Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 .. 80 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |

Maekchu
Black Rebel Rifter Club The Devil's Tattoo
97
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 21:14:25 -
[1051] - Quote
Ines Tegator wrote:Maekchu wrote:The dscan change is great. At last, some tools are given to the aggressor. Instead of always having all the odds stacked in favor of the defender.
Except it won't. As I pointed out earlier, it's just going to make more people focus on Local as their primary Intel tool. Expect your targets to safe up as soon as you enter system instead of waiting for you to approach their plex/anom/whatever. Even more then they already did that is. WH's a different story ofc. Depends what space you fly in. As a lowseccer, you can't always wait till a system is completely empty to do stuff, since many of the systems often have atleast a few characters in them. So this will give the opportunity to jump ratters etc.
For nullsec, I hope they just remove the local completely. The space is too empty most of the times, that people will just dock up when someone enters. So yeah, here I see your point.
|

Kevin Emoto
No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad
37
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 21:27:41 -
[1052] - Quote
Sturm Gewehr wrote:2/10
Small gang and solo roaming is about to get a lot more tedious and risk averse. Facwar (and everywhere really) is going to be full of noobship/inty/covops alts warping to check every plex and every gate or celestial to check for recons and warping into every medium before anybody considers entering with actual PvP ships. The game already favors taking OGB and alt accounts just to set up fights to create content with a small gang. Players who can't be asked to accommodate these changes and bring alt accounts currently make do by using DSCAN and common sense are going to be forced out. These players also represent a large portion of content generators and will be missed.
This change is going to be detrimental to any newer pilots (experience or time in game) trying to get their feet wet into small scale pvp. It is going to set the bar of entry to pvp even higher. The only counterplay is having extra sets of eyes everywhere. Being vigilant with DSCAN doesn't count for anything in regards to these new ships. Fix DSCAN and address the issues with these hulls players are actually concerned about (there are some good quality of life changes this time but far too much broken and unnecessary changes as well) before taking the lazy/sloppy route making big gamebreaking changes to make it look like something is being done.
There will be hordes of unscannable gank fleets with little counterplay ready to end player gaming sessions with them being neuted, damped, jammed, webbed, painted, scrammed and tracking disrupted. This is going to be like the inty blobs after the added interdiction nullified bonus but with actual combat ships that you can't see coming unless you have eyes on grid with EHP better than HACs.
At least with cloaky recons there is a delay which balances out the fact that force multiplying ships can suddenly appear out of thin air. They already fill the role of ganking/camping/stalking. Keep the covop recons in that role and make the other recons viable for larger scale conflict like people are asking for. It still sucks for small gang because of how strong recons already are (a lot of us intentionally don't comp them in gang because they scare away fights and remove content for us) but a lot of gameplay styles would benefit from that change. Recons already get HAC EHP because they have more slots to dedicate to tank (for shield shield).
I like reducing cap for warp but increasing the cap is a bit much and removes too much counterplay from already really strong ships. They are already hard to jam/damp (unlike T3 recons) and have the ability to force multiply from great range.
This power creep really needs to be checked. I know a lot of people are already planning to abuse this not in celebration but in protest and to display how gamebreaking it is.
Things were on a good track for a while in regards to getting a lot of interest back in the game from a lot of former and current small gang types but these changes validate their leaving and are discouraging them from playing.
There's NOTHING wrong with things being hard for new players, and challenging for the rest of us. Honestly, of all the repercussions from this change that I anticipate, increased challenge is greatly welcomed.
The power creep comment is however a good point, it really seems that when Fozzie Rise uses the term "balancing" they really tend to err on the side of OP. I know that WoW developers do the same thing, and promise to aggressively use the nerf bat over the next several cycles...which they fail at..miserably. However the realization that EVE devs appear to try to be keeping up with the WoW devs fills me with a bit of dread. What's next, a new fifth race? Pandari warriors with their faction Monastic Battlecruisers?
If the past is an indicator, this will initially benefit large fleet corps like Hard Knocks who have very aggressive fleet theory crafters... then progressive lowsec pirates like Missy Loreli who will inevitably find remarkable ways to turn this into a mind numbingly effective spiderweb tool, then eventually work its way to Null Sec alliances who'll decide it's too much effort and just continue dieing horribly at the end of pipebombs.
The beauty of these short cycle releases is that in 4-6 weeks this will all be forgotten in the emo rage storm over the next product of the Fozzie Rise experiment. Don't forget, these forum wars also fit into the 'interaction' category that the current developers crave from us!
Yay, we're all winning.... just remember, in EvE you can be Elite, and you can be Dangerous, but to be both, you have to go somewhere else!
|

