Equalize Battalion buffs

[Praydoh]

Name: 41st GC JT ARC MAJ Prado

Suggestion: Equalize battalion buffs

Implementation: Make it so that Battalion buffs should be given in skill points instead as a way to equalize the buffs given to every battalion. Those with max stats will not be at a disadvantage when facing a person with max stats in another battalion, as it will equalize out in the end. This way, clone troopers at the "apex" of their training, experience, etc should be represented by max stats rather than buffs that help in certain cases than not. 41st speed buffs helps more in events than CQB or the point of health buff is moot when there's multi-lives event. Realistically, battalion buffs in skill points scales better than a massive specific buff that another battalion simply cannot replicate. What's to prevent a clone trooper from also receiving the very same training different battalions teach? A 501st trooper can learn to reconnaissance in a jungle world he's been deployed to, likewise of another battalion to a different situation they're not used to.  If this was not the case, ARC troopers, Null and Republic Commandoes should have more "buffs" than your average Battalion trooper simply for the fact that they're different and trained in ways that differentiated them from such.  All clone troopers were bred, trained and made to fulfill a general qualification that made them "clone troopers". Ex. Recon Battalions can receive skillpoints into Running speed or Jumping, whereas Attack Battalions can get health or armor skill points instead.

Or we can go for a radical approach where buffs are given in the individual role sense, taking into account class specializations and training. Heavy troopers would receive health/armor buff, Sharpshooters damage or speed/jumping, etc.

This way, there would be an actual fair ground through which we can test our mettle against each other or actually give an incentive to join different classes. 

Especially for Bat vs Bat tournaments or any sims that pit different battalions against each other. Obviously the one with the strength fitting the situation at hand will have the advantage and increased chance to win. For CQC situations, those with health, armor, or damage buff is obviously going to have the advantage over speed buff. Vice versa in open world sims such as capturing the points, where that same speed buff would allow Recon Regiments to hold larger ground against the slower battalions. 

P.S. this would prevent salt over losses from BAT vs BAT, seeing as every battalion has an actual, equal chance of winning. :^)

Lore: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Clone_trooper

 

 

Edited May 19, 2018 by Praydoh

[Praydoh 107]

Name: 41st GC JT ARC MAJ Prado

Suggestion: Equalize battalion buffs

Implementation: Make it so that Battalion buffs should be given in skill points instead as a way to equalize the buffs given to every battalion. Those with max stats will not be at a disadvantage when facing a person with max stats in another battalion, as it will equalize out in the end. This way, clone troopers at the "apex" of their training, experience, etc should be represented by max stats rather than buffs that help in certain cases than not. 41st speed buffs helps more in events than CQB or the point of health buff is moot when there's multi-lives event. Realistically, battalion buffs in skill points scales better than a massive specific buff that another battalion simply cannot replicate. What's to prevent a clone trooper from also receiving the very same training different battalions teach? A 501st trooper can learn to reconnaissance in a jungle world he's been deployed to, likewise of another battalion to a different situation they're not used to.  If this was not the case, ARC troopers, Null and Republic Commandoes should have more "buffs" than your average Battalion trooper simply for the fact that they're different and trained in ways that differentiated them from such.  All clone troopers were bred, trained and made to fulfill a general qualification that made them "clone troopers". Ex. Recon Battalions can receive skillpoints into Running speed or Jumping, whereas Attack Battalions can get health or armor skill points instead.

Or we can go for a radical approach where buffs are given in the individual role sense, taking into account class specializations and training. Heavy troopers would receive health/armor buff, Sharpshooters damage or speed/jumping, etc.

This way, there would be an actual fair ground through which we can test our mettle against each other or actually give an incentive to join different classes. 

Especially for Bat vs Bat tournaments or any sims that pit different battalions against each other. Obviously the one with the strength fitting the situation at hand will have the advantage and increased chance to win. For CQC situations, those with health, armor, or damage buff is obviously going to have the advantage over speed buff. Vice versa in open world sims such as capturing the points, where that same speed buff would allow Recon Regiments to hold larger ground against the slower battalions. 

P.S. this would prevent salt over losses from BAT vs BAT, seeing as every battalion has an actual, equal chance of winning. :^)

Lore: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Clone_trooper

 

 

Edited May 19, 2018 by Praydoh

[J.Jefferson]

+1

[J.Jefferson 405]

+1

[Warrior]

+1

 

[Warrior 0]

+1

 

[Chambers]

+1

I always thought it would make sense for ARF to get that recon speed boost and ARC get the damage boost.

Tailoring the buffs to specific classes would be ideal.

Its going to be a shit ton of work I think though.

Imma just @Medic since he is most familiar with the backend 

 

Edited May 20, 2018 by Carter

[Chambers 1,223]

+1

I always thought it would make sense for ARF to get that recon speed boost and ARC get the damage boost.

Tailoring the buffs to specific classes would be ideal.

Its going to be a shit ton of work I think though.

Imma just @Medic since he is most familiar with the backend 

 

Edited May 20, 2018 by Carter

[TrijiM]

I'm sort of confused. Can you dumb this down for me?

[TrijiM 69]

I'm sort of confused. Can you dumb this down for me?

[Arroyo]

-1 This is so dumb. 

[Arroyo 208]

-1 This is so dumb. 

[Chambers]

1 minute ago, TrijiM said:

I'm sort of confused. Can you dumb this down for me?

Check out my reply I think that's what he means

[Chambers 1,223]

1 minute ago, TrijiM said:

I'm sort of confused. Can you dumb this down for me?

Check out my reply I think that's what he means

[Warrior]

37 minutes ago, Arroyo said:

-1 This is so dumb. 

Are you just going around -1ing everything, do you like wanna have your own perfect world where the only thing you do is -1ing things?

[Warrior 0]

37 minutes ago, Arroyo said:

-1 This is so dumb. 

