Carbineer Archive
Thread: Our Question
TAfirehawk
Thu Jun 17, 2004 8:57 am
#27
Ah Nova......drawn back in to this mess. But you fail to see one very important thing.....almost all combat people, that are non-Carbineers, only want that one Uber special they can SPAM.
Unfortunately you can not use logic and reason to discuss such things with people that have this play style mentallity.
I agree with ya Nova, but I would rather let them feel my Carbineer Flamer 
jfang
Thu Jun 17, 2004 9:17 am
#28
TAfirehawk wrote:
Ah Nova......drawn back in to this mess. But you fail to see one very important thing.....almost all combat people, that are non-Carbineers, only want that one Uber special they can SPAM.
Unfortunately you can not use logic and reason to discuss such things with people that have this play style mentallity.
I agree with ya Nova, but I would rather let them feel my Carbineer Flamer
Be nice, TAfirehawk. PadreBook has been very civil and thoughtful in his or her posts, and we should extend the same courtesy.
Only 7294 posts to go, TAfirehawk. You'll get there eventually, if somebody else doesn't beat you to it... 
Edit: I will admit the last post of PadreBook didn't note the meaning of Nova's post he or she quoted, which explained how DPS is not the end all and be all even when damage is all that an attack does... But despite that,flaming is bad. 
Message Edited by jfang on 06-17-2004 12:19 PM
PadreBook
Thu Jun 17, 2004 10:04 am
#29
jfang wrote:
TAfirehawk wrote:Ah Nova......drawn back in to this mess. But you fail to see one very important thing.....almost all combat people, that are non-Carbineers, only want that one Uber special they can SPAM.Unfortunately you can not use logic and reason to discuss such things with people that have this play style mentallity.I agree with ya Nova, but I would rather let them feel my Carbineer FlamerBe nice, TAfirehawk. PadreBook has been very civil and thoughtful in his or her posts, and we should extend the same courtesy.Only 7294 posts to go, TAfirehawk. You'll get there eventually, if somebody else doesn't beat you to it...Edit: I will admit the last post of PadreBook didn't note the meaning of Nova's post he or she quoted, which explained how DPS is not the end all and be all even when damage is all that an attack does... But despite that,flaming is bad.Message Edited by jfang on 06-17-2004 12:19 PM
I may have misinterpreted that but it came across to me as that we should look at some other feature of our shots. But what, sorry if I'm a little fuzzy here, but we are lacking in real options. While we have all these damage types they aren't as useful as AP is borked (I know Carbineer really has the short end of it with only the Laser Carbine and Nym/DXR6 to use--Energy and Acid)--meaning that it is frequently disadvantageous to switch from the republic blaster because of the lack of the ap vulnerability multipler. Now with the inability to switch weapons in combat (re: 3 second delay to switch weapons), a person of any combat profession has to just go in with their best weapon (be it pistol, carbine, rifle, pike, one handed, two handed, heavy weapon) and eliminate yet another tactical feature of the game.
Padre
jfang
Thu Jun 17, 2004 10:27 am
#30
PadreBook wrote:
I may have misinterpreted that but it came across to me as that we should look at some other feature of our shots. But what, sorry if I'm a little fuzzy here, but we are lacking in real options. While we have all these damage types they aren't as useful as AP is borked (I know Carbineer really has the short end of it with only the Laser Carbine and Nym/DXR6 to use--Energy and Acid)--meaning that it is frequently disadvantageous to switch from the republic blaster because of the lack of the ap vulnerability multipler. Now with the inability to switch weapons in combat (re: 3 second delay to switch weapons), a person of any combat profession has to just go in with their best weapon (be it pistol, carbine, rifle, pike, one handed, two handed, heavy weapon) and eliminate yet another tactical feature of the game.
Padre
The comment that Novamarine was making was that if you eliminate all issues of states and area and what not, so only damage was relevent, dps is not the end all and be all. So, for example, imagine you had a shot which was guaranteed to hit and did 20000 health damage, but then required a6 minute reload time. The DPS israther low, but is has a use above and beyond pure dps.
For a less extreme case, if you look at the pistoleer specials, they have uses distinct of each other, even if they are all variants ofuntargeted damage attacks. So, assuming you aren't at speed cap, if you knock somebody down it, it might be better to use two doubletap attacks then a stopping shot then two stopping shots, as while doubletap has lower dps you actually get more damage done in the time a person is on the ground (and save the "slow big shot" for last, so you can reload while the person is standing).
Also, when you interplay speedcap, HAM costs, and other issues, there is more bouncing around in combat than pure DPS. While pistoleer has less varient than carbineer, to say that all the attacks are redundant because they all do untargeted damage is not really valid.
As I understand it,this is the argument he is putting forward as to why pistoleer specials are not a broken as pistoleers claimthey is.
Rorenikibi
Thu Jun 17, 2004 10:49 am
#31
Keep in mind, Riflemen have an awesome edge that hasn't been given to ANYONE else.
Ranged Death Blows.
Stun damage, high speed, awesome DPS, better defenses are poppycock next to this little number.
The ability to incap your target at 64 meters spares the Rifleman a LOT of exposure to enemy fire and eliminates an incapped target's chance for a split second save before the Rifleman can get close enough to DB normally. With Carbineer and Pistoleer, when you go down, you've got a couple seconds that a talented Doc/CM/Medic can take advantage of, with a Rifleman, down you go and down you stay.
As far as the debate about the separation of powers between Rifles, Carbines and Pistols comes down to having two roles available and three professions to divide them between.
You have the DPS Role and the State Effect Role. Right now, Carbineers, with a few remaining issues, are the kings of state effects. We are also specialists in multi-target encounters. Riflemen are DPS dealers. At top skillspeed, with a decent rifle, they can out damage just about anyone out there. Pistoleers are stuck somewhere in the middle trying to find ground to stand on.They have the best defenses, which while nice, aren't enough of an edge to build a combat role around as a standalone (you can't defend your way to victory, at some point you've got to hit the SOB you're fighting), but they are trying to push for more damage and more state effect attacks, which is threatening the territory of carbines and rifles. Riflemen are asking for a KD of their own and to retain their current speed ratings in order to keep their role as Damage Dealers while picking up a few pieces of the Carbineer's role. Carbineers are looking for more speed and better defenses, along with a wider diversity of damage types to improve their use of state attacks (right now, if we can't hurt it, we can't affect it).Again, we're looking for elements of the Pistolleer's defense skills with the Rifleman's ability to pick up any weapon in the profession's arsenal and rock n' roll at top speed.
Riflemen don't want to lose their high DPS and Ranged Kill ability, but wantmelee defenses and some state effects added to enhance their performance.
Carbineers don't want to lose their dominance over State Effects and Multitarget shots, but we're looking for higher speed and VASTLY improved defenses.
Pistoleers don't want to lose their Defenses, but are looking for more effective State applications and DPS to compete with the other two in terms of looting rights and xp in PvE.
Pistoleers don't want to lose their Defenses, but are looking for more effective State applications and DPS to compete with the other two in terms of looting rights and xp in PvE.
The problem isn't so much that we're wrong to want what we do not have, but that we're really not sure of who and what we are supposed to be. Novamarine recently did a thread here that just knocked our socks off with a definition of what Carbineers would like to be and whatwe see as our role in the game. Maybe Nova could coordinate some effort between the Rifleman and Pistoleer Correspondants so we as the three mainline combat professions can sort out amongst ourselves who we think we should be and present a similar Vision thread to the Devs For each.
TAfirehawk
Thu Jun 17, 2004 11:05 am
#32
LOL
All of this from posting that our Question about Accuracy and Accuracy While Moving was the same as the Pistoleer Question.....
This is becoming so far off topic that I must ban myself from further non-sense in here..... 
Rorenikibi
Thu Jun 17, 2004 11:32 am
#33
TAfirehawk wrote:
LOL
All of this from posting that our Question about Accuracy and Accuracy While Moving was the same as the Pistoleer Question.....
This is becoming so far off topic that I must ban myself from further non-sense in here.....
Conversations invariably evolve as new opinions are added. This particular (and fairly informative) tangent came off of the similarity between requests for information between Carbineers and Pistoleers.
Believe me, the three ranged professions are long overdue for some kind of brainstorming session to see if we can't keep from stepping on each other's toes.
jfang
Thu Jun 17, 2004 11:52 am
#34
/scold TAfirehawk for distracting the conversation
(If you think this crossover is bad, you should see the turf wars that happen between doctors, combat medics, and medics. If they were introduced, who do you think should get ranged, area poison cures?Well, you're wrong because... )
)I would disagree with you Rorenikibi. I see at least three types of ranged combatants. Among others you have the defensive, the offensive, and the states. (I would also includethe "alternative damage type", "area effect", "special effects", "dabble friendly", etc., but those are outside the scope of this post. Note that these do not have to be mutually exclusive.) You would suggest that defensive is not a viable position to take, but I disagree, for both PvP and PvE combat.
I am making the assumption that everything is done within a group context, as in theory people shouldn't be playing a *MM*ORPG solo and expect everything to work as well as it should. It can, but balance should be focused on the group (thus the "offense" will be vulnerable to attack, the "states" won't be able to take advantage of them, the "defense" can't kill things, etc.). This to some degree is invalidated by 80% armor and 2400+ buffs, but I am speaking from a post-combat revamp, ideal world perspective...
PvE:
When fighting "dumb" AI, the role of a tank is well established and an important role. Especially when fighting enemies which can not be pinned down by melee fighters (such as SBDs), it is important to have some high defense targets in your party to prevent them from being overwhelmed. So, the defense keeps the party from being overwhelmed, the states would supplement the defense and offense, and the offense would be able to kill the target. Without a defensive position to distract and absorb hits, a strong opponent would be able tokill the states and offense before being taken down. It's not a glamorous job, but much like being a dedicated doctor (how many of those do you see on an average battle ground, not riflemen-buffers...), somebody needs to do it.
PvP:
A defensive ranged position by itself is much weaker, as your "smart" opponents in theory would just ignore them until last. However, professions do not exist on a vacuum. Having a high defense lets you do other things. For example a pistoleer-doctor might be much more effective than having both a pistoleer and a doctor, as the doctor would be killed quickly and the pistoleer would be ineffective by itself. Also, having an extra body in the fray can help keep the enemy off balance. Having an defense engage an offensive type keeps the offensive person engaged and unable to recuperate, in essence distracting and wearing the offensive person down until others can pay more attention and kill him or her.
I agree that the PvP argument is weaker (as professions should be stand alone viable), but it exists. As long as a good PvE situation exists though, which I think it does, this covers the majority of gameplay. So, so long as there is a viable PvP scenario the role is tenable. I do not think that having an offense-defense-states paradigm is as broken as you would suggest.
jfang
Thu Jun 17, 2004 1:09 pm
#35
Rorenikibi wrote:
novamarine wrote:
This community really wants balance.
In my experience, the most rational and reasonable Riflemen out there are easy to spot. I just check their badge list for the telltale:
...has mastered the Combat Medic profession.
and ignore them. Everyone else is pretty kosher in terms of wanting things to work.
"This community really wants balance." I keep picturing a carbineer council trying to bring balance to the game... Does this mean that Novamarine is the equivalent of Anakin, and we should be wary of him falling pray to the dreaded Riflemen side?
Hmpf. What does everybody have against my chosen profession. I think I have been fairly thoughtful and reasonable in both this forum and the combat medic one.
Honestly, I'm not sure I would want to see carbineers as having more melee defense. I view the range of 20m - 0m of being the pistoleer's domain, so in theory melee defense should be "useless" to a carbineer (even with the 15m long arms that Teras Kasi have). In theory carbineers should be focused on mobility though. Maybe rather than introducing more defense skills, they might introduce a "defense while moving" skill modifier for carbineers. In practice it would always be in effect in PvP combat, but it would make more sense to me to break it out.
TAfirehawk
Thu Jun 17, 2004 1:28 pm
#36
I am always amazed at the Combat Medics defending themselves.....
The Melee Defense is an issue because Rifleman get it (+40) and Carbineer should not have ZERO.....so your logic on Pistoleer and Melee Defense is not SWG "reality"
Rorenikibi
Thu Jun 17, 2004 1:29 pm
#38
Its not really CMs, I know several I have a lot of respect for.
Its when you find someone who's gone Rifleman/CM and you're likely looking down the barrel of a template kiddie who just wants to pwn j00.
PadreBook
Thu Jun 17, 2004 1:32 pm
#39
My feeling on CM/Rifleman is that just illustrates how borked and capricious the profession design was and is. I mean why does Rifleman have +90 speed when Carbineer have +60 (or Pistol at +74)? That makes no sense from a game design perspective.
Padre
Padre