Recent Topics

Ads

[Review] [SW] Scout Tactics

Proposals after the two week discussion period will be moved to this sub-forum for internal review.
User avatar
lefze
Suspended
Posts: 863

Re: [SW] Scout Tactics

Post#51 » Wed Dec 13, 2017 7:40 am

Tesq wrote:
Spoiler:
from when have a rr 40 toons is required to post in a balance topic, it's only required to made a proposal and not to anwser to other proposal unelss of course allow ppl to freely buff their own class without let other debunk em

some of you are asking buff to SW mastery with multiple change some which increase the burst as op wrote (he want a 3-4 sec burst) I own i sw here , i had a sw and a wh in live (both rr 40), same name as here i do have basics knowledge, i also have 3 order toons rr40 plus multiple other destru char rr50+.

Got a problem with that? make change balance discussion rules because as it stand now nothing prevent me /anyone to asnwer in this thread

Plus best part im not making obstructionis here i DO agree with guerrilla tactic being lackluster, you desagree with me on the way fix it? present your argument in logical way, dev will then decide after 2 week, point... You feel my argument are out of mark ? dont bother debunk me ,cuz if you do i will anwer too to your quote, if it's like that dev wont follow it, no need to make personal call on who own waht....

i have to add tbh those lezle post should get moderated......and not going around tell other ppl toons when is not relevant at all for the rules.....
Spoiler:
The fact here is that half the arguments made in this discussion have been based around situations that are PURE theory which in most part is completely wrong, and I early started to suspect that. You claim this isn't obstructing, I say it's highly obstructive. When you don't know your **** AT ALL, don't ruin a balance discussion with mumbo jumbo, PLEASE. And even though I agree that the "I have this and that in RRxx so I know everything" is irrelevant, I had a rr8x SW on live, and unlike you my SW is not r15 but RR6x. Got several RR6x on destro aswell, but that doesn't mean I can go into an AM thread and theorize like I know the class even though my AM is RR4x. Sorry in advance if I shouldn't have posted this, but it frustrates greatly when this is claimed to not obstruct.
Footpatrol22 wrote: So... here's the deal with ap reduction tactic or ap feed tactic's, this applies to all of them in the game, you can make super mean ap drain group(s) in this game. I specifically run one. I'll run 8+ shaman's in a warband group comp or at minimum 2 shaman's per group comp for smaller scale engagements. I skew super hard to try to tip over the table. Currently, You weren't using dat m3 ap steal portion is not working but trust me when it is working I'll be using that quite a bit to destroy the opposition's available ap. I want to starve the opposition of it's ap.

The ap reduction/ap feed tactic's are in response to a heavy ap drain meta.

I'll shut down one of your dps through ap draining it in small scale and en masse ap drain at large scale. This is just one example out of many ap drain type groups. Order can do the same if not better. You can mitigate this if you have guerrilla training tactic slotted and pray your healer's are on top of your cleansing. You can slot in additional ap feed tactic's if you know your going to have to face something like this.

The ap reduction tactic's is to deal with a meta that is heavily tilted on ap drains. I run that kind of meta. Now if you don't value guerilla training as a good choice to spec into then maybe guerrilla training should be baseline and Smoldering Arrows should be in the spec tree. I don't think the purpose of guerrilla training tactic is bad. If you don't deal with a heavy ap drain meta then you won't see the value of these tactic's and you won't have to spec into it.

Also consider it a boon that the 13 point tactic is in a spec tree as opposed to baseline. Would you rather have Smoldering Arrow's be speccable as opposed to baseline? If you don't deal with a heavy ap drain meta (which is likely most) then you don't have to spec into it. If you do, you might want to consider the option.

Changing guerrilla training tactic is losing a tool on how do deal with a heavy ap drain environment/meta. What your feeling now will get worse when You weren't using dat m3 ap steal portion is correctly working.