Nyjil Lizaru
Aideron Robotics
34
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 21:29:43 -
[1053] - Quote
Niskin wrote:52 pages in and it all boils down to this:
Combat Recons with D-scan immunity are still less of a threat than cloaky T3's in all but FW plexes specifically because of the block on cloaking in them. Everywhere else, in every area of space, the cloaky T3 is more dangerous to the solo player. So yes, for FW players this will hurt a bit, mostly the solo guys. For everybody else there is still a greater risk than what is being introduced in Proteus.
As a solo player myself, I empathize, but you have to understand that game balance can't be focused on solo play. Especially in FacWar, where you are specifically trying to achieve a goal alongside other players, whether you choose to coordinate with them or not. Maybe they will play with the ship limitations in sites because of this, who knows. If you are solo then I'd recommend finding a Combat Recon that serves your purposes and plex in that. Fit creatively and watch your overview and you likely will never get caught, even by Lachesis's. Yes, I'm saying to fit Warp Core Stabs on your recon, that Lachesis isn't going to have unlimited points, and if they fit scrams their range is even shorter.
At that point just be happy that cloaking isn't allowed in FW plexes, because when that T3 decloaks he's gonna hit you with a bump and he's gonna have the DPS and tank to ruin your day without ruining his own.
TL;DR: Plexes are still safer than everywhere else, cloaky bumping T3's hurt.
And cloaky bumping T3's cost a LOT more than a recon. If someone risks a T3, they are 'earning' an advantage by risking a larger pile of ISK as well as skillpoints. But to give close to the same level of reward/power for a sub-200M ISK hull? Risk-v-reward-v-effort is out of whack, IMO. I'll fly the recons in FW, but it will be because I feel that I have no choice - that's not a good design.
Nyjil's corollary to Malcanis' Law: -á "Any attempt by CCP to smooth the learning curve of EVE Online will be carried out via the addition of extra factors and 'features' such that there is a net increase in complexity."
|

IcyMidnight
Valkyries of Night Of Sound Mind
8
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 21:30:46 -
[1054] - Quote
Recons should also never appear in local. |

Please Turn
The Tuskers The Tuskers Co.
31
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 21:31:10 -
[1055] - Quote
On the D-Scan immunity
As one of my corp mates said: "this seems like a weird idea; it seems CCP run out of ideas and they said - let's try a weird one this time". I couldn't agree more with what he said. I'm pretty sure the people that enjoy "ganking" as a game-play style love this change(I'm just not sure that another tool for this activity was really needed).
I just can't see the solo and the small gang PvP lovers(the ones that love the "gud gites" and not ganks) liking this change. It breaks the more powerful tool they have/had: D-Scan(I guess the only good news is the fact that you can get a sisters combat probes on a confessor, lol). I'm so "excited" to see how this change will affect the Eve PvP streams, which are for the most part centered around PvP action at FW plexes.
On Balancing things(in general and on recons in particular):
It's really sad to see that the balancing process is unidirectional: let's buff everything and keep doing it over and over again. I feel recons were already unique and in a good place when looked at them in zoom-in mode. The zoom-out was/is the problem, mainly the fact that T3-Cruisers are preferred over everything(especially in small/medium gang context) because for some reason CCP decided to make them good at ******* everything.
So, as long as you have little risk of dying they are the preferred ship for almost every activity. To make justice for recons a T3-Cruisers nerf(as in don't let them overlap with recons unique abilities) is/was more apropiate.
On people pretending to be solo PvP'ers:
Get the hell out. When 90% of your kills are the result of gate-camping just shut up, please ... |