Are you just going around -1ing everything, do you like wanna have your own perfect world where the only thing you do is -1ing things?

[Spooky]

-1, say a recon battalion (like 41st) needed to do foot recon, but lacked ARF (or any speed boost) jobs that had a speed boost. they would be slow and unable to get somewhere without speed. or an attack battalion could not have the damage boost job readily available and would be less effective in combat.

[Spooky 355]

-1, say a recon battalion (like 41st) needed to do foot recon, but lacked ARF (or any speed boost) jobs that had a speed boost. they would be slow and unable to get somewhere without speed. or an attack battalion could not have the damage boost job readily available and would be less effective in combat.

[Andrews]

+1

[Andrews 293]

+1

[TrijiM]

+1 after looking at Carter's reply i actually like the idea of this

[TrijiM 69]

+1 after looking at Carter's reply i actually like the idea of this

[Trig]

50 minutes ago, Arroyo said:

-1 This is so dumb. 

Come up with a reason maybe? Or are you "so dumb" that you cant

this makes battalion buffs fun and equal for everyone

 

+1

[Trig 74]

50 minutes ago, Arroyo said:

-1 This is so dumb. 

Come up with a reason maybe? Or are you "so dumb" that you cant

this makes battalion buffs fun and equal for everyone

 

+1

[CBlake]

39 minutes ago, Warrior said:

Are you just going around -1ing everything, do you like wanna have your own perfect world where the only thing you do is -1ing things?

people have a right to their opinion    please show some respect.   thank you     im gonna say    eh +1   we need to find a system where that actually works    

 

[CBlake 232]

39 minutes ago, Warrior said:

Are you just going around -1ing everything, do you like wanna have your own perfect world where the only thing you do is -1ing things?

people have a right to their opinion    please show some respect.   thank you     im gonna say    eh +1   we need to find a system where that actually works    

 

[Rolenth]

So i'm putting my 2 cents into this,

1. This could be really cool but'
2. Why pay in-game money for it when we already get it for free?
3. Lastly, this would be fucking insanely annoying and complicated to do. We'd have to make custom skill menus for every battalion. 

[Rolenth 747]

So i'm putting my 2 cents into this,

1. This could be really cool but'
2. Why pay in-game money for it when we already get it for free?
3. Lastly, this would be fucking insanely annoying and complicated to do. We'd have to make custom skill menus for every battalion. 

[BigMan/TimmyThicc]

If this is possible then +1

[BigMan/TimmyThicc 80]

If this is possible then +1

[Chambers]

I think the best way to think of this would be like this.

Recon Troopers/ARF get run speed.

Heavys get Armor/Health.

Arcs/specialists get Damage

Or something along those lines 

 

(Side idea)

Make the class buff additional to the battalion buff.

Ie Dooms Unit ARF get the Armor and Run speed.

41st ARC get run speed and damage? 

Just a thought.

[Chambers 1,223]

I think the best way to think of this would be like this.

Recon Troopers/ARF get run speed.

Heavys get Armor/Health.

Arcs/specialists get Damage

Or something along those lines 

 

(Side idea)

Make the class buff additional to the battalion buff.

Ie Dooms Unit ARF get the Armor and Run speed.

41st ARC get run speed and damage? 

Just a thought.

[Conrad]

+1, Right now battalion buffs are all over the place. Some have these insane buffs, some have a gun with a bit larger clip. Equalizing these differences would create a more fair experience.

[Conrad 2,465]

+1, Right now battalion buffs are all over the place. Some have these insane buffs, some have a gun with a bit larger clip. Equalizing these differences would create a more fair experience.

[Flamma]

-1

[Flamma 5]

-1

[Wynter]

-1 Leaning Neut

 

See the problem with this would be the battalions with weapon lore i.e. GM/Rancor with westars, DU with shields and Z6's ect. What i personally think should happen is the bonuses should be more EVEN like if they get a damage/weapon buff no armor speed or health buff. where as others would get those stat bonuses. But in the case of a batt getting both weapons and health it would be a more minor form (i.e. 50 health instead of 100)

Edited May 20, 2018 by Wynter

[Wynter 40]

-1 Leaning Neut

 

See the problem with this would be the battalions with weapon lore i.e. GM/Rancor with westars, DU with shields and Z6's ect. What i personally think should happen is the bonuses should be more EVEN like if they get a damage/weapon buff no armor speed or health buff. where as others would get those stat bonuses. But in the case of a batt getting both weapons and health it would be a more minor form (i.e. 50 health instead of 100)

Edited May 20, 2018 by Wynter

[Gadget]

Currently some battalions are too same-y, if you get my drift, like 91st 41st and CG being faster, but some are suitable buffed and others are not, such as 501st just having a 100 clip and nothing else, i would say this is a +1, but don't be lazy and just reduce everyone else's buffs just because its easy, think logically and  lore wise, i won't make recommendations, as this is a big thing and i don't speak for all, but this is my penny's worth thrown in.

 

P.S. - you touch my WESTAR, i'll hunt you down. that's my baby, and nobody, i repeat, NOBODY, messes with baby.

[Gadget 424]

Currently some battalions are too same-y, if you get my drift, like 91st 41st and CG being faster, but some are suitable buffed and others are not, such as 501st just having a 100 clip and nothing else, i would say this is a +1, but don't be lazy and just reduce everyone else's buffs just because its easy, think logically and  lore wise, i won't make recommendations, as this is a big thing and i don't speak for all, but this is my penny's worth thrown in.

 

P.S. - you touch my WESTAR, i'll hunt you down. that's my baby, and nobody, i repeat, NOBODY, messes with baby.

