Lower damage in PvP?

[kurai]

Just a small note ... there's already an inbuilt 33% steelskin value for runners, so presumably you mean to add to that rather than reduce the overall to 20% ?

[switchnine]

DO NOT lower the damage. As it stands it takes a capped rifle spy with a silent hunter 2-3 headshots on an unsuspecting (unbuffed) tank/monk/pe. This is way more than necessary for a sniper, lowering the sniper damage even more is going to ruin sniper combat.

Also because of the new body-section armour specs, there is now no good full body energy armour for spy. The majority of weapons deal out pure energy damage (nearly all hightech do this). It might be a nice novelty to have spy PA that give an enormous amount of xray protection, but in pvp this is near useless.

Specifics like these need to be thought about when you hear people complain about how quick they are dieing in pvp. Lowering the overall damage is just another "quick fix" that people will find fault with after a day.

[nabbl]

there is energy underwear for spy.

there is shelter armor for spy.

there are energy resist nanits for spy.

there are enough possibilities for spy to spec energy resist.

[switchnine]

The bonuses from PA are needed for PvP badly, so the energy underwear is out of the question. and only weak shelter is available to even a capped spy. Appart from the nanites, there is no real/effective energy resist setup for spy. And having PvP'd using nanites i don't recommend relying on them.

Anyway my point was that people are dying in PvP fast because of certain class flaws (EXAMPLE: effective spy energy resist setup is near impossible, energy being of the the two main PvP damage types). And if the overall damage is lowered its going to expand/create other class flaws (EXAMPLE: underpowered/useless sniper combat).

[Note that i wrote "example" in caps there... I dont want to get dragged into a yelling match about one class here. ]

[Dargeshaad]

The bonuses from PA are needed for PvP badly, so the energy underwear is out of the question.

You gain offense with PA and loose out on defense (well PA still gives great xray but in your equation you need energy). There's plenty of succesful spies that don't use PA, just rethink your setup

[yuuki]

erm i saw spies with really good energy resists, even when wearing a pa (was regants tho, don't know the stats).
mebbe you should just reevaluate your points distribution, as you don't need to get your main weapon on really high values. and you should use the nanites, they're way more effective than psi and allow you to be shielded better then a pe using his psi, you can additionaly shield against one damage type (in your case energy) as if having a ppu cast apd on you.

oh and on a sidenote, be sure to check out the holovests too as they are pretty nice pas now.

[awkward silence]

Guys... go vote at the german forum too.

Apparently they want to ruin this game a bit further

[SorkZmok]

Yeh, i really dont get the difference in the results. Why do the germans want pvp damage reduced while the rest of the world doesnt?

Weird.

[Dribble Joy]

Who on earth are these people wanting a 20% reduction?

[nabbl]

36 + 13 + 8 = 57 > 45

most of the english people want a dmg decrease too... -.-

[Dribble Joy]

I get the feeling both sides are voting on each other's threads....

[[F6]Knight]

i like lifewasters idea to just increase the steel skin
that way ppu's still cant go over their cap (which they reach anyway with selfbuffs) but other classes can survive a little bit longer.
this shouldnt make any class/setup invincible in 1v1 due to weaker heals than in the old days

[No Style]

Yeh, i really dont get the difference in the results. Why do the germans want pvp damage reduced while the rest of the world doesnt?

Weird.

It is because ZEE germans have ZEE über-aim so all fights are finished in 3 seconds.

[nabbl]

It is because ZEE germans have ZEE über-aim so all fights are finished in 3 seconds.

yeeehaarr

right!

[extant]

question about this poll

are you including all three yes answers vs. the no, or 4 seperate ones?

because right now i see:

58 - Yes (5%, 10%, 20%)
45 - No

if you include all three

If you keep it too four than its

45 - no
9 - 5%
13 - 10%
36 - 20%

which would mean that no wins, but yet theres clearly more yes's. it's a biased poll, you should have had a simple yes or no poll and if yes won than ask the %age because had it won alot of those no's would probabaly vote for 5% instead of 20% which would win if you look at the outlook of all yes's vs. no's.

p.s. if this was mentioned previously, no i didn't read all 5 pages, and no i'm not going to.