Kevin Emoto
No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad
37
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 21:33:10 -
[1056] - Quote
Maekchu wrote:
For nullsec, I hope they just remove the local completely. The space is too empty most of the times, that people will just dock up when someone enters. So yeah, here I see your point.
For nullsec and for lowsec.... death to local list, to be honest, it provides no real game value anywhere other than showing off our cool avatar....head.
|

Lvzbel Ixtab
0ne Percent. Odin's Call
41
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 21:38:15 -
[1057] - Quote
At least it should be consider to have a D-scan immunity up to a certain distance for example 3 AU or at the maximum 1AU that will force scouts to actually get closer to gather intel, but complete D-scan immunity is just crazy |

Verdis deMosays
Alexylva Paradox Low-Class
76
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 21:38:28 -
[1058] - Quote
As a wormhole resident, I approve this change of Combat Recons!
5 Rooks, please...
*ambush artist signing off* |

Theronth Valarax
V0LTA Triumvirate.
83
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 21:39:43 -
[1059] - Quote
EHP and stat buffs are enough if not too much already. Additional dscan bonus is irrelevant in mid to big scale engagements, where its ridiculously screwing over small scale and solo PVP. I guess that ISB ban has to be compensated with alt eyes everywhere.
Check out my Youtube channel
|

Loan--Wolf
Utter-Chaos
18
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 21:39:47 -
[1060] - Quote
About half of eve that read this just jizzed there self the other half ****
i love it they been in need of some love for a long time now
just wondering and have been for a good while how come on T2 ships it has a bonus per skill level for that class ship like 5 % per frig level lets say when you have to have level 5 to even fly the ship how come not just 25 % ? |
|

Dani Maulerant
Order of the Valkyrie LOADED-DICE
9
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 21:41:56 -
[1061] - Quote
If this is going forward, then you should also take away a combat recon's ability to Dscan around themselves. Just like the scan inhibitor deployable.
Same effect, being invisible to dscan, but at a balancing cost that already has precedent. |

CheesusCrust
HildCo Interplanetar Villore Accords
15
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 21:42:09 -
[1062] - Quote
Some more thoughts from a solo/smallscale fw perspective:
I see a lot of "You are just crying because all you fw folks want to do is farm. This will counter that". Contrary to what people have been saying here I am not too worried about potentialy getting ganked in medium plexes.
I am more afraid that this could actually increase farming.
I would be completely fine with something like this:
- I see a potential target in a medium plex. I take the fight and you have a recon there. I probably get exploded.
- Similarly, I take a fight and you warp in your recon. Granted, I lose the short opportunity to dscan it using the gate. But in such a baiting situation I'm probably under full tackle and committed anyway.
After that, I'll give you a gf and move on.
Just like with a Falcon alt sitting cloaked off the 30km decloak range inside the plex or coming in mid-fight, I now have a lossmail with a lot of intel I can use for future engagements at the cost of my ship. I can then share this intel with my corp/alliance/militia and then people can adapt to this information. There's not much difference between cov ops and combat recon alts in that regard.
If you are running solo, fitting for combat scanner probes is not viable for most fits and hulls. You could bring one in your cargo and refit at a friendly station or mobile depot but that's all time I would not take of my roam for a "could be maybe" scenario. For me personally, I'd rather take a few punches, gather that intel about you and keep the pace up.
Also some things to consider:
- If you are roaming without a scout you are much more likely to run into a stray gatecamp than getting Recon'd in a random plex.
- As large plexes can be warped to directly and thus essentialy have a 200km diameter warp in region I see no problem here. You could just as well be ganked by cloaked support.
- The main source for a gank opportunity, the medium plex, must be opened for someone to be inside. That fact plus local should give you some idea about potential danger.
But what I am actually a little worried about is that you could then actively farm these plexes undetected, a symptom that was addressed through the 30km decloak. Before the cloak changes, the amount of farming was insane. If you give people an easy way to make money like that they will do it anyway they can. Maybe even if that means using a stabbed combat recon. For the sake of argument, let's also say that the combat recon pilot running tons of plexes is not stabbed. Having the benefit of stealth and combat ability alone is not a problem, but adding to that the capability of earning heaps of ISK is a bit much. In my oppinion, if you are sitting in a plex running the timer and making a butt-load of cash farming these sites, you should be a visible target. Even before, when you could cloak inside the timer range, that meant it would stop running it.
A counter to this thought would be the limitation to mediums and larges, which is good. Also, training a farming alt just for a stabbed combat recon is skill intensive. Especially compared to a cloaky t1 frig you could farm in before.
So, from an fw point of view, I'd say let these changes roll in and keep an open eye for changing metas.
o7 |