[Jacien]

-1 And this is why I say this. Way I see this is either we equalize the stats unless we paid for them with credits in F2 and make players/battalions like 91st and 41st as slow as a 212th. Or we could keep what we have and fix the current buffs they they should have gotten such as 501st getting their damage buff a long while ago. Overall I quite enjoy the way things are in terms of the attributes. GM for example just get a weapon upgrade in terms of it getting 70 rounds and 70 damage, Null on the other hand get the same weapon so it doesn't seem all that serious. I mean our Nova Corps don't even get it so its a fair trade off. I personally think this would be a whole re-branding sort of direction with all battalions. This would take every single job and go through who does and doesn't have a boost in anything and not making them overall unique if they are just recon or attack.

[Jacien 38]

-1 And this is why I say this. Way I see this is either we equalize the stats unless we paid for them with credits in F2 and make players/battalions like 91st and 41st as slow as a 212th. Or we could keep what we have and fix the current buffs they they should have gotten such as 501st getting their damage buff a long while ago. Overall I quite enjoy the way things are in terms of the attributes. GM for example just get a weapon upgrade in terms of it getting 70 rounds and 70 damage, Null on the other hand get the same weapon so it doesn't seem all that serious. I mean our Nova Corps don't even get it so its a fair trade off. I personally think this would be a whole re-branding sort of direction with all battalions. This would take every single job and go through who does and doesn't have a boost in anything and not making them overall unique if they are just recon or attack.

[Scribbles]

-1. As much as i'd love this, it would make it over complicated to customize the point menu. 

But lets keep batts unique mkay? 

[Scribbles 753]

-1. As much as i'd love this, it would make it over complicated to customize the point menu. 

But lets keep batts unique mkay? 

[ASVO]

+1

[ASVO 82]

+1

[Badger.]

-1 just keep it like it is

[Badger. 6]

-1 just keep it like it is

[WaterMelonWolf]

Thats physically impossible unless every class whats the same buff. as in all heavy's want extra heath and armor. If i look at this as a tester, id say yes this is a good idea and it really is. But as someone who knows a slight amount of what zim dose. I know much work this will be for him working it for each class. So personally. This is too much work for something that isn't broke.(except a few but they are fixing it)

If she aint broke, dont fix it.

-1

[WaterMelonWolf 138]

Thats physically impossible unless every class whats the same buff. as in all heavy's want extra heath and armor. If i look at this as a tester, id say yes this is a good idea and it really is. But as someone who knows a slight amount of what zim dose. I know much work this will be for him working it for each class. So personally. This is too much work for something that isn't broke.(except a few but they are fixing it)

If she aint broke, dont fix it.

-1

[J.Jefferson]

4 hours ago, Medic said:

So i'm putting my 2 cents into this,

1. This could be really cool but'
2. Why pay in-game money for it when we already get it for free?
3. Lastly, this would be fucking insanely annoying and complicated to do. We'd have to make custom skill menus for every battalion. 

Well the thing is Medic battalions aren't  really balance right now.  Every battalion has a weapon what can kill people in 13 shots or less. 

Edited May 20, 2018 by J.Jefferson

[J.Jefferson 405]

4 hours ago, Medic said:

So i'm putting my 2 cents into this,

1. This could be really cool but'
2. Why pay in-game money for it when we already get it for free?
3. Lastly, this would be fucking insanely annoying and complicated to do. We'd have to make custom skill menus for every battalion. 

Well the thing is Medic battalions aren't  really balance right now.  Every battalion has a weapon what can kill people in 13 shots or less. 

Edited May 20, 2018 by J.Jefferson

[Praydoh]

2 hours ago, Scribbles said:

-1. As much as i'd love this, it would make it over complicated to customize the point menu. 

But lets keep batts unique mkay? 

What's making battalions "unique" is the fact that some battalions have 2-3 buffs while others have only 1. Add onto the fact that when one has max stats and multiple buffs, he is already a greater asset than 2 people combined. A person with 600 hp can trade with a person with 500 hp and always come out the victor if they have the same guns. Extra health, armor and damage can literally slim down the chances of killing him by another player to near impossible. There's no point using PvPs or tourneys as a way to testing the mettle of a battalion if one side is going to be naturally biased towards lol. Take for example the health buff. Even if you set everybody to 500 hp, that extra 100 hp allows you to be healed to 600 hp. Same as the speed buff on an open map simulations where you need to capture an area or point. As much as anyone can try to avoid these problems, they are inherently flawed and redundant in any things meant to even the odds against each other. If you compared tournaments from before the buffs were implemented, you'd notice that many rounds were close or not curb stomps compared to now. I'd wager if you compare the results between two different battalions fighting and then them fighting again as CT jobs, you'd see different results across the board because there is a minimized chance of bias towards both party. 

[Praydoh 107]

2 hours ago, Scribbles said:

-1. As much as i'd love this, it would make it over complicated to customize the point menu. 

But lets keep batts unique mkay? 

What's making battalions "unique" is the fact that some battalions have 2-3 buffs while others have only 1. Add onto the fact that when one has max stats and multiple buffs, he is already a greater asset than 2 people combined. A person with 600 hp can trade with a person with 500 hp and always come out the victor if they have the same guns. Extra health, armor and damage can literally slim down the chances of killing him by another player to near impossible. There's no point using PvPs or tourneys as a way to testing the mettle of a battalion if one side is going to be naturally biased towards lol. Take for example the health buff. Even if you set everybody to 500 hp, that extra 100 hp allows you to be healed to 600 hp. Same as the speed buff on an open map simulations where you need to capture an area or point. As much as anyone can try to avoid these problems, they are inherently flawed and redundant in any things meant to even the odds against each other. If you compared tournaments from before the buffs were implemented, you'd notice that many rounds were close or not curb stomps compared to now. I'd wager if you compare the results between two different battalions fighting and then them fighting again as CT jobs, you'd see different results across the board because there is a minimized chance of bias towards both party. 

