal Problem. With one damp, I can give you a Gal scout with around 700 HP, be invisible, sprint at over 9m/s and run full proto. THIS IS BAD.
2.) Here is the main problem we are trying to address. eWAR. eWAR is in a VERY sorry spot right now, mainly due to the fact that there is no BALANCE to scanning/precision. One is king, and the other is USELESS in these scenarios. IF we have to have one be useless, let's make precision useless. Back in the old days, scouts were nigh impossible to detect to eachother. Scout battles became "Fighting in the Dark". Lots of skill involved. I want to move back to that stage.Scouts can't do their job if scanned. Scouts should not counter scouts. Active Scanners should counter scouts, but in waves of opportunity (Scans being unable to perma-scan). It would follow this: Scout beats heavy (Slow target that is blind to the scout) Heavy beats Med (Tons of HP and DPS.) Med beats scout (Only a bit slower, can dodge scans with damps, and has an HP advantage) Notice how I mention med frames running damps. Meds used to run TONS of damps in PC, due to the fact that they could avoid scouts. This gave them their place in the above statement. Heavies were then PROTECTED by the Med frames. Med frames and heavies engaged each other, with scouts running along the edges of the skirimish and eliminating lone targets and assassinating heavies if they could get away with it. THIS is the goal we should be working towards IMO. I would love to hear a response from you on this Rattati. I would go into detail, but it's dinnertime. EDIT: Playing Tales of Symphonia right now, but will check periodically. Also, if you do this: DON'T forget about the vehicle scanners as well This^^^^
Scouts should not be screwing their fits over to dodge lolpermascan85mcalscouts, they should be balanced by the active scanner. The active scanner should become THE ultimate anti-scout tool, not a cal/amarr scout.
TL;DR Balance scout precision with med/heavy frames, not other scouts,a nd make the active scanner useful again, even against scouts, but never EVER reintroduce perm scans. Make it a "waves of opportunity" with gallogis being the ones generating the largest tide
"Minmitar Scout" and "Masochist" are synonyms.
Kills-Archduke Ferd1nand
|
Bayeth Mal
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
718
|
Posted - 2014.07.13 00:45:00 -
[17265] - Quote
Fundamentally a problem arises when you have 1 ghost scout and 1 precision scout. Either their bonuses are meaningless or they leave the other scouts in a terrible position.
Unless we declare two of them "Actual Scouts" and the other two "Light Assaults".
Heading over to Destiny Beta and a few others
Hit me up for Skype and PSN
|
voidfaction
Void of Faction
314
|
Posted - 2014.07.13 00:52:00 -
[17266] - Quote
Bayeth Mal wrote:Fundamentally a problem arises when you have 1 ghost scout and 1 precision scout. Either their bonuses are meaningless or they leave the other scouts in a terrible position.
Unless we declare two of them "Actual Scouts" and the other two "Light Assaults". make 2 precision and 2 ghost, lol
|
Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p
Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance
1302
|
Posted - 2014.07.13 00:54:00 -
[17267] - Quote
voidfaction wrote:Bayeth Mal wrote:Fundamentally a problem arises when you have 1 ghost scout and 1 precision scout. Either their bonuses are meaningless or they leave the other scouts in a terrible position.
Unless we declare two of them "Actual Scouts" and the other two "Light Assaults". make 2 precision and 2 ghost, lol Not a bad idea actually
"Minmitar Scout" and "Masochist" are synonyms.
Kills-Archduke Ferd1nand
|
mollerz
3805
|
Posted - 2014.07.13 00:54:00 -
[17268] - Quote
Ghost Kaisar wrote:
IF we have to have one be useless, let's make precision useless. Back in the old days, scouts were nigh impossible to detect to eachother. Scout battles became "Fighting in the Dark". Lots of skill involved.
Also, if you do this: DON'T forget about the vehicle scanners as well
Yea man. Those were the days- and it made nothing but sense really. Scout to scout combat should be all about eyeballs.
You're Welcome... see their you go, Appia!
|
Brokerib
Lone Wolves Club
1623
|
Posted - 2014.07.13 01:20:00 -
[17269] - Quote
Wow, that was a lot of posts to catch up on
My 2 ISK, as the discussion seems well under way.
The requirement for two complex damps an an active cloak to avoid the best precision possible seems solid, and allows three of the scouts to outright fit dampeners if they so chose. But I would request that the cloaks be given a base profile dampening at all levels (as per pre-alpha, though probably around the 10% mark instead of 25%, but what ever will work with the math), instead of forcing scouts into using a proto suit with 2 proto modules + one piece of proto equipment.
The benefits of the cloak should be around the size of the wave (time dampened), not there only being one viable wave.
Otherwise the investment for new bro's is just unachievable.
Proto scout + proto dampeners + proto cloak = ~3.6 Mil SP
Adv scout + proto dampeners + standard cloak = ~2.1 Mil SP
Would also mean that new bro's could fit standard/enhanced damps and cloak to achieve partial dampening.
I know most of us are already full up on damps etc, but won't somebody think of the new bros!