Caldari 5
D.I.L.L.I.G.A.F. S.A.S
370
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 21:43:55 -
[1063] - Quote
Wow I hadn't looked at F&ID in a couple of days and all of a sudden massive thread on Recons. Haven't read the thread yet, but have read the blue posts.
CCP Rise any chance of adding the PvE bonus for Virus Strength to the Covert Recons? I had mentioned this to you in person at Eve Down Under. |

Altirius Saldiaro
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
217
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 21:44:58 -
[1064] - Quote
Malcolm Faust wrote:This will break exploration.
"Use combat probes?" Q. Can you probe and hack a container simultaneously? A. No
"Use a scout?" I've never heard of an exploration fleet, not once. Not ever.
CCP wants players to interact with other players. Fleet up with friends. We do it all the time in wormholes. We work together to accomplish our goals. If you go solo, then you're on your own. There's a fleet function in EVE for a reason. Plus, did no one pay attention to the exploration trailer? Think it was the Rubicon one. Those explorers were in a fleet. They worked together.
People always bitching about that EVE is a MMO, it should be played with friends etc etc, then they ***** because they might need a scout with them when they go exploring. Learn to adapt. |

Kevin Emoto
No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad
38
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 21:46:07 -
[1065] - Quote
Lvzbel Ixtab wrote:At least it should be consider to have a D-scan immunity up to a certain distance for example 3 AU or at the maximum 1AU that will force scouts to actually get closer to gather intel, but complete D-scan immunity is just crazy
This actually makes more sense....actually, make it combat recons cannot be descanned beyond 1.5 au, or 0.5 au..... the concept of dscan immunity is novel, and as a person who's always loved the recon class, kind of exciting to fly one with this kind of ability... but to have a ship class like recons to be dscan immune at all ranges is truly OP.
and as an earlier poster hinted at...
Leave the rapier as a projectile turret ship and the huginn as a missle boat, changing that around to just change it around is kinda silly.
In each and every release the Fozzie Rise nuttiness brings me one step closer to being able to warp cloaked in a Sin! |

Nivek Steyer
Unknown Crusade
35
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 21:48:21 -
[1066] - Quote
I must agree with the above comments. All of the development on not seeing the targets on the scanner in sounds so much like WH space except for the local chat part. CCP get it over with remove local from null and low sec like you have been saying for years. I find it amazing that your trying so hard to go around the issue just remove the local and eve will be a better place for PvP. It really seems like CCP is trying to push for small scale PvP that happens in WH space so just do it already! |

Ines Tegator
Towels R Us
525
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 22:01:32 -
[1067] - Quote
Maekchu wrote:Ines Tegator wrote:Maekchu wrote:The dscan change is great. At last, some tools are given to the aggressor. Instead of always having all the odds stacked in favor of the defender.
Except it won't. As I pointed out earlier, it's just going to make more people focus on Local as their primary Intel tool. Expect your targets to safe up as soon as you enter system instead of waiting for you to approach their plex/anom/whatever. Even more then they already did that is. WH's a different story ofc. Depends what space you fly in. As a lowseccer, you can't always wait till a system is completely empty to do stuff, since many of the systems often have atleast a few characters in them. So this will give the opportunity to jump ratters etc. For nullsec, I hope they just remove the local completely. The space is too empty most of the times, that people will just dock up when someone enters. So yeah, here I see your point.
Agreed about nullsec. The problem is that Dscan is only so-so as an intel tool, and the vast majority of Nullsec fleet doctrine depends on Local as an intel tool. Can you imagine a roaming gang when you don't even know if targets are in system or not? An entire class of small corp gameplay will evaporate. CCP even acknowledged this (back newar when I joined, when people started asking for WH style local in nullsec) and said they won't remove/change local until they have replaced it with better intel tools. The problem with the recon change is it makes Dscan even less reliable; Local will end up picking up the balance. This makes the issues with too-good intel worse.
As for lowsec, I don't play there, the space isn't valuable enough to be worth the risk. I'll accept your judgements about how it's affected. My concern is directed toward Null.
I should note that the change won't affect me personally. At all. I tend to do my PVE in areas that can't be reached without probes, and seeing probes on Dscan is already my first warning anyway. My complaint with the Recon change is how it ties in to the larger game design, and the answer is badly.
I guess it's time to start pushing hard for a dscan overhaul, and then for Local to be removed from nullsec. CCP has been talking about it for years, now they are forcing their own hand.
- Mission Overhaul - Bridging the PVP / PVE Gap -
If the game stops teaching people to fear lowsec, maybe people will start going there?
|

