Give Scrappers a real inherent power

I have theories, but I don't really understand the motivation. The defensiveness projected is always counter-productive to any possible motivation.

I proposed a theory long ago in a USENET forum that people do not have conversations with other people on discussion groups and forums: the medium is too slow. So people have conversations with mental models of the participants instead, of which the groups contain only a subset thereof. The actual conversations contain far more discussion than actually ends up in the shared medium, but its mostly opaque to the participating parties.

This actually seems to be a remarkably powerful expository conjecture.

Why are you cross-examining me?

What are you trying to prove?

WHY CAN'T YOU JUST LEAVE ME ALONE!!!!!


*runs out of thread, sniffling*

* angles bare lightbulb

Where were you on the evening the Devs tested Regen on a server with no purple patch?

Very good answer, and one I can also respect. The thing with Nin is it is such a great fit for Martial Arts themes. The only really good fit now is SR, and that is still not so well meshed with Natural origin characters. WP is pretty good, but just still doesn't quite make it for me. For one Fast healing should have been Dull Pain because that would have fit the whole Will Power theme better.

Nin may need to see some changes, but I trust the devs could find the right changes if they were willing to look for them.

*Leagle Fleagle confidently enters the room*

I am advising my client not to answer any more questions. You may, if you wish, present your questions to me, in writing, and specifying with particularity the dates and times in question. We will then respond, if appropriate.

Now, unless you are charging him, my client and I are leaving.

*Legal Fleagle exits, leaving a hint of his cologne lingering in the air*

I'm more interested to know what the devs were on that evening.

But you know I still haven't gotten an answer to my question yet. Which is that while everyone was focused on the fact the test was run without the purple patch, I asked dozens of times why, and how, the devs were testing the Super Reflexes build with two more enhancement slots than everyone else. Which they never even acknowledged, much less corrected.

Those Scrappers were created as somewhat literal strawmen to validate the devs' hunches about Scrapper changes that they strongly felt were needed based on the degree to which they understood the game's rules?

Not even the devs have the ability to just randomly add slots to a character in general.

No, but Geko and Statesman were able to pretend really hard!

Agreed.

Yes, they are.. my main scrapper can solo GM's, AV's and run mishes against any enemy group at +4x8... keep your changes, leave my scrapper alone

Any 'change' made in this game comes with one third gain and 2 thirds loss... at best.. if something isnt broken, dont try to fix it!

It is not just that, it is the blatant clear violation of the forum rules that allows this thread to be here 27 pages, that is really confusing since the OP admitted to be on a "crusade" in the first post.

5. Non-Constructive posts are prohibited.

Below is a non-exhaustive list of examples of non-constructive posts. As a rule, non-constructive posting is not permitted:

"Do not engage in Lobbying on the Official Forums. Lobbying is continually bringing up the same topic repeatedly in numerous different threads or as an off-topic post in official threads to get developer attention. This form of posting is not permitted. We recognize you may be passionate about a specific subject, however this sort of posting is non-constructive and will not be tolerated."

Your Inventions are doing that.

That's patently false. So much so that I won't even bother providing any of the dozen counter-examples. I'll stick with one: Stalkers.

As a matter of fact, no. While I don't agree that Scrappers require an Extra Special Snowflake Inherent, just so they can feel like Extra Special Snowflakes, the "solo AVs/GMs/+4x8" justification for... pretty much anything... has always been a specious argument at absolute best. Your character, regardless of AT, had to be rigorously tuned to acquire this ability, just like anyone else's.

And/or Incarnate abilities.

People need to pull their heads out and stop using this as an argument for (or against) anything.

I hate this ended up in three different threads, I really wish it had been in only one. Each thread was started by a different person, and those of us passionate about posted in each of them. It is just sort of the nature of message boards, and any online community.

I am pretty much done with it, and will PM Synapse, or ambush him next time I seem in chat.

I do think there is an imbalance in the Melee ATs. I however am no longer sure of what could be done to solve that issue. My endurance idea was disliked, and I strongly disliked EG's original idea.

You know what? I have a good way to ultimately expose this thread, then.

EvilGeko, I am calling you out. At this point, if you cannot, in a comprehensive and detailed manner, fully and entirely explain, BEYOND a shadow of a doubt, that the recent Stalkers buff, and any other related factors, make Scrappers ALL OF THE FOLLOWING, you will get full support for your, dubbed, 'crusade'.

Fail to do so, and I will do everything I can to make sure your posts are obliterated in context to Rule 5 of the Forum Rules.


Criteria:

1) Is AT_Name_Here performance threatening Scrapper viability? Specifically viability, not 'unique niche'.
2) If 1 is untrue, is AT_Name_Here performance threatening Scrapper performance? That is, due to AT_Name_Here, Scrappers will no longer be able to perform their role sufficiently?
3) Does AT_Name_Here's existence mean Scrappers will have difficulty finding teams and be less desired, due to 'something better exists, we don't need you!'?
4) Does Scrapper's lack of a Specifically Unique mechanic threaten Scrapper viability?
5) Does Scrapper's lack of a Specifically Unique mechanic threaten Scrapper performance?

I have more, but these are specific enough. Remember the rule; BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT.

Obviously, no one is going to be able to show that. And it doesn't matter. The devs themselves would not hold such claims to such a standard. I see no reason anyone should be bothered to try and make proofs to such a standard to another poster, childish threats to wield the forum rules as a weapon non-withstanding.

And remember, I disagree with EG's position.

Try not to insult people.

If you're insulted by my being blunt, I'm not sorry. Threatening to engage in warfare against another poster using the forum rules as your sword is childish, full stop, even if there's justification. When there's justification, what you do is you go report the post. You don't threaten to report it unless the other poster does something.

You're hardly a paragon of avoiding saying things people might find insulting, despite your announced effort to turn over a new leaf in how you post. The difference is one of intent. I'm actually on the same side of the debate in this thread that you are. I'm not using some sort of ad homenim tactic to try and attack you instead of your argument. I'm pointing out that I think that your approach to our side of the argument involves sucky behavior. If you don't like me telling you that, I really don't care.

Ahhh. An attempt to use ad hominem where there isn't any. (If you didn't intend to suggest I AM using ad hominem, apologies. But due to your post structure and wording, it seems you are.) Sorry, but I'm not defacing Geko's argument by attacking his person. I am demanding him to actually provide evidence for his continued-to-be-posted-in-every-thread-related-to-Stalkers-or-Scrappers-ever-argument-that-Scrappers-are-in-danger. Or whatever he's arguing, as it tends to get bogged down.

As it is, I have gone back through this thread. All it is is "Scrappers are not unique". I'm demanding to know why this is a vital issue demanding to be spread across the forums in clear violation to the rules. And since I have been told to follow the rules religiously, I feel obligated to do the same.

Moreover, you're contradicting yourself. You say there is justification in enforcing the rules, but it is childish to do so? I am giving him a chance to prove his post ISN'T breaking the rules by answering those questions. If his cause is righteous, he needs to make it more obvious. As it stands, it is in violation to the rules unless there is a legitimate reason. If there isn't, then it's just a violation.

I believe in people having chances to explain their actions and choices. Is this wrong? You make it sound like it's wrong for people to have a chance. I don't agree with this. I am giving Geko his chance to provide evidence and fact for his argument, before I pass my own personal judgment and begin my own 'crusade' against his posts.

As a closing to this post; you were using ad hominem against me. Just saying.

Objective has nothing to do with it when the OP admits in his first post he is doing things that are clearly against the rules.

No worries though, these things will work themselves out organically and all is well. Cheers.