[Review] [SW] Scout Tactics

[dansari]

Spoiler:

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.

"Distance," arguably, is only utility when the distance between you cannot be easily decreased. The only time this is plausible is during keep offenses/defenses, or in large rvr fights with a strong frontline (and in the latter, a guarded LA+ES SW is much more useful anyway).

This is precisely why Skirmish, and now Assault, are strong, viable specs. Skirmish allows you have a plethora of tools (PD, rkd, heal debuff) that are buffed and attainable because you're Skirmish specced, able to effectively rotate around a fight without getting into a "danger zone" most of the time. Assault allows you to trade risk and reward, giving you access to melee burst at the cost of being in melee range, and is in a good place because the risk is worth the reward. Scout is also a risk/reward, but currently is skewed too far into risky play because of the time it takes to accomplish what your spec is intended to do, and I argue, not rewarding enough for that risk.

I still disagree that only decreasing the cast time on FA would encourage more SWs to run Scout spec.

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.

Lefze is not arguing for more utility in Scout; he's saying that the damage is insignificant for the spec, and that if you want to bring utility, you run Skirmish instead (rkd, heal debuff at 98ft).

[lefze]

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.

1a is not a damage buff in any practically applicable way except a fringe case of WW, and is the only buff I want and/or see as viable. And a lot of that order CC comes from SWs, which loose all of their CC outside of 65ft and most of it completely by speccing for the tree in question. And also, there is NO viable rotation without a 3 second cast outside of M2, do you honestly think this plays well in the actual game?

[Tesq]

1-a is not viable as long FA dmg do not scale better across all target

hit 1 tank the same as hit 1 soft target is not a godd way to balnce anything.

if the bypass is toned under 100% then the FA can be made spammy and the dmg can also be increase x2/x3 (dosent really matter). that is not a.... prob, buff 1 skill is = buff another one.
The problem here is ths scaler:

FA cant hit tank as it hit other soft target.After tone down the bypass you can both:

-cast time reduction FA to 2 sec
-increase his dmg to x5 if serve the purpose.
.reuces the cd of 5 or even make it spamable.

becuse you balance these things with each other but you cant balance anything if your aim is make FA take down target but those ideal target suppsoe to be soft target(dd or healers) and not tank (but then you do the same dmg also on tank **** sake...).

[lefze]

1-a is not viable as long FA dmg do not scale better across all target

hit 1 tank then same as hit 1 soft target is not a godd way to balnce anything.

if the bypass is toned under 100% then the FA can be made spammy and the dmg can also be increase x2/x3 (dosent really matter). that is not a.... prob, buff 1 skill is = buff another one.
The problem here is ths scaler:

FA cant hit tank as it hit other soft target.After tone down the bypass you can both:

-cast time reduction FA to 2 sec
-increase his dmg to x5 if serve the purpose.
.reuces the cd of 5 or even make it spamable.

becuse you balance these things with each other but you cant balance anything if your aim is make FA take down target but those ideal target suppsoe to be soft target(dd or healers) and not tank (but then you do the same dmg also on tank **** sake...).

I can't quite follow half of this, but in essence your issue is that you loose health as a tank? Quite frankly scout needs the skill to hit that hard to be relevant in the slightest, even against tanks. And it doesn't do moraledamage, it's still mitigated by toughness, flat damage decreasers, bubbles and a plethora of other stuff. And in practice damagenumbers on tanks are lower than on other targets, so another useless theoretical argument.

[Tesq]

1-a is not viable as long FA dmg do not scale better across all target

hit 1 tank then same as hit 1 soft target is not a godd way to balnce anything.

if the bypass is toned under 100% then the FA can be made spammy and the dmg can also be increase x2/x3 (dosent really matter). that is not a.... prob, buff 1 skill is = buff another one.
The problem here is ths scaler:

FA cant hit tank as it hit other soft target.After tone down the bypass you can both:

-cast time reduction FA to 2 sec
-increase his dmg to x5 if serve the purpose.
.reuces the cd of 5 or even make it spamable.

becuse you balance these things with each other but you cant balance anything if your aim is make FA take down target but those ideal target suppsoe to be soft target(dd or healers) and not tank (but then you do the same dmg also on tank **** sake...).