[Praydoh]

4 hours ago, Medic said:

So i'm putting my 2 cents into this,

1. This could be really cool but'
2. Why pay in-game money for it when we already get it for free?
3. Lastly, this would be fucking insanely annoying and complicated to do. We'd have to make custom skill menus for every battalion. 

I'd honestly pay for this implementation. If not for all battalions, then the same way @Egg did by paying for Green Company models for the 41st. At least as a pilot test to see if this implementation is a success or failure. 

If not soon, then in the unforeseeable future, this should be considered as a way of promoting both fair play, an incentive to play different classes and as a way to reduce salt between different battalions. Furthermore, this would be another actual, unique system that would differentiate Synergy from other Starwars RP servers. 

[Praydoh 107]

4 hours ago, Medic said:

So i'm putting my 2 cents into this,

1. This could be really cool but'
2. Why pay in-game money for it when we already get it for free?
3. Lastly, this would be fucking insanely annoying and complicated to do. We'd have to make custom skill menus for every battalion. 

I'd honestly pay for this implementation. If not for all battalions, then the same way @Egg did by paying for Green Company models for the 41st. At least as a pilot test to see if this implementation is a success or failure. 

If not soon, then in the unforeseeable future, this should be considered as a way of promoting both fair play, an incentive to play different classes and as a way to reduce salt between different battalions. Furthermore, this would be another actual, unique system that would differentiate Synergy from other Starwars RP servers. 

[Praydoh]

6 hours ago, Arroyo said:

-1 This is so dumb. 

Want to know an old joke? Before the battalion buffs, where somehow you have 3 compared to others' 1 buff, 212th would usually be the first one to be wiped out in one life events. Back before battalions had no buffs at all. No excuses for losing in a sim, event or tournament and everybody had access to the same weapons across all the classes. Now? It's just a shit fest where each battalions hope something plays to their advantage. 

[Praydoh 107]

6 hours ago, Arroyo said:

-1 This is so dumb. 

Want to know an old joke? Before the battalion buffs, where somehow you have 3 compared to others' 1 buff, 212th would usually be the first one to be wiped out in one life events. Back before battalions had no buffs at all. No excuses for losing in a sim, event or tournament and everybody had access to the same weapons across all the classes. Now? It's just a shit fest where each battalions hope something plays to their advantage. 

[Spooky]

6 hours ago, Praydoh said:

Want to know an old joke? Before the battalion buffs, where somehow you have 3 compared to others' 1 buff, 212th would usually be the first one to be wiped out in one life events. Back before battalions had no buffs at all. No excuses for losing in a sim, event or tournament and everybody had access to the same weapons across all the classes. Now? It's just a shit fest where each battalions hope something plays to their advantage. 

I remember that

[Spooky 355]

6 hours ago, Praydoh said:

Want to know an old joke? Before the battalion buffs, where somehow you have 3 compared to others' 1 buff, 212th would usually be the first one to be wiped out in one life events. Back before battalions had no buffs at all. No excuses for losing in a sim, event or tournament and everybody had access to the same weapons across all the classes. Now? It's just a shit fest where each battalions hope something plays to their advantage. 

I remember that

[Flintlock]

Personally, not because I don't agree to the concept of battalions getting one buff, because I do. But to be fair, I'd love to see this suggestion more refined, detailing out specifically what each battalion is wanted to have as their buff, as simply stating vagueness wouldn't do much.

I doubt this is any sort of vendetta post about BATvBAT, but I would like to state with 212th is that the all of our weapons do 35 damage. Excluding dual DC-17s, which does 30, the WESTARs that ARC gets (50 shots, 50 DMG), the Battalion specific DC-15A (Personally, I don't like these), which does 50 as well. And then there is airborne's sniper, thats only on the Assassin class itself.
There are some items given to other battalions to set them apart further, such as GM receiving a higher damage WESTAR with more ammo in its magazine.
Am I bitching about "REEE all these special things!" no, because I honestly agree, people get better stuff than others in terms of "buffs" personally, I'd rather classes be attributed to battalions that make sense for their specified role, like Recon wouldn't need a heavy, but would need a sniper, Attacks wouldn't need a sniper, but would need a heavy, considering that battalions purpose of course. Granted discrepancies would happen, as sub-units can somewhat go past that line of "what is strictly allowed" considering (Using my own battalion for the sake of its what I'm in) 2ndAC would still have a sniper, considering its use as an Advance Movement Reconnaissance group.... or at least we attempt to.

but all in all
TL;DR
-I agree, battalions get more buffs than others, and I believe they should be subsidized to something fair and appropriate for their group, but personally it doesn't have to be specifically stat wise
-Sub Groups I believe would/should be given discrepancies dependent on said groups purpose
-I wish for this to be refined out and detail what is specifically wanted, so its easier for staff to consume and push out, considering not doing that may result in buffs unwanted to each battalion

This is not a -1 nor a +1

-Ghost Company Second Lieutenant Cale | Shephard

Edited May 20, 2018 by Sythen McSwiggity

[Flintlock 24]

Personally, not because I don't agree to the concept of battalions getting one buff, because I do. But to be fair, I'd love to see this suggestion more refined, detailing out specifically what each battalion is wanted to have as their buff, as simply stating vagueness wouldn't do much.

