PDA

View Full Version : How Many Of You Would Like To See TC/MST Give A Combat Bonus?



Nvidia
22-09-03, 01:30
Was just thinking about this....

After listening to a bunch of people bitch about how they need TC to use any sort of a decent weapon, but how it's such a massive point sink.

So, I figured, why not give them some sort of a bonus for invesiting in it? But then I remembered... MST is needed for ALL PSI spells, which is basically the equivalent of TC... So then I figured, Why not make TC and MST give some sort of bonus?

It could do something as simple as Multiply the damage percent a point in your main combat skill gives to all the way to Having TC/MST Affect almost COMPLETELY the RoF your weapon/PSI Spell gets.

So in my first example:

Right now TC is sorta like this

At 150 of a Certain Skill, a point in your main combat skill only gives 1-2% damage increase.

With my idea, at 150 of a Certain Skill, having TC multiplies the damage percent per point so that instead of getting only 1-2% damage increase, you get something like 4-5% increase.

I cannot really comment on what a Bonus should give to PSI spells since MST is required for all spells, and I haven't really explored the PSI Monk Class. All help on this subject is greatly appreciated.

Now when I make the arguement about TC, I feel that TC should only affect damage/RoF on TC WEAPONS

Do you feel this would help people who sink a huge amount of points into a secondary weapon skill? I feel that this is a welcome addition to ANY class, seeing as how every class basically relies off MST or TC. All input, whether it be positive, or negative, is welcome, just keep it civil :p

Thanks for taking the time to read this idea, and if you don't like it, and vote no, PLEASE say WHY! I'd like to eventually present this idea to KK if it gets enough of a positive response, and I need feedback to find out what needs changing.

EDIT: If you feel this is a good idea, please rate it 5 Stars

Heavyporker
22-09-03, 01:37
No...

Let's make T-C and MST be a factor in increasing frequency AND handling in their respective types...

That'd be better than straight up damage.

Omnituens
22-09-03, 01:44
no.

should be requirements only.

nothing more.

KidWithStick
22-09-03, 02:43
no.

Mankind
22-09-03, 02:47
no. (just aren't winning huh? :p)

Specializing in one thing gives +dmg. One thing that I would like to see is the TC/MST requirements lowered so PEs/Spies will have points to spread elsewhere.

DonnyJepp
22-09-03, 03:27
I vote to remove TC and MST entirely.

Mattimeo
22-09-03, 03:31
Originally posted by DonnyJepp
I vote to remove TC and MST entirely.

I like that idea too.

BlackPrince
22-09-03, 03:39
Originally posted by Mattimeo
I like that idea too.

I third that. They're both nothing more than worthless point sinks, remove them.

Then theres the "but we'll have PEs usin obliterators" blah blah blah.

Maybe its time we begin seeing more class specific weapons implemented anyway.

Mankind
22-09-03, 03:48
How would we have PEs using obliterators because removing TC/MST? Obliterator requires dex as well. I think stealth tools should still require TC, but weapons would give people more points to spend elsewhere so we aren't so restricted.

BlackPrince
22-09-03, 03:58
Hmm..good point.

And people will whine about anything without ever bothering to think about it.

Perhaps as was mentioned earlier, an overall increase such as RoF and handling...this line of thought requires more whiskey, brb.

Heavyporker
22-09-03, 05:07
Just make more things that require T-C (like Shadow Dancer's and my idea of portable regenerative field tools) and MST... Tech Combat sounds stupid beyond retarded now... It should be called Technical Skill or something, that refers to being able to understand and use technological things.

well, MST... that may have to change to EPU for it to stay in and have the effect it currently does in evening out the PSI field.

Omnituens
22-09-03, 15:48
it MST/TC reqs should be lowered on SOME items.

stealth is one that should NOT be lowered

greendonkeyuk
23-09-03, 02:59
5 stars. I love the idea.