Lvzbel Ixtab
0ne Percent. Odin's Call
41
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 22:02:29 -
[1068] - Quote
Kevin Emoto wrote:Lvzbel Ixtab wrote:At least it should be consider to have a D-scan immunity up to a certain distance for example 3 AU or at the maximum 1AU that will force scouts to actually get closer to gather intel, but complete D-scan immunity is just crazy This actually makes more sense....actually, make it combat recons cannot be descanned beyond 1.5 au, or 0.5 au..... the concept of dscan immunity is novel, and as a person who's always loved the recon class, kind of exciting to fly one with this kind of ability... but to have a ship class like recons to be dscan immune at all ranges is truly OP.
In each and every release the Fozzie Rise nuttiness brings me one step closer to being able to warp cloaked in a Sin!
Ya ill be happy with something closer to 1AU it will punish fleets that get lazy and dont take the extra step to get within 1AU to scan and will reward with intel with the people that do |

Yahrr
The Tuskers The Tuskers Co.
18
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 22:32:51 -
[1069] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Quote: I can tell you what will happen most likely: - Less fights because people are risk averse - A 2nd account with a Prober at all times will be must, not an option.
Before these changes, the gang considering fighting them never would because they know they can't deal with the Rooks. After, they won't see them and so they will probably engage. That's more fights because people are risk averse. Isn't that what the Force Recons are for?
Invisible Rooks will be the return of the old Falcon. Do you even remember the the 'because of Falcon'-Falcon? If so, you know that this isn't a good thing. Then there will be 'suddenly point' and 'suddenly neuts', all realistically unprobeable, heavily tanked and without sensor recalibration delay. |

Lars Erlkonig
Discrete Solutions Ltd.
15
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 22:35:07 -
[1070] - Quote
Because most guns take more grid to fit than missile launchers, will the huginn be getting more power grid to accommodate the change in weapon systems?
|
|

Cale Agittain
Calamitous-Intent Feign Disorder
1
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 22:35:37 -
[1071] - Quote
So CCP sees nothing wrong with the scenarios created by combining these combat recons together? You warp onto a grid and are in the space of a few seconds pointed, webbed, damped and jammed, stuck outside of your own engagement range and unable to respond... Oh wait, you think this counts as a fight, and thus as content!
You are not stimulating unknown fights with this, you are stacking the odds even further against people who don't want their gang to be 60% force multipliers. What makes you think the majority of gangs won't now be comprised of invisible HAC-tanked super-ewar boats?
What is the downside of this change? What are combat recons trading for this? Is the answer nothing? You guys know this is broken and you're releasing it anyway and that's what's pissing us off.
Where is the incentive to keep subbing to this game if you're just going to keep inventing ways to make fights miserable? |

Grumpy Grandpa
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 22:36:48 -
[1072] - Quote
I actually am looking forward to this as it will be fun in faction warfare
|

Arla Sarain
196
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 22:36:54 -
[1073] - Quote
Ok, if you keep the D-SCAN, bloat their sig and reduce their sensors. If someone even accidentally swipes them with combat probes they light up like the caroline star.
hopefully it won't take 14 days to blap it.
Wouldn't be such an issue if Combat Probes were common but they're not - fights take around celestials and you typically don't need combat probes for that.
If the cost for expanded launchers goes down and Combat Wincons are easier to scan the D-Scan immunity would be deserved. |

Catherine Laartii
Dominion Fleet Group Templis CALSF
440
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 22:54:19 -
[1074] - Quote
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:TuCZnak wrote:Gully Alex Foyle wrote:3) Both fighting parties are free to use them Why nerf Ishtars, both parties are free to use them, right? Balancing is about giving people options and not making bunches of ships entirely useless. Ishtars are currently pretty strong compared to all other hacs, but do you seriously think that if this change is confirmed everybody will fly just combat recons? Ishtars by themselves are not OP. Ishtars with sentries are since it's sentry drones on the ishtar that is the problem, not the ship per se. |

Azusa Asara
Asara Corporation
10
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 22:57:59 -
[1075] - Quote
It seems the only way you will be able to counter a Combat Recon now is to fly a combat recon yourself.
Industrialists will make easy isk off this change as everyone will want to fly a one!
Start Construction! |

Ehud Gera
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
15
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 22:59:19 -
[1076] - Quote
For everyone who says "This will be awesome for Wormholes"
You are the PVP WH'er who wants to gank (and dont get me wrong, i'm a pvp nut as well) but here's your problem:
Your targets are going to disappear. Any kind of solo or small gang operation just became so risky that its not even worth trying to do anoms in WH's.
The only sites that will be done in WH's will be Signatures because then at least pilots can dscan for probes.
CCP if you're going to make these ships not D-Scannable then please replace all WH Anoms with Signatures so that pilots can at least rely on DSCAN to see probes if not the actual combat recons.
Otherwise RIP WH anom farming for all except the larger(est) groups
|

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1799
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 23:14:01 -
[1077] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote: The negative side for me is your other bullet point. Because people don't want to take unnecessary risk they will work very hard, sometimes doing something very boring or difficult, just to get at those last pieces of information. And they should. But we would want to avoid mechanics that obligate people to this kind of behavior too heavily without enough positive side to make the mechanic worthwhile.
I would be more worried with this mechanic that people have to spend a lot of time running probe scans when they really don't want to be than that they are avoiding engagements because of the possibility of Recons. I don't think this will be a problem but we'll have to wait and see.
Going back to a post I made earlier, if Recons got a bonus to fitting probe launchers, this would provide some counter play that doesn't force alts. Obviously more T2 ships like Cov Ops & Black Ops BS should also be getting this bonus, but currently Combat Probes are T3 only if you want to be using the ship for anything else, which isn't good game play. |

Leon Mantis
Limul Tribal
4
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 23:21:24 -
[1078] - Quote
Hmmm, Rapier becomes missile ship. Huggin becomes projectile ship... Thats nice... I think. Don't get the utility high slot on the huggin tho... |

Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2614
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 23:24:41 -
[1079] - Quote
Caldari 5 wrote:Wow I hadn't looked at F&ID in a couple of days and all of a sudden massive thread on Recons. Haven't read the thread yet, but have read the blue posts.
CCP Rise any chance of adding the PvE bonus for Virus Strength to the Covert Recons? I had mentioned this to you in person at Eve Down Under. I don't see why it has to be only covert recons?
I agree that it would be nice to see them get a +10 virus strength for hacking |

Xe'Cara'eos
A Big Enough Lever
224
|
Posted - 2014.12.19 23:25:18 -
[1080] - Quote
CCP - have you REALLY considered how this is going to affect WH play?
I know this is an alt-heavy environment (or teamwork-heavy), but I worry this will make combat recons the new HAC, as they have pretty good 'damage evasion' and you're buffing their resists to HAC levels......
just a concern
also - what is the point to using a force recon now? since the main bonus of the cloak is nullified by the combat recon's role bonus?
For posting an idea into F&I:
come up with idea, try and think how people could abuse this, try to fix your idea - loop the process until you can't see how it could be abused, then post to the forums to let us figure out how to abuse it.....
If your idea can be abused, it [u]WILL[/u] be.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 .. 80 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |