Combat Medic Archive

oh, i figured it was something like that

But, liek I said before, CM are very good at offense, just not dealing damage.. traumatize, electrolyte drain and thyroid rupture caus no damage buit are very devastating attacks.

---

Quandry wrote:
We are suppost to be a 4 in offence....that means damage. Not croud controle or status effects wich is all we got atm.

---

I agree, if we were suppose to wear down our opponents exculsively then we wouldn't need a 4 in offense.

Pistoleers have a (2) in offense, lowest of all combat professions, and they wear down their opponents.

Riflemen have a (5) in offense, tied for highest, and they don't look to wear down their opponents, they nuke them!

So please(devs)if we are to control attackers, just tell us. You dont have tolie about our offensive ability.

An AoE dot might be nice, but I feel getting advanced infect to work better is more important at the moment.

Message Edited by mmaness on 08-11-2005 08:06 AM

The gripe is that our rating is not indicative to how we are offensively.
So what if the document was changed to reflect that?

The document your referring to is fairly old was put up before CU was on the TC if I'm not mistaken.

I would look to this as reference but not the be all end all definitive guide to professions combat abilities. Just a general overview with some mistakes. Remember paralyze paralyzed for 45 seconds even with damage? Things change as they have been.

Currently I think an MCM's offense is a 3 MAYBE even a 2 but does that really matter? Someone is bound to do better as a combat medic offensively when you compare 10 in a room.
We're just talking semantics at this point & unless we hear something solid from a developer or our beloved correspondent arguing this is moot. I do believe this is in the Current issues sticky.
I even brought this up 4 months ago so it's not like I'm blind to the issue. This document to which you are referring to is old. (hasn't been modified since it was posted). Is everything else up there accurate?

For those of you that deny the effectiveness of DOT's send me a tell on farstar I'll get my alt and we can have a friendly duel. Of course in this we'll see who gets the upper hand as the only rule is "you can't use DOTs on me" while I can use them all I want

although I still agree infect should be made a useful DOT.

Message Edited by noran_vaz on 08-11-2005 11:46 AM

That document is what the entire combat revamp is based on. It is a diagram of how the developers plan to balance the classes to their respective positions. The document is not wrong the game is. The document is the developers ideal balance for those said professions...And the target goal.

Correct Quandry. its a spec sheet our basic outline of the Combat upgrade. Does that mean everything is 100%?

What I can tell you is I've worked for 2 large software/hardware companies over the past 5 years (and currently) and specs on a system are not always concrete until it's finished. During the process things change and not everything works as intended and some things get redesigned etc. For one of a thousand reasons things change. I don't work for SOE I'm just basing this on my experience in the industry and general laws of deduction.

PscionicHawk any way to ask if we are to refer to the combat upgrade document as the Definitive guide for our combat offensive/defensive/healing rating.

yes it is! no it isn't! yes it is! no it isn't!

Honestly now.

I'm (NOT) interested in a pissing contest here as I've stated before this issue has been brought up. I even made a post asking about it. It's on the known issues list and if you want to get technical there are more issues with that document than just CM being an offense rating of 4. Take commando for instance.

Here's what we know. Most don't consider the offensive rating of CM to be a 4.
As a result I would strongly urge you to consider the document as outdated and just accept CM's are a 3 or 2. Or pretend it's a typo. If needed I can make a new one stating just that if you like. As we know this game has been changing significantly for many profs since CU started so what was a good idea has affected someone else & in turn is... blah blah blah.
Come on guys your smarter than this.

Message Edited by noran_vaz on 08-12-2005 01:06 PM

dude....



That document is what they are making the game into.


I dont know how much more simple to say it.


Things change yes. That is the intention of the developers as to what they want the game to be.

Commando is a perfict example of how far off they are from what they want.



If you make toasters. Thrue the years you will have sevral changes to it...But the concept is still the same...toast bread.


The document is the concept...the game is the toaster.

uh well put?

ok ok seriously I think this is the wrong issue to be hammering on but here goes. What if dev responded tomorrow with "oh that was a typo"? (unlikely I know so let's say it gets an update).

Since the question has been "Why aren't we a 4 like it says in the docs"
If they changed it the basis for any argument would be over.

I realize no-one feels our offensive rating is equivalent to a 4. I don't think it is either.

That being said, Do you really think it should be? If so why?

I'm trying to help believe it or not. I just don't want to get tied down to that document whose fate and status is not 100% certain. Is this the bible of CU or the basis for an evolving framework & subject to change? While I doubt the document would ever really change things would just begin to happen.

Message Edited by noran_vaz on 08-12-2005 11:13 AM

Thing is a cm has to do a bunch of things before the real effect kicks in. Got to get both dots working and usualy thyroid and maby electrolite and in pvp maby even action and mind debuffs. Then it takes time to realy do what its suppost to.

Im hoping our master skill gives us sompthing with a real offensive threat. There are sevral ways it could be done....Pick one please. Having nothing is worse.