I doubt this is any sort of vendetta post about BATvBAT, but I would like to state with 212th is that the all of our weapons do 35 damage. Excluding dual DC-17s, which does 30, the WESTARs that ARC gets (50 shots, 50 DMG), the Battalion specific DC-15A (Personally, I don't like these), which does 50 as well. And then there is airborne's sniper, thats only on the Assassin class itself.
There are some items given to other battalions to set them apart further, such as GM receiving a higher damage WESTAR with more ammo in its magazine.
Am I bitching about "REEE all these special things!" no, because I honestly agree, people get better stuff than others in terms of "buffs" personally, I'd rather classes be attributed to battalions that make sense for their specified role, like Recon wouldn't need a heavy, but would need a sniper, Attacks wouldn't need a sniper, but would need a heavy, considering that battalions purpose of course. Granted discrepancies would happen, as sub-units can somewhat go past that line of "what is strictly allowed" considering (Using my own battalion for the sake of its what I'm in) 2ndAC would still have a sniper, considering its use as an Advance Movement Reconnaissance group.... or at least we attempt to.

but all in all
TL;DR
-I agree, battalions get more buffs than others, and I believe they should be subsidized to something fair and appropriate for their group, but personally it doesn't have to be specifically stat wise
-Sub Groups I believe would/should be given discrepancies dependent on said groups purpose
-I wish for this to be refined out and detail what is specifically wanted, so its easier for staff to consume and push out, considering not doing that may result in buffs unwanted to each battalion

This is not a -1 nor a +1

-Ghost Company Second Lieutenant Cale | Shephard

Edited May 20, 2018 by Sythen McSwiggity

[Flintlock]

8 hours ago, Praydoh said:

I'd wager if you compare the results between two different battalions fighting and then them fighting again as CT jobs, you'd see different results across the board because there is a minimized chance of bias towards both party. 

I'd +1 this though if this was the suggestion
put all teams on CT/Cadet, color them, and give them the designated weapon for said BATvBAT event, and distribute a fair amount of medics for each side

no complaints if they lose their medics
no complains on weapons carried
only complaints, skill buffs, but even then, max health and armor is already given, so speed and jump? lol

[Flintlock 24]

8 hours ago, Praydoh said:

I'd wager if you compare the results between two different battalions fighting and then them fighting again as CT jobs, you'd see different results across the board because there is a minimized chance of bias towards both party. 

I'd +1 this though if this was the suggestion
put all teams on CT/Cadet, color them, and give them the designated weapon for said BATvBAT event, and distribute a fair amount of medics for each side

no complaints if they lose their medics
no complains on weapons carried
only complaints, skill buffs, but even then, max health and armor is already given, so speed and jump? lol

[Chambers]

17 minutes ago, Sythen McSwiggity said:

I'd +1 this though if this was the suggestion
put all teams on CT/Cadet, color them, and give them the designated weapon for said BATvBAT event, and distribute a fair amount of medics for each side

no complaints if they lose their medics
no complains on weapons carried
only complaints, skill buffs, but even then, max health and armor is already given, so speed and jump? lol

We used to do this and it was literally pointless, what's the point of having Battalion vs Battalion if battalions don't use what they are known for!?

Example I have from DU was when I had a Batt vs Batt match and we couldn't use our shields and Z6s and we literally had no practice using a DC-15A at all since it is pointless within our battalion.

[Chambers 1,223]

17 minutes ago, Sythen McSwiggity said:

I'd +1 this though if this was the suggestion
put all teams on CT/Cadet, color them, and give them the designated weapon for said BATvBAT event, and distribute a fair amount of medics for each side

no complaints if they lose their medics
no complains on weapons carried
only complaints, skill buffs, but even then, max health and armor is already given, so speed and jump? lol

We used to do this and it was literally pointless, what's the point of having Battalion vs Battalion if battalions don't use what they are known for!?

Example I have from DU was when I had a Batt vs Batt match and we couldn't use our shields and Z6s and we literally had no practice using a DC-15A at all since it is pointless within our battalion.

[Flintlock]

7 minutes ago, Carter said:

We used to do this and it was literally pointless, what's the point of having Battalion vs Battalion if battalions don't use what they are known for!?

Example I have from DU was when I had a Batt vs Batt match and we couldn't use our shields and Z6s and we literally had no practice using a DC-15A at all since it is pointless within our battalion.

Then the most you can do is to teach people not to complain, hate to break it that way then, but if equalizing the playing field for that isn't going to work, then a team is going to have an advantage, especially considering this isn't some MRP server, where you're fighting players on another side constantly, so "balancing" isn't really determined until one of these tourney's happen
when it does, and people see "Well das bullshit cause x, y, and z" then what does one do
either nullify their usage of "what they're used for" so less complaints happen, or teach people to not complain when a loss happens

I don't know what to tell you then if both of those "are bad choices" if complaints are going to happen regardless, even with this suggestion.

[Flintlock 24]

7 minutes ago, Carter said:

We used to do this and it was literally pointless, what's the point of having Battalion vs Battalion if battalions don't use what they are known for!?

Example I have from DU was when I had a Batt vs Batt match and we couldn't use our shields and Z6s and we literally had no practice using a DC-15A at all since it is pointless within our battalion.

Then the most you can do is to teach people not to complain, hate to break it that way then, but if equalizing the playing field for that isn't going to work, then a team is going to have an advantage, especially considering this isn't some MRP server, where you're fighting players on another side constantly, so "balancing" isn't really determined until one of these tourney's happen
when it does, and people see "Well das bullshit cause x, y, and z" then what does one do
either nullify their usage of "what they're used for" so less complaints happen, or teach people to not complain when a loss happens

I don't know what to tell you then if both of those "are bad choices" if complaints are going to happen regardless, even with this suggestion.

[Rocketpackgolem]

+1

[Rocketpackgolem 5]

+1

[Chambers]

54 minutes ago, Sythen McSwiggity said:

Then the most you can do is to teach people not to complain, hate to break it that way then, but if equalizing the playing field for that isn't going to work, then a team is going to have an advantage, especially considering this isn't some MRP server, where you're fighting players on another side constantly, so "balancing" isn't really determined until one of these tourney's happen
when it does, and people see "Well das bullshit cause x, y, and z" then what does one do
either nullify their usage of "what they're used for" so less complaints happen, or teach people to not complain when a loss happens

I don't know what to tell you then if both of those "are bad choices" if complaints are going to happen regardless, even with this suggestion.

At the end of the day all battalions have something that makes then different so making those differences moot doesn't help show how that battalions are different at all.

Some battalions will be better than others because of lore or other reasons people need to get over the "fairness"

[Chambers 1,223]

54 minutes ago, Sythen McSwiggity said:

Then the most you can do is to teach people not to complain, hate to break it that way then, but if equalizing the playing field for that isn't going to work, then a team is going to have an advantage, especially considering this isn't some MRP server, where you're fighting players on another side constantly, so "balancing" isn't really determined until one of these tourney's happen
when it does, and people see "Well das bullshit cause x, y, and z" then what does one do
either nullify their usage of "what they're used for" so less complaints happen, or teach people to not complain when a loss happens

I don't know what to tell you then if both of those "are bad choices" if complaints are going to happen regardless, even with this suggestion.

At the end of the day all battalions have something that makes then different so making those differences moot doesn't help show how that battalions are different at all.

Some battalions will be better than others because of lore or other reasons people need to get over the "fairness"

[Alexz]

+1

[Alexz 42]

+1

[Brem]

11 hours ago, Praydoh said:

Want to know an old joke? Before the battalion buffs, where somehow you have 3 compared to others' 1 buff, 212th would usually be the first one to be wiped out in one life events. Back before battalions had no buffs at all. No excuses for losing in a sim, event or tournament and everybody had access to the same weapons across all the classes. Now? It's just a shit fest where each battalions hope something plays to their advantage. 

You mind not shit talking an entire battalion because you disagree with one members opinion?

That being said +1 because in all honesty the Battalion buffs as they are right now are way too unbalanced.

Edited May 20, 2018 by Brem

[Brem 40]

11 hours ago, Praydoh said:

Want to know an old joke? Before the battalion buffs, where somehow you have 3 compared to others' 1 buff, 212th would usually be the first one to be wiped out in one life events. Back before battalions had no buffs at all. No excuses for losing in a sim, event or tournament and everybody had access to the same weapons across all the classes. Now? It's just a shit fest where each battalions hope something plays to their advantage. 

You mind not shit talking an entire battalion because you disagree with one members opinion?

That being said +1 because in all honesty the Battalion buffs as they are right now are way too unbalanced.

Edited May 20, 2018 by Brem

[Austistic]

Tester Opinion

Pros- buffs for certain classes and/or battalions
Cons- people may complain about the buffs they actually receive
Opinion: I think this will be fine, but you have to think about everyone else when doing this
Overall: +1, due to the battalion buffs being a little too unbalanced (This is a +1 only if they are not working on it now, and if they are than a -1)

Edited May 20, 2018 by aust

[Austistic 64]

Tester Opinion

Pros- buffs for certain classes and/or battalions
Cons- people may complain about the buffs they actually receive
Opinion: I think this will be fine, but you have to think about everyone else when doing this
Overall: +1, due to the battalion buffs being a little too unbalanced (This is a +1 only if they are not working on it now, and if they are than a -1)

Edited May 20, 2018 by aust

[Egg]

4 hours ago, Sythen McSwiggity said:

I would like to state with 212th is that the all of our weapons do 35 damage. Excluding dual DC-17s, which does 30, the WESTARs that ARC gets (50 shots, 50 DMG), the Battalion specific DC-15A (Personally, I don't like these), which does 50 as well.

I don't know if you actually did any fact checking before posting this but the Dual DC-17s just got buffed to 50 damage a shot, Westar does 58 damage with a 50 round mag and your battalion specific DC-15A, which EVERYONE has, does 50 damage. The entire battalion also has buffed health which means that you have multiple buffs as apposed to everyone else having one.

 

 

This way of making buffs would be difficult but would all around make battalions good at what your battalion is supposed to do. +1

[Egg 1,538]

4 hours ago, Sythen McSwiggity said:

I would like to state with 212th is that the all of our weapons do 35 damage. Excluding dual DC-17s, which does 30, the WESTARs that ARC gets (50 shots, 50 DMG), the Battalion specific DC-15A (Personally, I don't like these), which does 50 as well.

I don't know if you actually did any fact checking before posting this but the Dual DC-17s just got buffed to 50 damage a shot, Westar does 58 damage with a 50 round mag and your battalion specific DC-15A, which EVERYONE has, does 50 damage. The entire battalion also has buffed health which means that you have multiple buffs as apposed to everyone else having one.

 

 

This way of making buffs would be difficult but would all around make battalions good at what your battalion is supposed to do. +1

[CBlake]

12 hours ago, Praydoh said:

Want to know an old joke? Before the battalion buffs, where somehow you have 3 compared to others' 1 buff, 212th would usually be the first one to be wiped out in one life events. Back before battalions had no buffs at all. No excuses for losing in a sim, event or tournament and everybody had access to the same weapons across all the classes. Now? It's just a shit fest where each battalions hope something plays to their advantage. 

Your roast is uncooked.   Dont hate. Please.  You sound like a 5 yr old.     It's funny how 212th won the BvB.  And now 41st people are running their mouth about specialization 🤔🤔🤔  is

Former Commander Cody 

91st Recon 2ndLT CBlake 

[CBlake 232]

12 hours ago, Praydoh said:

Want to know an old joke? Before the battalion buffs, where somehow you have 3 compared to others' 1 buff, 212th would usually be the first one to be wiped out in one life events. Back before battalions had no buffs at all. No excuses for losing in a sim, event or tournament and everybody had access to the same weapons across all the classes. Now? It's just a shit fest where each battalions hope something plays to their advantage. 

Your roast is uncooked.   Dont hate. Please.  You sound like a 5 yr old.     It's funny how 212th won the BvB.  And now 41st people are running their mouth about specialization 🤔🤔🤔  is

Former Commander Cody 

91st Recon 2ndLT CBlake 

[CBlake]

And before I get voted down like hell from 41st.  I'm for this change so please. Dont take this as me saying this isnt a smart idea.   

[CBlake 232]

And before I get voted down like hell from 41st.  I'm for this change so please. Dont take this as me saying this isnt a smart idea.   

[CBlake]

8 minutes ago, Egg said:

I don't know if you actually did any fact checking before posting this but the Dual DC-17s just got buffed to 50 damage a shot, Westar does 58 damage with a 50 round mag and your battalion specific DC-15A, which EVERYONE has, does 50 damage. The entire battalion also has buffed health which means that you have multiple buffs as apposed to everyone else having one.

 

 

This way of making buffs would be difficult but would all around make battalions good at what your battalion is supposed to do. +1

Its Cale.  He's defective.   I dont even know how or why we got the weapon buff.   All I asked was for an accuracy change. Bc.  Our weapon was shit.     None the less. I'll step back as I am no longer 212th. And this is not my fight anymore.   Much respect to 41st.  o7

[CBlake 232]

8 minutes ago, Egg said:

I don't know if you actually did any fact checking before posting this but the Dual DC-17s just got buffed to 50 damage a shot, Westar does 58 damage with a 50 round mag and your battalion specific DC-15A, which EVERYONE has, does 50 damage. The entire battalion also has buffed health which means that you have multiple buffs as apposed to everyone else having one.

 

 

This way of making buffs would be difficult but would all around make battalions good at what your battalion is supposed to do. +1

Its Cale.  He's defective.   I dont even know how or why we got the weapon buff.   All I asked was for an accuracy change. Bc.  Our weapon was shit.     None the less. I'll step back as I am no longer 212th. And this is not my fight anymore.   Much respect to 41st.  o7

[CBlake]

@BigBurner did you not read the rest of what I said?

[CBlake 232]

@BigBurner did you not read the rest of what I said?

[Flintlock]

3 hours ago, Egg said:

I don't know if you actually did any fact checking before posting this but the Dual DC-17s just got buffed to 50 damage a shot, Westar does 58 damage with a 50 round mag and your battalion specific DC-15A, which EVERYONE has, does 50 damage. The entire battalion also has buffed health which means that you have multiple buffs as apposed to everyone else having one.

 

 

This way of making buffs would be difficult but would all around make battalions good at what your battalion is supposed to do. +1

I've already stated most of those

Base classes (not GC/AC) bat blaster

The duelies I did not know got a buff, which is the only "lack of fact check" considering I use the WESTAR and DC-15S. The westars extra 8 damage is arbitrary as only ARC gets it, and that's it's the base westar.

I do not know the pnt you're making. I do know the BAT Blaster everyone in base gets, and I know it's a bit op, I even stated I don't think anyone needs those, considering we have the base DC-15A. But everything else is on the subgroups, and not even commonly used. GC/AC gets a dc-15a scoped, duelies, and a dc-15s, and the scoped does sane damage as reg dc-15a.

The WESTAR is only given to our ARCs

I already said I'm not opposed to this suggestion, and I'd like everything detailed on what is want so it's "fair" but logical for everyone.

The 100 health is the "battalion buf"f we get. If you want to suggest a removal of the BAT blasters in total, I +1 that, if you want to lower the damage back down of the dualies, I +1 that too, it's dualies, it don't need 50.

But you can't call it "our battalions buffs" if others have those items too. A complaint for OP weapons ofc, and I'd even agree! But these are not MY BATTALIONS buffs, we happen to have these weapons, BASE WEAPONS that were modified via changing the TFA code, weapons others are equipped with, that happened to have been buffed.

So the point you're making to me is what, cuz the two "BAT Blaster is OP" and "Dualies were buffed" is something I agree and don't agree  with respectively, and I'd request removal, and damage debuff respectively .

Edited May 20, 2018 by Sythen McSwiggity
not on phone

[Flintlock 24]

3 hours ago, Egg said:

I don't know if you actually did any fact checking before posting this but the Dual DC-17s just got buffed to 50 damage a shot, Westar does 58 damage with a 50 round mag and your battalion specific DC-15A, which EVERYONE has, does 50 damage. The entire battalion also has buffed health which means that you have multiple buffs as apposed to everyone else having one.

 

 

This way of making buffs would be difficult but would all around make battalions good at what your battalion is supposed to do. +1

I've already stated most of those

Base classes (not GC/AC) bat blaster

The duelies I did not know got a buff, which is the only "lack of fact check" considering I use the WESTAR and DC-15S. The westars extra 8 damage is arbitrary as only ARC gets it, and that's it's the base westar.

I do not know the pnt you're making. I do know the BAT Blaster everyone in base gets, and I know it's a bit op, I even stated I don't think anyone needs those, considering we have the base DC-15A. But everything else is on the subgroups, and not even commonly used. GC/AC gets a dc-15a scoped, duelies, and a dc-15s, and the scoped does sane damage as reg dc-15a.

The WESTAR is only given to our ARCs

I already said I'm not opposed to this suggestion, and I'd like everything detailed on what is want so it's "fair" but logical for everyone.

The 100 health is the "battalion buf"f we get. If you want to suggest a removal of the BAT blasters in total, I +1 that, if you want to lower the damage back down of the dualies, I +1 that too, it's dualies, it don't need 50.

But you can't call it "our battalions buffs" if others have those items too. A complaint for OP weapons ofc, and I'd even agree! But these are not MY BATTALIONS buffs, we happen to have these weapons, BASE WEAPONS that were modified via changing the TFA code, weapons others are equipped with, that happened to have been buffed.

So the point you're making to me is what, cuz the two "BAT Blaster is OP" and "Dualies were buffed" is something I agree and don't agree  with respectively, and I'd request removal, and damage debuff respectively .

Edited May 20, 2018 by Sythen McSwiggity
not on phone

[Praydoh]

3 hours ago, CBlake said:

Your roast is uncooked.   Dont hate. Please.  You sound like a 5 yr old.     It's funny how 212th won the BvB.  And now 41st people are running their mouth about specialization 🤔🤔🤔  is

Former Commander Cody 

91st Recon 2ndLT CBlake 

Say it to the several BCMDs, High Command and admins that were there and survived and took part in the picture. You think I started this trend back then? You're delusional. There's a reason why things happen and people notice. Like I said, things held more parity back then and if you weren't there to experience it, don't confer an ignorant judgement. 

[Praydoh 107]

3 hours ago, CBlake said:

Your roast is uncooked.   Dont hate. Please.  You sound like a 5 yr old.     It's funny how 212th won the BvB.  And now 41st people are running their mouth about specialization 🤔🤔🤔  is

Former Commander Cody 

91st Recon 2ndLT CBlake 

Say it to the several BCMDs, High Command and admins that were there and survived and took part in the picture. You think I started this trend back then? You're delusional. There's a reason why things happen and people notice. Like I said, things held more parity back then and if you weren't there to experience it, don't confer an ignorant judgement. 

[CBlake]

1 hour ago, Praydoh said:

Say it to the several BCMDs, High Command and admins that were there and survived and took part in the picture. You think I started this trend back then? You're delusional. There's a reason why things happen and people notice. Like I said, things held more parity back then and if you weren't there to experience it, don't confer an ignorant judgement. 

What?   I'm confused  anyways   im not starting any fight  like i said after that    idk how we got those things anyways    I was only told the Health buff    that was it      if you would like,   talk to Oddball   he would be more then willing to discuss your concerns with their buffs  but also as i stated.  this would be a good change  however i dont see how its gonna be possible 

[CBlake 232]

1 hour ago, Praydoh said:

Say it to the several BCMDs, High Command and admins that were there and survived and took part in the picture. You think I started this trend back then? You're delusional. There's a reason why things happen and people notice. Like I said, things held more parity back then and if you weren't there to experience it, don't confer an ignorant judgement. 

What?   I'm confused  anyways   im not starting any fight  like i said after that    idk how we got those things anyways    I was only told the Health buff    that was it      if you would like,   talk to Oddball   he would be more then willing to discuss your concerns with their buffs  but also as i stated.  this would be a good change  however i dont see how its gonna be possible 

[Dreams-]

Hello, I do not mind this idea at all and think it can be implemented to be quite useful in the long run. I think the Buffs should be more specialized type buffs to go along with roles, For example:

 

Sharp Shooter, Recon ECT, It would be nice to see this have a speed or jump boost as stated above so they can swiftly and easily get into prime position for sniping and recon ect. Where as an EOD could have more health or armor buff as they deal with explosives.

 

Now I understand people may not like the buffs they receive, but if they where to be made so they are what you would expect from that said specilization then if they dont like it, why would they continue to play it? It makes the said role more immersfal. I was 212th SharpShooter Lead for a long time and I can say now, if I had a speed or jump buff added it would have made it so much cooler, cause we become unique compared to our heavies ect.

 

I give this a +1 BUT  I see no need to rush into this anyways cause there are bigger problems and issues on server.

[Dreams- 212]

Hello, I do not mind this idea at all and think it can be implemented to be quite useful in the long run. I think the Buffs should be more specialized type buffs to go along with roles, For example:

 

Sharp Shooter, Recon ECT, It would be nice to see this have a speed or jump boost as stated above so they can swiftly and easily get into prime position for sniping and recon ect. Where as an EOD could have more health or armor buff as they deal with explosives.

 

Now I understand people may not like the buffs they receive, but if they where to be made so they are what you would expect from that said specilization then if they dont like it, why would they continue to play it? It makes the said role more immersfal. I was 212th SharpShooter Lead for a long time and I can say now, if I had a speed or jump buff added it would have made it so much cooler, cause we become unique compared to our heavies ect.

 

I give this a +1 BUT  I see no need to rush into this anyways cause there are bigger problems and issues on server.

[Cancer]

Pros - This would be nice to differ from each specialization. Heavy would be a little slow moving but lots of health .  Good IDEA

Cons - How much of a workload to make this possible.

Tester Opinion - Nothing we cannot work on but could take a while.

[Cancer 2]

Pros - This would be nice to differ from each specialization. Heavy would be a little slow moving but lots of health .  Good IDEA

Cons - How much of a workload to make this possible.

Tester Opinion - Nothing we cannot work on but could take a while.

[Esitt]

Alright what im going to say about this is that, this suggestion is way to broad. It would take ALOT of time to remove everyone's buffs once again, Zim will have to go to EVERY battalion to hear what they want as their buffs, then we will have to implement it ALL again after. This is a lot of work to do but all you have to do is make a server suggestion for your own battalion's buff and it will be alot easier. So if you want to go ahead and make a new suggestion for the 41st only, that would be easier. Or you could possibly make a suggestion about a battalion you think has way to many buffs/overpowered ones and that could possibly work better. All in all, this would just consume too much time for a such a little reward considering all battalions would have the same stuff again and no longer be unique. Plus Zim has already told me that Skill Points for buffs will never be a thing.

DENIED

//Locked

//Moved to Server Suggestions - Denied

[Esitt 884]

Alright what im going to say about this is that, this suggestion is way to broad. It would take ALOT of time to remove everyone's buffs once again, Zim will have to go to EVERY battalion to hear what they want as their buffs, then we will have to implement it ALL again after. This is a lot of work to do but all you have to do is make a server suggestion for your own battalion's buff and it will be alot easier. So if you want to go ahead and make a new suggestion for the 41st only, that would be easier. Or you could possibly make a suggestion about a battalion you think has way to many buffs/overpowered ones and that could possibly work better. All in all, this would just consume too much time for a such a little reward considering all battalions would have the same stuff again and no longer be unique. Plus Zim has already told me that Skill Points for buffs will never be a thing.

DENIED

//Locked

//Moved to Server Suggestions - Denied