psi line of sight advantage, and its balancing

[Torg]

in recent discussions on the role and general viability of the APU subclass we missed (at least imho) one important advantage to all psi modules: no real/perfect line of sight requirement.

whats this? using guns you need to target the body to gain a hit, just a corner of the outer hitbox wont do. psi will let you target the outmost part of an enemy's hitbox (PvE or PvP). additionally your hit chance with psi moules is not depending on the size (closing) of your reticle, just the damage. this does allow for a more dynamic gamplay, dodging enemy fire more efficiently, using movement and obstacles.

as we can see here, damage of guns and psi modules cant be compared 1:1. what damage malus would balance the psi advantage? what do you think?

[Cursed Shadow]

To my knowledge this is already addressed, simply the less lock-on you have with the APU spell, the worse the damage is.

[Ivan Eres]

in recent discussions on the role and general viability of the APU subclass we missed (at least imho) one important advantage to all psi modules: no real/perfect line of sight requirement.

whats this? using guns you need to target the body to gain a hit, just a corner of the outer hitbox wont do. psi will let you target the outmost part of an enemy's hitbox (PvE or PvP). additionally your hit chance with psi moules is not depending on the size (closing) of your reticle, just the damage. this does allow for a more dynamic gamplay, dodging enemy fire more efficiently, using movement and obstacles.

as we can see here, damage of guns and psi modules cant be compared 1:1. what damage malus would balance the psi advantage? what do you think?

That's a valid point.

I think the targetting of PSI modules should be reworked to match the targetting of other weapon classes.

I do not see a reason why the targetting should be different for PSI modules.

[Cursed Shadow]

You're both considering crushing one of the most important advantages of the APU Class.

As I have already stated, I believe the damage is reduced based on how closed the Reticle is.
Perhaps that damage mallus for being further away/less locked on does need to be reworked, but the overall behavior of APU targeting is sensible.

Let's not forget, when an APU misses a cast it's cost them shitloads of PSI and they are unable to hit again for atleast another second or so. Which normal classes do not need to worry about.

[Agent L]

I think the targetting of PSI modules should be reworked to match the targetting of other weapon classes.
I do not see a reason why the targetting should be different for PSI modules.

Why even keep the APU class if it's going to be another carbon copy of Tank/Spy/PE?

The whole point of a "wizzard" class in a cyberpunk world is to be different. I think we should go back to when there was no reticle at all. Just for the sake of diversity.

[Cursed Shadow]

This entire thread stinks of "why should I be hit in stealth/whilst I'm clipping by an APU spell?"

So in counter-riposte: If I'm wildly spraying bullets through the air, I should be able to hit someone who has artificially cloaked their body.

[lawless]

Back to no reticle, awesome speed, high damage, high range.

Classes with weapons are balance like this:


Cannons
.
.
RifleS
.
.
.
.
.
.
Pistols
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
APU modules


In NC 1 it was kinda well balanced. We had viable Liberator PEs / Tanks / Spies, Healing Light PEs / Spies, APUs, CS Tanks / PEs, Devil's Grace Tanks. Now it's like tanks all over the place (not minding the WOC stuff for pistol / rifle).

[Torg]

dont mistake me: i was bringing up a difference in targeting, and asked for your opinion on how much damage the mentioned psi-advantage would need to be toned down in order to be in balance with guns.

i'm fine with the aiming difference (at least its psi, people, imagine!). and i'm somewhat following Cursed's argument of APU dmg being hindered by the reticle already. still, it appears to me that a psi-wepon of any TL should not do the same damage as a gun of the same TL, for known reasons.

[Jack Slater]

I don't think the way APU works right now is too powerfull. Without closed rectile you don't do a lot of damage. And they are weak without any defense abilities.
ATM HC Tanks don't need closed rectile and don't care too much about LOS either. But I'm not sure if i like it since it seems to be the latest glitch/exploit.

[nabbl]

Yeah... Devourer Tanks don't need their aim to be closed nor do they need LOS.
AND you can hit from quite far away.

I don't know ... but no LOS isn't really an issue nowadays. (since speedcap is introduced it is even less an issue)

[Chuck Norris]

ACTUALLY - Some spells do infact need LoS - just no one ever uses them cause they suck and are not end game viable; balancing needs to happen to psi modules