Carbineer Archive
Thread: How much use is Ranged Mitigation 2?
Page 1 of 2
Snapweasel
Mon Jun 14, 2004 7:09 pm
#1
Ok. Im in a quandry. I was a master Carb, but plan on moving on to hologrind heaven with Fencer....but of course Im running out of skill points.
My deciding question on my future is ....How much use is ranged mitigation? Does it actually work and has anyone experienced the difference it may make in a big blaster fight with some stormies ?
Any views welcome... even flames about the fact that Im planning to leave Carb and have placed this blatent fact in the Carb Forum ! (Sorry)
jfang
Tue Jun 15, 2004 10:49 am
#2
It is hard to test in PvE combat, but ranged mitigation most certainly does work in PvP combat. Ranged mitigation will reduce the spread of damage from upper to lower by 80%, whereas ranged mitigation 2 reduces it by 40%.
So, just to pick random ball park numbers out of mid air, you will expect to take on average 20% more damage in ranged combat. (This is an extremely rough, semi-blind,guess, don't quote me.) Make of that what you will.
novamarine
Tue Jun 15, 2004 10:56 am
#3
As a former creature handler, ranger and scout that spent alot of time looking at creatures, it was my experience that most creatures in the game had very tight damage ranges. Thus, verse them mitigation was almost useless. I never saw damage on the NPCs, but I would be shocked if their ranges were not tight just like creatures. Thus, for PvE, I'd have to say mitigation has little defensive advantage.
PvP is a different case. It is invaluable when fighting players. That of course assumes there are any players on your server still using ranged weapons.
jfang
Tue Jun 15, 2004 11:08 am
#4
Wasn't the point of adding mitigation to the game so that PC's could tank NPCs as well as creatures could? Isn't that purpose kind of defeated if creatures have low spreads of damage? I don't get the devs sometimes... 
Snapweasel
Tue Jun 15, 2004 4:31 pm
#5
Thank you for all your brilliant answers.
As I am a PvE and Melee player I suppose (regretfully) that I will be converting all my skill points for my new class.
But seeing that my new class is gonna be Fencer..... then I think I'll be laughing!
So long and thanks for the fish.....
EisMan_Buckeye
Tue Jun 15, 2004 4:33 pm
#6
jfang wrote:
Wasn't the point of adding mitigation to the game so that PC's could tank NPCs as well as creatures could? Isn't that purpose kind of defeated if creatures have low spreads of damage? I don't get the devs sometimes...
It was my understanding that the Devs implemented mitigation partly in an effort to nerf uber weapons such as those pesky Krayted FWG5s that they couldn't remove from the game. Before the FWG5 crafting nerf, they used both power handlers AND projectile feed mechanisms, which made for quite an uber weapon in its days before mitigation. If you think there are a lot of riflemen now, you should have seen how many pistoleers there were before all that.
novamarine
Wed Jun 16, 2004 12:44 am
#7
I did raise the exact same issue before these changes went live. I am not a big fan of damage mitigation and neither are several other correspondants because it does not effect all classes equally. For instance, certain classes have all their weapons with wide ranges and other classes have very tight ranges. Thus, damage mitigation hurts some classes in PvP more than others. We lose access to our best carbine and we sure could use that AP 2.
Rorenikibi
Wed Jun 16, 2004 6:00 am
#8
Pistoleers, Smugglers, Bounty Hunters and their pre-nerf Scatter Pistols, Commandos and their pre-nerf Launcher Pistols.
It was hell out there. Of course, most of those guys are now Riflemen/CMs these days.
novamarine
Wed Jun 16, 2004 8:29 am
#9
EisMan_Buckeye wrote:
jfang wrote:
Wasn't the point of adding mitigation to the game so that PC's could tank NPCs as well as creatures could? Isn't that purpose kind of defeated if creatures have low spreads of damage? I don't get the devs sometimes...
It was my understanding that the Devs implemented mitigation partly in an effort to nerf uber weapons such as those pesky Krayted FWG5s that they couldn't remove from the game. Before the FWG5 crafting nerf, they used both power handlers AND projectile feed mechanisms, which made for quite an uber weapon in its days before mitigation. If you think there are a lot of riflemen now, you should have seen how many pistoleers there were before all that.
It was my understanding that damage mitigation was added to allow for player tanks. If I am not wrong, mitigation was added the same patch that the infamous CH nerf went live. The Devs really wanted players tanking and not creatures. I think the Dev vision of this game is really just like every other game. They want "warriors" (melee classes) tanking creatures, clerics (doctors and combat medics) healing with archers (range classes) adding damage and mages (commandos) providing the occasional nuke.
Unfortunately damage mitigation really doesn't work as well as one would think (in PvE) because the damage ranges are too tight. On the flip side, mitigation has had a huge effect on PvP because most weapons have low mins and high maxes. Personally, I'd like to see mitigation removed but then I think I have an odd view of the game. I'd like to see players killed in under 10 hits though I would prefer thoseten hits didn't come in a 10-15 second period (unless multiples were firing at one target). I don't like this Warhammer 40k game that SWG has become with the armor, the psg, the buffs, the foods, etc where single players can survive for minutes at a time when being fired on by half a dozen players. The combat revamp cant come fast enough for me.
Rorenikibi
Wed Jun 16, 2004 8:43 am
#10
I still say it all goes back to the buffs. They are just way too powerful and eliminate too many checks and balances on combat.
1) Special Spamming
2) All effectiveness sliced triple layered armor becoming wearable
3) The ability to absorb ungodly amounts of damage and regenerate it nearly as fast as it lands.
Those three effects of buffing make the current combat system the mess it is even without Combat Medics being factored in.
TAfirehawk
Wed Jun 16, 2004 8:46 am
#11
/nod Nova
You may have an odd view of the game, but that view is shared by many.....or not so many....but you are not alone in your thinking 
jfang
Wed Jun 16, 2004 9:02 am
#12
I think most people will agree with you Nova. Nobody wants 80% composite armor to exist, but paradoxically everybody wants to have it. Nobody wants riflemen to be able to head hit for 1000 damage, but everybody wants to have an attack which will do 1000 damage themselves. The problem is the prevalent thinking "make everybody weaker, it will improve the system... oh except me", which skews the system.
I'm still amazed how people can say with a straight face "riflemen arebeing nerfed in the combat revamp". Yes that is literally true, but if *everything* is nerfed, may really not be a nerf...
EisMan_Buckeye
Wed Jun 16, 2004 9:30 am
#13
jfang wrote:
I think most people will agree with you Nova. Nobody wants 80% composite armor to exist, but paradoxically everybody wants to have it. Nobody wants riflemen to be able to head hit for 1000 damage, but everybody wants to have an attack which will do 1000 damage themselves. The problem is the prevalent thinking "make everybody weaker, it will improve the system... oh except me", which skews the system.
I'm still amazed how people can say with a straight face "riflemen arebeing nerfed in the combat revamp". Yes that is literally true, but if *everything* is nerfed, may really not be a nerf...
/vote paradoxicallyfor word of the day.
Page 1 of 2