I can't quite follow half of this, but in essence your issue is that you loose health as a tank? Quite frankly scout needs the skill to hit that hard to be relevant in the slightest, even against tanks. And it doesn't do moraledamage, it's still mitigated by toughness, flat damage decreasers, bubbles and a plethora of other stuff. And in practice damagenumbers on tanks are lower than on other targets, so another useless theoretical argument.

scaler is a scaler, my prob is there is no scale the thing you pointed out are = for all archtype.... FA is doing not scaling dmg atm becaus is always a 100% bypass; ideally

tank should take less dmg
healer medium dmg
DD the most dmd

this si jsut an exemple dd and healer could be swap , it dosent matter there must be at least a 3 stop scaler or theorically even if ther are not fixed values at least 3 differents ranges of values so you can see what the behavioir of the skill will be, so that you can balance to "respect" each archtype role (again cant hit tanks as soft target , jsut nope) atm there aren't because FA is a 100% bypass.

-1050 tough will remove 210 dmg, appart that that much tough stack is inconsistent exept on BG but also it's just -210 dmg vs 2k hit.
-healers absorbs have CD and anyway allow a FA spam with 100% would make em uselss.
-guard can be applied to anyone nuff talk...it dosen't really matter, that is not going to make a scaler between classes

[dansari]

tank should take less dmg
healer medium dmg
DD the most dmd

Sometimes this is the case; most times it's not. Respectfully, your theory about how much damage each class should take is not relevant to the topic nor realistic in relation to the current iteration of the game.

[Panzerkasper]

Spoiler:

1a is not a damage buff in any practically applicable way except a fringe case of WW, and is the only buff I want and/or see as viable.

1a is a damage buff and I already explained why on page 3.

And a lot of that order CC comes from SWs, which loose all of their CC outside of 65ft and most of it completely by speccing for the tree in question.

The first part of the statement is just completly false, the second part is partly false.

And also, there is NO viable rotation without a 3 second cast outside of M2, do you honestly think this plays well in the actual game?

So the 3 second cast is the problem, as I already said: reduce the casttime to 2 seconds, but then the damage should also be toned down a bit.

No omnislashing.

[Tesq]

Spoiler:

tank should take less dmg
healer medium dmg
DD the most dmd

Sometimes this is the case; most times it's not. Respectfully, your theory about how much damage each class should take is not relevant to the topic nor realistic in relation to the current iteration of the game.

k, agree to disagree,

i just pointed it out, still 1 thing is we/wh ignoring armor which mean the scaler is reduced a lot or removed, but it's a melee class.....1 pew pew man hitting from 100" feet bypassing 100% reistence hitting equally a tank like a soft target still IS not right because you just then throw away any class role and class customization.

[Penril]

How hard someone is hit depending on his archetype is irrelevant to this thread. And if you are that worried about tanks dying to FA, just disagree with the "Undefendable" proposal and point out that Hold the Line is one of few counters to FA.

[lefze]

1a is not a damage buff in any practically applicable way except a fringe case of WW, and is the only buff I want and/or see as viable.

1a is a damage buff and I already explained why on page 3.

And a lot of that order CC comes from SWs, which loose all of their CC outside of 65ft and most of it completely by speccing for the tree in question.

The first part of the statement is just completly false, the second part is partly false.

And also, there is NO viable rotation without a 3 second cast outside of M2, do you honestly think this plays well in the actual game?

So the 3 second cast is the problem, as I already said: reduce the casttime to 2 seconds, but then the damage should also be toned down a bit.

In all technicality allowing a class to land a skill is a damage buff, and if you are looking for a static dps number it's also a dps buff. But in the actual game if you look away from the fact that the spec currently can't land a rotation, it's only enabling the rotation. The 1 second cast doesn't provide any meaningful damage outside of rotation cooldowns, and when factoring in required kiting and actual gameplay you still have the same windows of burst that you have now, the only change is that you can actually start and complete a rotation. In no way is a theoretical example of a SW standing still hitting a stationary target representative of how the spec works, so all your theoretical dps formulas etc. Are moot.

And saying SW doesn't stand for a fair share of CC is just retarded. Disputing that SW looses a knockdown and snare while outside of 65ft when speccing scout is even more so.