Are you willing to lose a tool for this kind of change? I'm just showing the cost here.
I see value in clever Shootin' which is the destro equivalent. If the opposition starts running heavy ap drain groups against me I know how to respond.
SW already has 2 core AP tactics, only one of them was required for bombing, and now I'm not sure ap tactic is even needed as LA is slow, but against drains it's gonna more or less negate the whole thing. And considering the fact that running scout in a warband makes zero sense makes the argument irrelevant. Hell, running scout in even in a 12 man is impossible and pointless as it is. So as it stands the tactic is useless, and I definetly don't think anyone would mind loosing it in the slightest.
Rip Phalanx

Ads
User avatar
peterthepan3
Posts: 6509

Re: [SW] Scout Tactics

Post#52 » Wed Dec 13, 2017 12:06 pm

Festering arrow just needs to be feared again!

Havoc magus revolves around bolt of change; everything in the tree revolves around doing a rotation around/with BoC. Similarly, I echo lefze's comments and feel Scout needs to be finetuned a bit around FA (imo), and not necessarily moar deeps as a bandaid fix.

At the moment, Engi is the stationary dps king, BW is a mixture of mobility and stationary, and the SW is more akin to a mobile dps. Even still, Scout should be viable and functional at it's role of a stationary long caster - yet it should offer something unique so it isn't a wannabe engi.
Image

User avatar
footpatrol2
Posts: 1093

Re: [SW] Scout Tactics

Post#53 » Wed Dec 13, 2017 12:16 pm

I can't delete post. Went off-topic. Sorry

Penril
Posts: 4441

Re: [SW] Scout Tactics

Post#54 » Wed Dec 13, 2017 1:20 pm

AP pots, AP aura, Master Rune of Fury, CLEANSES are all much better tools to counter AP drain than a SW slotting a tactic that makes him lose a lot of damage. What do you lose? You have Bullseye, Instinctive Aim, Masterful Aim, Powerful Draw, Leading Shots, No Quarter and of course probably Enchanted Arrows assuming it gets changed in some way. There is no room for a tactic that reduces AP cost on some skills when you can get AP from several other sources.

Guerrilla Training being good/fine because of AP drains is not a valid argument.

Penril
Posts: 4441

Re: [SW] Scout Tactics

Post#55 » Wed Dec 13, 2017 1:51 pm

Damn, I just wrote a wall of text giving my opinion on this and somehow lost it. Oh well...

1a. Too strong, makes this skill better than, say, Fireball (3s cast, no CD but it does not ignore 100% resists) and BoC (3s cast, 10s CD). MAYBE if it wasn't affected by CD decreasers.

1b. This one sounds ok. It is still a 3s cast and ignores 50% instead of 100%. Better than BoC, but it requires a tactic slot.

1c. No. SWs do physical and Corp damage, not Spirit. Nothing to discuss on this one tbh.

2a. Maybe. Assault has something similar, and this one would only affect 3 Scout skills. I like that it doesn't affect Eagle Eye.

2b. I like this one too. Specially the 5s CD increase to FA, so it wouldn't really make it OP combined with proposal 1b. And it would make Scout work more with rotations instead of EE spam (yeah yeah I know they don't really spam EE, you know what I meant...).

User avatar
lefze
Suspended
Posts: 863

Re: [SW] Scout Tactics

Post#56 » Wed Dec 13, 2017 2:14 pm

@Penril

Fireball already hits for similar numbers, not that it's ever cast without FF/M2 for similar reasons fester isn't used.

1a with 2b is too good, 1a alone with 10 second cooldown and not letting it work with WW would suffice and make up for the fact that it rivals the stuff you listed. But keep in mind that even if fester in itself rivals fireball/boc, the combo as a whole on SW is vastly inferior to what both magus and bw can pull off, which is how it should be imo.

1b would kill the spec, it's a net nerf no matter how you look at it. It might look like it increases reliability, but the damage drop on fester is HUGE.