Knowledge is power
|
Aero Yassavi
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
8737
|
Posted - 2014.07.13 01:24:00 -
[17270] - Quote
Bayeth Mal wrote:Fundamentally a problem arises when you have 1 ghost scout and 1 precision scout. Either their bonuses are meaningless or they leave the other scouts in a terrible position.
Unless we declare two of them "Actual Scouts" and the other two "Light Assaults". None of the scouts should be light assaults, that is not their role. Make them scouts.
Reading through the responses, a lot of people are complaining about the proposed Amarr scout having too good of a passive scan precision (which I don't see at all), but you have to remember that not all combat is going to be scouts versus scouts. There are many other suits on the battlefield, or at least there should be. When going up against non-scout suits, all the scouts should be able to easily scan them down. So what is the Amarr scout gaining in these situations? It doesn't matter the margin of how much lower your precision is, lower is lower. So the Amarr scout may be getting a bonus that seems really powerful but it is only effective against one fifth of the suits. Meanwhile the scanning range of the Caldari scout's bonus gives it an edge that works against all opposition suits, as well as Minmatar's nova knife bonus. Additionally, all suits will be able to hide from the proposed Amarr scout's passive scans, two of which don't even need a cloak to do so (Gallente and Minmatar), and of those the Gallente only needs to use 2 of it's 4 low slots.
Numbers look pretty good in my opinion. Perhaps we may need to increase the profile dampening of cloaks though or else the Caldari scout won't be able to avoid 15dB.
Amarr are the good guys
Their way of the Commando seems right and noble
|
|
Toby Flenderson
research lab
554
|
Posted - 2014.07.13 01:32:00 -
[17271] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Appia Vibbia wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:Appia Vibbia wrote:CCP Rattati wrote: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.
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? Let's see how that scenario plays out by actually just changing the numbers. I'm just catching up on the dev posts so I don't know if anyone has brought this up again but if passive scans are shared then precision is innately more powerful. What I mean is that countering 6 dampened scouts with one player with high enough precision is not balanced. I'm for passive scans being shared but I'm also for every scout being invisible with enough sacrifice. |
Aero Yassavi
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
8737
|
Posted - 2014.07.13 01:38:00 -
[17272] - Quote
Brokerib wrote:Wow, that was a lot of posts to catch up on My 2 ISK, as the discussion seems well under way. The requirement for two complex damps an an active cloak to avoid the best precision possible seems solid, and allows three of the scouts to outright fit dampeners if they so chose. But I would request that the cloaks be given a base profile dampening at all levels (as per pre-alpha, though probably around the 10% mark instead of 25%, but what ever will work with the math), instead of forcing scouts into using a proto suit with 2 proto modules + one piece of proto equipment. The benefits of the cloak should be around the size of the wave (time dampened), not there only being one viable wave. Otherwise the investment for new bro's is just unachievable. Proto scout + proto dampeners + proto cloak = ~3.6 Mil SP Adv scout + proto dampeners + standard cloak = ~2.1 Mil SP Would also mean that new bro's could fit standard/enhanced damps and cloak to achieve partial dampening. I know most of us are already full up on damps etc, but won't somebody think of the new bros! Scouts are definitely the most skill point intensive role in the sense that you need your skills maxed out for it to work competitively with e-war (especially your scout skill to level 5 so you can manage to fit a cloak). Though that's just the nature of the role, nothing particularly wrong with that. Also given that all standard scouts can avoid advanced scanners with no modules or skills whatsoever, I'd say newer players have plenty of room to work with. If anything should be done in that area though, it would definitely be giving all scouts a 75% cloak fitting reduction as a Role Bonus as soon as you get the skill to level 1/inherent to the suit. There are many cases of such Role Bonuses in EVE, where there is one set bonus inherent to the ship that doesn't go up per skill level as well as another bonus that does increase per skill level.
I also agree that the cloak field's profile reduction should be a constant value across all tiers. I know this was changed in Alpha to make the proto cloaks more appealing, but the biggest problem was that standard/advanced cloaks already had such ridiculously long cloak durations. I'd argue with the much shorter durations they have now that the proto cloak would still be very appealing even if it was just extra duration you are gaining.
Amarr are the good guys
Their way of the Commando seems right and noble
|
Aero Yassavi
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
8737
|
Posted - 2014.07.13 01:46:00 -
[17273] - Quote
Toby Flenderson wrote: I'm just catching up on the dev posts so I don't know if anyone has brought this up again but if passive scans are shared then precision is innately more powerful. What I mean is that countering 6 dampened scouts with one player with high enough precision is not balanced. I'm for passive scans being shared but I'm also for every scout being invisible with enough sacrifice.
Actually, given that passive scans are shared I'd argue that range is the most beneficiary bonus for a scout part of a large squad, as not every enemy will be a scout and all scouts can easily scan non-scouts, so the Caldari's long range scanning will reveal much more enemies to the squad opposed to the Amarr scout's high precision but low range. Essentially the Amarr scout's bonus only gives a benefit when going up against other scouts, where as the Caldari scout's bonus would be better against the other 80% of the suits. Also, given these numbers all scouts would be able to avoid the Amarr scout's best passive scanning, though Caldari scout would require a cloak.
On the topic of sharing passive scans with squads, I believe currently all squad members can see each others passive scan from anywhere. What if we change this so in order to see a squad member's passive scan you must be within that squad member's passive scan? So for example, if I am an Amarr scout with 30 meter scan radius, I only share my passive scans with squad members who are also within 30 meters of me.
Amarr are the good guys
Their way of the Commando seems right and noble
|
mollerz
3808
|
Posted - 2014.07.13 02:33:00 -
[17274] - Quote
Why can't each race have a couple of scouts?
Each type covers a base of sorts. Infiltrator, force recon, Assassination- for example. Then adjust slots for each towards that purpose and hammer them in with efficacy bonuses. Sprinkle in a few different colors on the 3D models to reflect the role.
Pie in the sky? It shouldn't be. It would be easily accomplished with very minimal work on any developer's part as you are reusing assets, and only making minor cosmetic changes.
This way you aren't shoe horning four different races into some kind of rock paper scissors type of situation. In reality, any civilization at war with another would have different types of scouts that would be tasked to specific missions. Maybe you could even make it a bit easier by leveraging the lore based alliances- so for example, minmatar/gallente where they complimented each other's skill sets.
Honestly, I think the pie in the sky is what fixes this game. This is so difficult because we are trying to make an incomplete game work, You can't balance incompleteness. And even if there was a magic bullet solution to be found here- you can't do it rubik's cube style one side at a time. You have to solve the whole puzzle at once. At least on some kind of top level. You guys are working this from the bottom up.
You're Welcome... see their you go, Appia!
|
Llast 326
An Arkhos
3903
|
Posted - 2014.07.13 03:32:00 -
[17275] - Quote
Take a little time out and you folks go nuts This is why I love you Bastards
KRRROOOOOOM
|
Brokerib
Lone Wolves Club
1626
|
Posted - 2014.07.13 03:57:00 -
[17276] - Quote
Aero Yassavi wrote: On the topic of sharing passive scans with squads, I believe currently all squad members can see each others passive scan from anywhere. What if we change this so in order to see a squad member's passive scan you must be within that squad member's passive scan? So for example, if I am an Amarr scout with 30 meter scan radius, I only share my passive scans with squad members who are also within 30 meters of me.
Good suggestion Aero, has already been made Along with sharing the full distance of scans, but only showing reds that the squad mates have the precision to see.
To technically complex to implement at this time, so removal of shared passives was the fall back position. Which is also not possible at this time.
Knowledge is power
|
Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p
Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance
1303
|
Posted - 2014.07.13 04:00:00 -
[17277] - Quote
taking a step back here....why are we balancing precision as if every player is using a scout....?
Even in a competitive setting, you usually won't have more than 6 on a team, and with assaults getting buffed, that number will be going down even further
"Minmitar Scout" and "Masochist" are synonyms.
Kills-Archduke Ferd1nand
|
Cat Merc
Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION
10877
|
Posted - 2014.07.13 04:11:00 -
[17278] - Quote
Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote:taking a step back here....why are we balancing precision as if every player is using a scout....?
Even in a competitive setting, you usually won't have more than 6 on a team, and with assaults getting buffed, that number will be going down even further Because everyone else is scout food
Feline overlord of all humans - CAT MERC
|
Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p
Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance
1305
|
Posted - 2014.07.13 04:31:00 -
[17279] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:Gavr1lo Pr1nc1p wrote:taking a step back here....why are we balancing precision as if every player is using a scout....?
Even in a competitive setting, you usually won't have more than 6 on a team, and with assaults getting buffed, that number will be going down even further Because everyone else is scout food Not for long
Prof 3 CR's and leveling up the min assault for the mega buff they're about to receive. I WILL eat your scouts for breakfast, lunch, dinner, and maybe some for a midnight snack...
Though TBH Ill miss being a speedy SGer/Knifer, but with the way things are turning out, minjas will continue to be boned.
I already have my MLT heavy with republic HMG's, so I'm good to go there if i need a real stay-and-slay fit
Seeing me doesn't matter with that fit if i can gank you before you can come near me.
And, I have eyes so i can see every little "invisible" scout coming from miles away.
Oh well.
"Minmitar Scout" and "Masochist" are synonyms.
Kills-Archduke Ferd1nand
|
Cyrius Li-Moody
0uter.Heaven
6161
|
Posted - 2014.07.13 04:46:00 -
[17280] - Quote
I said it before and I'll say it again, 2 damps plus a cloak should be all that's needed to dodge the best scanner and best precision out there.
Honestly if it were up to me I'd throw away the gallente's damp bonus and the caldari's precision bonus. No scout suit should have them. Here we are balancing E-War for a 3rd time and the gallente is going to end up OP in some way or whatever scan scout is going to end up OP.
Youtuber. Your friendly neighborhood whiskey-fueled merc.
|
|
|
|
|
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 |