Give Scrappers a real inherent power

Fair enough.

Jack didn't say that much about game balance after your join date. So I don't know what you remember agreeing with, or calculating agreement with. Most of what he said after that point were announcements about what the devs were going to do, less about the theory behind doing it.

ED happened after my join date. Oh wait that is just my forum join date. Forum join date is basically when I first found out there was a forum. I joined the game in Feb 2005, game was just out in the UK I think. There is atleast one where he got the numbers wrong. Alot went into complaining about ED, problems with Tanking, Statesmans idea of Tanking. All you've got to look at is what happened on the US forums I think. It's too much work for me to try to dig up european forums. It wouldn't surprise me if much has gone. If you want something to prove against me, you can dig it up.

Statesman posted more on the european forums than anyother Dev. Warwitch though came within 2 posts of it I think. Other Devs one or two if lucky. Warwitch also came over which was nice. Certainly War witch is possibly our fave dev.

Didn't you just tell me that April 2005 was before your time?

As to "something to prove against you" all I'm asking is that when you say you've made spreadsheets to prove Statesman right, and you basically agree with almost everything he had to say about the game design, to provide an actual example of either. Forget proof regarding when anything happened. Right now I'm just interested to know what, of Jack's many game design pronouncements, do you even agree with today.

Some Scrappers just need to be told they're loved. Preferably with a bit of frippery no other AT gets.

Okay, how about this.

Let's rename them Scrappies, and their special power is to scrapperlock until a larger character has to pick them up and drag them away from danger.

And when the scrapperlock starts, a sound effect is played at 100% volume to all the team members:

"Da da di-dat di-da! OVERRRRPOWERED!"

Some players dislike the notion that Scrappers have no "mechanic" that is strictly unique to them. This appears to be separate from the notion that Scrappers, taken as a while, function as a unique archetype. That appears to be inadequate. Because all of their individual, obvious features, such as Critical Hits, can be found in other ATs, and because they do not possess a clearly distinct role, this creates a desire among these players for the devs to add something clearly distinctive to the Scrapper AT. It appears less important to these players that the addition be a clear "buff" to the performance of the AT, though they generally acknowledge that any meaningful change probably counts as a buff of some kind.

A related but different set of these players hold that, because Stalkers are now arguably better at single target damage, and because Brutes are "good enough" at damage and have the added role of aggro management (with attendant increased durability and the benefits of taunt auras), that there is no room for an AT which splits this difference. These players suggest that without some buff and/or distinguishing characteristic, Scrappers will be suffer a decline in creation or retention beyond that due simply to improvement in time share of other ATs such as Stalkers - the prediction here is that Scrappers will be viewed as actively inferior. These players appear to lean towards any Scrapper changes amounting to an actual meaningful improvement in Scrapper combat performance, even if it an indirect one such as improved endurance efficiency, to keep the AT "above water" with respect to other melee ATs.

I hold neither of these views, and so it's possible I have captured their essence incorrectly. I was quoted in this thread's OP because discussion on this topic (I know of three threads where this is being discussed) spurred me to have an idea that wasn't so much a buff for Scrappers, but something they could bring to teammates. It was something I would be less leery of supporting than most other suggestions I had seen, though I still don't think any change is particularly called for.

This (set of) discussion(s) was directly precipitated by the I22 improvements to Stalkers. Related discussions have happened before, also in relation to previous Stalker buffs, but now that Stalkers appear truly competitive with (or even superior to) Scrappers in at least one area of performance, the discussion has come back with a vengeance.

Hey, we have found something we agree on!!!

I think they just need a fresh Binky....

Originally Posted by PapaSlade Rangle's right....this is fun.

lol awesome!

April 2005 is before my time on the forums. Anything before that (Sept 2005) I had not seen. Did I say that I made spreadsheets to prove Statesman right? Don't think I did. I did say that I basically agreed with what he said apart from a couple of things, one with a mathematical error.

I am innocent to proven guilty and this is not looking like you are proving me guilty at all. I am not going to dig up all of Jacks design announcements when all I have said is that I agreed with most of what he said, this was on the European forums and from the time I discovered them which is fair. It's not upto me to prove anything because I have nothing to prove to myself.

All in all, what you've thought as inplausible is not inplausible at all.

No, this is me saying when you say you agreed with anything Jack said, that doesn't mean a lot when you don't remember anything he said.

Saying you think he was almost always right, except you can't remember anything he ever said, is a peculiar assertion in general to make. It has nothing to do with whether you're lying or "guilty" and more to do with the fact that statement has no meaning.

Other people are getting free cool stuff, and that's always a good time to put your hand out, just on the off-chance.

I remember agreeing with most everything he said. How hard is this to sink in? I do not keep an archive of "exactly" what he said. I do not need to. If you have a problem with what I have said it is upto you to prove otherwise not for me.

The statement is the truth. People have opinions and that's that. Their opinions can come from private excel sheets and just like not all opinions need to be backed up, not everything that is private needs to be shown.

You can't prove that I am not telling the truth even though you may like to. Also where you got the thought that I said I made spreadsheets to prove Statemans points is a wonder.

I had my spreadsheets, I never told you that in this thread, I never made them to prove Statesmans points. All things I have said are true from the time I logged into the forums. What went on before is not on the cards and didn't have to be.

I don't find you at all justifiable in trying to prove anything against me and until you can find something then you have nothing. I will continue to see that you have nothing no doubt.

Plus this has been the most childish waste of my time.

You keep thinking I'm trying to prove you wrong, when I'm still trying to see if you're saying anything specific at all. Which I've come to the conclusion you're not.

The person that I replied and therefore quoted doesn't seem to have a problem with what I said. My reply was in context with what he said.

You interjected, you first seemed to presume that I might be lying because you didn't remember me from any talks. Talks you had on the US forums. I am from the European forums. But you then proceed to drag things out.

You either have something to prove that I was never part of any conversion in regards to something Statesman has said or you don't. In this case you won't.

The person I replied to is making light conversion. You should not involve yourself with light conversations if you are going to turn them into something more due to an obvious baseless opinion.

You know I would apologise if I feel that I have done wrong but in this case I make no apologies for light conversation.

I had Frosties this morning, I do not feel that I need a photograph, time and dated to prove it.

Originally Posted by Arcanaville Softcapping an Invuln is fantastic. Softcapping a Willpower is amazing. Softcapping SR is kissing your sister.

Pretty good one.

I don't think it should be proliferated because it would lose much of its unique appeal in the transition; it's got nothing to do with balance or any of that. At a bare minimum, it would have to lose Caltrops (conflicts with scrapper APPs) and Hide (Stalker-specific). Hide would probably be replaced with some other stealth power with different numbers like Energy Cloak or Cloak of Darkness.

It would likely also lose Smoke Flash due to the loss of synergy with Hide and the fact that Placate has very limited utility for scrappers. I'm not sure what would replace Caltrops or Smoke Flash, but the presence of the Weapon Mastery pool on Scrappers limits the options considerably.

Don't get me wrong, Scrapper's my favorite AT, and I'd love to see a set like Ninjitsu on scrappers. But I think the actual Ninjitsu set would lose much of its flavor in the porting.

Language. Perspective. Insecurity. Ego. Any of those, or none of those. Could even be past history with the person asking. Dunno.

As great as the written language can be, tonality and intent can sometimes be misunderstood. I generally try and take things with a grain of salt... sometimes a bucket or two.

Originally Posted by PapaSlade Rangle's right....this is fun.