2a Is a net buff for sure, but it's just a shitload of damage slapped on to something that is still gonna remain a gimmicky one trick pony. Will not fix the issues of the spec, and the RR70 skirmish buff from this is insane.

2b Still won't fix anything as this also revolves around fester. Which again, you can't get off under normal circumstances. On the other hand if this is implemented with 1a it's too much of a buff.
Rip Phalanx

Penril
Posts: 4441

Re: [SW] Scout Tactics

Post#57 » Wed Dec 13, 2017 2:24 pm

1a and 1b are pretty much the same but with different values on its variables. I think it all comes down to finding the proper mix of cast time, CD, ignore resist % and (Un)defendable. Yes, I agree that Festering Arrow is pretty bad in the current state of the game. Hopefully something can be done about it.

User avatar
Acidic
Posts: 2074
Contact:

Re: [SW] Scout Tactics

Post#58 » Wed Dec 13, 2017 2:53 pm

Well there a few comments that are in the ops post that should be addressed when reading the whole post.
The tree is for ranged attack, the burst part is some of the features to improve the range functions but the tree is not specifically for this.
The tree gives a SW ability to keep distance, this is completely ignored by the OP.
The fact that the distance is utility and a huge benefit on its own should be sufficient to make any damage or utility gained from being close significant.
Without taking this into account any buff , change or remix seems out of place.
Underperforming imo is just such a cheap explanation when used without better clarification.

Ads
User avatar
lefze
Suspended
Posts: 863

Re: [SW] Scout Tactics

Post#59 » Thu Dec 14, 2017 3:44 pm

Acidic wrote:Well there a few comments that are in the ops post that should be addressed when reading the whole post.
The tree is for ranged attack, the burst part is some of the features to improve the range functions but the tree is not specifically for this.
The tree gives a SW ability to keep distance, this is completely ignored by the OP.
The fact that the distance is utility and a huge benefit on its own should be sufficient to make any damage or utility gained from being close significant.
Without taking this into account any buff , change or remix seems out of place.
Underperforming imo is just such a cheap explanation when used without better clarification.
Okay, first of all the tree is nothing without burst when comparing to skirmish, mainly because your argument about scout having the kit to keep distance is completely wrong. Skirmish is the tree that has the utility to keep a distance.

I agree being able to deal damage from a range is a huge benefit, but currently the spec is unable to deal significant damage from a distance unless the target is standing completely still for a massive amount of time without the SW taking any pressure. The spec is also unable to assist in any way or apply any utility/cc from a distance except leading shots if that is slotted. On the other hand these things are doable in skirmish.

I hope this clarifies why the spec needs a buff to their burst, and why it is underperforming. Burst is the only thing the spec has going for it, and at the moment that burst is theoretically possible, but close to impossible to pull off.
Rip Phalanx

User avatar
Panzerkasper
Posts: 588

Re: [SW] Scout Tactics

Post#60 » Thu Dec 14, 2017 4:08 pm

lefze wrote:Okay, first of all the tree is nothing without burst when comparing to skirmish, mainly because your argument about scout having the kit to keep distance is completely wrong. Skirmish is the tree that has the utility to keep a distance.

I agree being able to deal damage from a range is a huge benefit, but currently the spec is unable to deal significant damage from a distance unless the target is standing completely still for a massive amount of time without the SW taking any pressure. The spec is also unable to assist in any way or apply any utility/cc from a distance except leading shots if that is slotted. On the other hand these things are doable in skirmish.

I hope this clarifies why the spec needs a buff to their burst, and why it is underperforming. Burst is the only thing the spec has going for it, and at the moment that burst is theoretically possible, but close to impossible to pull off.
With the insane amount of CC order can put out, it should not be too hard to pull off a rotation with long cast times.
So as i read your post, Scout is more lacking some utility then damage. But basically all that is suggested with this proposal is more damage. I honestly do not see a reason to decline this.
Image

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest