Constant Barrage

[Shaguar]

Shrubberyman, can you please explain everyone the mechanics of all the other 13 profs, and also the mechanics of the nt profession. Thanks buddy.

[navycut]

It's not stupid at all. Dodge debuff checking Dodge, NR debuff checking NR. Can soldiers do other things while they wait for the perk to recharge? You bet they can. Can an NT do anything while waiting for that nano to recharge?

Yeah difference is, perks are based on true/false while nanos landing are based on probability.


So as a soldier, you probably won't ever land those dodge debuffs on say a fixer or something, but even with NR8, nanos can still land on you.

It will land eventually, so you cannot compare perks to nanos

[Shrubberyman]

Shrubberyman, can you please explain everyone the mechanics of all the other 13 profs, and also the mechanics of the nt profession. Thanks buddy.

Do I really need to chew it for you, seems so basic game knowledge…

4 or 5 threads of actions (weapon specials, weapon regulars, nano casting, perks, pets) for 13 profs out of 14 and only 2 for NTs?
Offence and defense on the same thread?
Non-reduceable recharge on NT’s main weapons?
30s equip cyberdeck?
No autoattack-like autonuking?
Cast caps, level locks, focuses, local cooldowns, you name it?
Existence of a nemesis perkline without counterpart?

Just that makes us quite apart from the rest of the game professions I would say.
If I’m not mistaken, a good part of the balancing will be based both on normalizing the NT prof on some aspects and in extending some of NTs limitations to other professions.
As I said already a disheartening number of times, balancing might just make nanos like CBs totally un-needed, but in the midtime no amount of whine will bring anything but more fun for me in a otherwise pretty dull daywork.

[-Klod-]

Guess what? NR checking nukes, so far, look to work exactly the same in the near future. There's no need to use those soon to be OP'd perks ever. They should be reworked into Breaking and Entering temp perk buffs.

Sounds good.

In the current situation, if there's one thing NTs don't need, it's more unreliable tools. It's bothering enough that CC and Blinds are so often useless already.

Those last two are getting reworked and that only works in our (CB whiner's) favour.

This discussion about CB (and siblings) is here because we have no clue about its future, but we are well aware that this tool will be annoying as hell, if it stays as it is and everything else changes as advertised.

[Shrubberyman]

I got it mate, even though it's unclear to me why CB would mysteriously dodge the big balancing mixer while the rest of our offencive post SL toolset undergoes its mutation.

The discussion remains silly though. There's no way of making a single suggestion without having an idea of what will nanoweaving, multithreading and reviewed nanos really be. CB concept might still be needed, or not, or might need an adjustement that will depend on our new abilities.

It all comes down to one thing : the discussion won't have a point (well, apart abusing a few noobies) til we get more solid news.

[-Klod-]

It all comes down to one thing : the discussion won't have a point (well, apart abusing a few noobies) til we get more solid news.

That's why we discuss it ( ).

[sultryvoltron]

Yeah difference is, perks are based on true/false while nanos landing are based on probability.


So as a soldier, you probably won't ever land those dodge debuffs on say a fixer or something, but even with NR8, nanos can still land on you.

It will land eventually, so you cannot compare perks to nanos

The core concepts behind it are equally silly in both scenarios. Debuffs to defensive skills should not check the defensive skill they debuff, or if they do it should be a low check.

How can you argue against that?

consider using Incessant Flurry

Level 74. That's just not gonna happen without mochies.

[howlin]

Level 74. That's just not gonna happen without mochies.

With a med suit on all nanos are hard on low levels, gets better as you level thou.

[sultryvoltron]

With a med suit on all nanos are hard on low levels, gets better as you level thou.

Yeah, sux. Still good for PvP though. Pew pew doubles!

[Shrubberyman]

Indeed the discussion won't have a point until guys like you will get out of box and stop defending game breaking things.When it was all about trader's gth&BR you filled the forums about urgently band aid required, when it comes to your profession, we must wait for balance.Nice play brainiac.
PS: Everyone is regular customer, even if the name is Noim, stop pretending you're important.

Having no clue seems to be fun, I should try sometimes. You have no idea how much more numerous CB threads have been compared to NT initiated threads about GTH. (yea, I will have the charity not to mention your autowtfselfownage with BR... oh, doh).

PS : My name doesn't count. Yours neither even if you were not hiding it. All that matters is that my game knowledge > yours.

That's why we discuss it ( ).

Now, that's old you, alright

[Solstiare]

Indeed the discussion won't have a point until guys like you will get out of box and stop defending game breaking things.When it was all about trader's gth&BR you filled the forums about urgently band aid required, when it comes to your profession, we must wait for balance.Nice play brainiac.

a: The game is not broken.
b: roll an Nt, level to 220, pvp, then make w/e noise you want. Until then, shaddap.
c: otherwise you are a whiny lamer that got his #%& wrecked and got all but hurt.

[-Klod-]

a: The game is not broken.
b: roll an Nt, level to 220, pvp, then make w/e noise you want. Until then, shaddap.
c: otherwise you are a whiny lamer that got his #%& wrecked and got all but hurt.

O'hai thar, precious.

P.S.
You are still wrong.

[Shrubberyman]

a.I didn't said game is broken, I said things that break the game need a fix
b.is more like ''a'' NT, not ''an''.Like ''a'' shaddup not ''an'' shaddap.
c.otherwise, I could not understand this last point.
Must bring arguments on current topic, mkay shaddap since Jun 2002?


If that matters so much to you, cheers for achieving this important thing in your challenging RL.

Lol, RPing the spellcheck police?

As for this "important thing", you're being a clown in a public forum, whining like a girl about some mechanic in a video game and begging FC to take time and ressources changing something a few month before they do a massive change. My kitten could own you with such a pedigree.

[Shrubberyman]

You have "interesting" friends. And get back on your feet, putting some kind of sense in your posts will be more than enough.

[Molotoff]

b.is more like ''a'' NT, not ''an''.Like ''a'' shaddup not ''an'' shaddap.

Except using 'an' is perfectly fine before the acronym 'NT', since the first sound is a vowel sound.

[Djantro]

The core concepts behind it are equally silly in both scenarios. Debuffs to defensive skills should not check the defensive skill they debuff, or if they do it should be a low check.

Case is actually quite different depending the scenario, and that's mostly why "no other debuff ig does as much as CB bla bla" is a dumb argument :

- Case 1 : Shade. You got a perk based evade debuff, which is meant to alllow the profession to dmg its target. Main dmg of the profession are perks. The perk check on the evade debuff should be LOWER then the dmg perk that will follow or it makes little sense (beside perking in "hole", when opponent's short-timed evade buffs are up, in prevision of the time when evade buff will be up again).

- Case 2 : Solja. You got 3 different evade debuff perk which serve 2 distinct purposes. The low check perk debuff, is meant to allow dmg perk and other debuff perk to land (which are 100% too). The 2 other evade perk that follow, which are 100%, not only allow the solja to use at its advantadge opponent's variable evades like in case 1 (those "hole" or "windows" during which opponent has less evades), but mainly to modify the odd to land their luck based dmg (FA, and Burst, mainly) to their advantadge. This is different then case 1 because solja's PvP dmg isn't as hugely based on perks as for shades. 100% def check on such an evade debuff makes sense.

- Case 3 : NT. NT's main source of dmg is prolly very comparable to solja's. 80%+ of it depends of a luck based mechanic (nano program cast), just as burst and FA, and 20%ish is perk based. We could imagine a perk that check 100% of opponent's evade and debuff, say, 500 NR. It would still make sense because the main point of this perk wouldn't be to land our perk which would be checking @ 100%, but to give us a way better chance of landing our main source of dmg, nukes. As a quick reminder, a 500 NR debuff would grant us somefin around 20% more landrates. This result depends of the NT's AR and opponent's NR in the 1st place, so you can't exactly say 500 NR debuff = +20% landrates, it isn't true all the time. Can't stress yall enough to go take a look here http://pvp.aodb.us/ARDEF/nano_calc.html to know what you talking about.
Altho in the case of CB, it is purely dumb to discuss it based on its current def check, and compare it to perks, since, once again, CB is a nuke in the 1st place, and as so, obeys to luck based mechanics, whiles perk follow an on/off pattern. Which is why, even if i think solja's dmg repartition beetwene perks and luck based damage is pretty similar, a 100% check on CB doesn't make sense. For the sake of being coherent, a nano based debuff should land on an equal or better probabilities then what it will allow after it landed.

That said, a PERK @ 100% def check and debuffing for NT would make sense as well. Thing is, current perks aren't enough, imo. 20% more landrates alone wouldn't cut it for current NT's setup. With a 2.8K AR setup, maybe, since you d go from roughly 70% landrate vs 2.3K NR to 90% landrates, BUT we d still need to metain our current evades (you lose roughly 300+ evade when goin max nanoskill setup today). Furthermore, NR1/2 based setup, HP setup, and nanodmg setup wouldn't exist anymore neither. Would kill the variety.

[Parranoid1]

It's not stupid at all. Dodge debuff checking Dodge, NR debuff checking NR.

It is stupid because a perk has a A or B construction, either A, you have enough AR and the perk lands or B you dont and it gets resisted.

A nuke on the otherhand has a % chance of landing depending on the defense/offense, that is, if you cast one nuke on a target and they resist, on the 2nd cast, nothing at all could have changed and the nano would land the 2nd time. Where as with a perk, if your target resists it the first time, they WILL resist it the 2nd time.

Also recharge is a fairly significant difference

[Gunfytr]

As for this "important thing", you're being a clown in a public forum, whining like a girl about some mechanic in a video game and begging FC to take time and ressources changing something a few month before they do a massive change.

Wow, Im having GTH thread flashbacks here.

[Shrubberyman]

Wow, Im having GTH thread flashbacks here.

Guess so, I did not really took interest in the GTH issue. The notable difference I think would be that according to the infos released so far, traders toolset and combat mechanics won't be undergoing a change as dramatic as NT's are planned to. They have no business doing minor tweaking, let alone risking to break a whole prof, within a few month of a tabula rasa of NTs related combat.

[Solstiare]

Except using 'an' is perfectly fine before the acronym 'NT', since the first sound is a vowel sound.

bloody marvelous!


Mocs, go back to WOW and cry there. No matter how you distort it, CB is not game breaking. That is from someone that has been on both sides of it many many times.