Bio Engineer Archive

In almost every nerf commando post either as a topic or a reply i see people saying we can solo kryats, i cant even begin to imagine how a commando can do this. I just want to know has some commando actually soloed a kryat or is this just another one of the lies spread by every nerf cryer?

same question for this story that people one hit kills at-sts with a flamethrower ..

i dont know where the damage comes from .. i can make at max 7k dam against a target that has 0 armor and0 resistance (as long as i dont attack rifle users)

and the dot allone will not kill the at st .. at least not in one shot ...

still haven fought a krayt yet () but I imagine its something like this:

1. send in pet

2. burst run to krayt hit with flamethrower DOT

3. run away

4. repeat until dead.

---

LBC69 wrote:
In almost every nerf commando post either as a topic or a reply i see people saying we can solo kryats, i cant even begin to imagine how a commando can do this. I just want to know has some commando actually soloed a kryat or is this just another one of the lies spread by every nerf cryer?

---

I tried to solo a kryat. Guess what, I suceeded. The DoT killed him and I got 0 XP.

The change was pulled because it was part of a larger package of changes which had the overall effect of making experimentation much less effective than the present version. Also, the new version would count missing stats on a resource as a zero instead of ignoring them or filling in 1000 or whatever it does now. This would further reduce the stats on certain key items like advanced power handlers, where over half the required materials don't have the required stats.

---

Dalnin wrote:
I have seen alot of calls for resources like Rhodium Steel, Plumbum Iron, etc to be 'fixed', but I have not seen a much talk from the communityabout real problem. The experimentaion is based on the overall stat cap of 1000, instead of the individual stat cap of the 'gated' attributes. Am I the only one that was excited tohear aboutthe changes on the test server, would use the individual caps for each stat of a given resource? Did I miss or miss-read something regarding this? It seems that a change like this would solve most of the "crappy gun" issues in one easy step.

---

I took something different from those changes, I did post something long winded here before on my interpretation but here goes again for the short of it.

Using the actual resource's cap doesn't mean that this becomes the new 'perfect score'. That is pretty much the system as it is *now*, from an experimentational standpoint (the base build and resource cap on an item still depends on the scores) - but experimentation at the moment ignores the resource actual caps and assumes perfect scores. This is what TH said when he said it was broken in our favour.

It just meant the bonus you get from experimenting and nailing a great successwon't be always a flat 7%. As it stands now they say experimentation bonuses works off the max range, i.e. 1000, rather than the resource max range. This would mean to get 7% bonuses to experimentation would require close to perfect scores. This would also mean if the 'resource range' is 500, then the great success bonus would be half, or 3.5%. And if 250, then 1.75% per great success. The numbers posted by folks on TC supported this theory - people we getting only 3% bonuses to experimentation using the same resources making an FWG5 - which uses iron and typically iron has less than stellar resource ranges (where it counts for us, in Cond/OQ combined).

What this means in the greater scheme of things is it would take most, if not all your experimentation points to reach the resource cap on any *one* area. So instead of having some spare points to throw into durability or efficiency you'll need all 10 of great success magnitude to max out the damage/speed.

To run a quick example -

The max range is 1000 for attributes, that is the maximum theoretical attribute value.

Assume you're working with resources with a max range of 500, so this is the 'actual resource cap'.

Now, link the 7% bonus in great success experimenting per point to the max range. So, if you have perfect scores in your resources you will get a 7% bonus per great success. (This is the current system).

Noooow, correlate the actual resource cap (as proposed). In this example it's 500. That is exactly half the max range of attribute values which in turn means a great success returns only a 3.5% bonus per great success (half of 7% of course). Remember these changes were speciically targetted on experimentation. Seeing as the only real output of experimentation is that percetile improvement (which drives the item's attributes) - one can only assume this is what is targetted.

This is not exactly great news. And as Jennai mentioned, the side effect of this is including 'missing attributes' in the equation - whereas right now it's based on the max range and thus ignored, the proposed change would bring it into the equation which would be disastrous for things like power handlers (gas, polymer, ore, all have no Cond.).

Anyway there's what I took from it.

Regards,

Ker'shakk

I have seen alot of calls for resources like Rhodium Steel, Plumbum Iron, etc to be 'fixed', but I have not seen a much talk from the communityabout real problem. The experimentaion is based on the overall stat cap of 1000, instead of the individual stat cap of the 'gated' attributes. Am I the only one that was excited tohear aboutthe changes on the test server, would use the individual caps for each stat of a given resource? Did I miss or miss-read something regarding this? It seems that a change like this would solve most of the "crappy gun" issues in one easy step.

Does it actually work on TC? I would be excited if someone could verify it =)

Am I missing something, or is a BH terminal in a player city pretty useless? Since you can't put spynet operatives there.