If the beam/channel spells have to have some effects from suppression then rather than outright denial (aka breaking the channel) it could potentially just have diminishing returns. Would make sense, since you are breaking the psychic users concentration and his focus is not wholly on empowering his incantations. That is, if we need the mechanic to begin with, id rather see the actual Heavy Bolter get buffed from its current almost unused by players state before we tackle any nerfs on spells. On another note, the healing beam has been able to noclip through walls since day 1 of Alpha, and the devs have not addressed it since. I can heal a guy through a wall in the other room any day of the week, if it were lag it would break at one point when the client/server caught up, but it never did. Wether that mechanic is intentional or not i dunno, its definitely cheap to have noclip on spells tough.
The only things that needs to be done to beam spells are have there range reduced to about 3/4 of what they are now and to make them not as accumulative (say 3 streams at max centralized on one player) . That way people will at least have a chance to get in range to stop it and also it won't be as reachable to take people out with ease on maps like Maggon but still powerful enough to mess people up unless they take it out quickly. Anything more and it will be just another over kill nerf to yet another Chaos item.
Instead of a focused beam, I'd be okay with the sorc having an active-cast AoE that heals in a radius around him. Same for SoC, give it a radius of 20-25m.
I like the channeled beam for debuffs and buffs, anything that causes debilitating effects especially (blind, paralysis, snares, forced overheat etc), but yeah SoC and anything that deals damage is not my favourite.
Yes, ranged attacks. If you want to play semantics then we'll play semantics. The vague use of "they" has no clear referent so you're essentially imposing meaning onto that pronoun to suit your need. If you read it in context, within a discussion of attacks such as SoC, then it's clear enough that "they" is referring to "attacks", not "sorcerers". So, with that in mind, I would be advocating that ranged attacks should still be subject to suppression, which is something I do generally support in theory. That does contradict my loose usage of "anything", but it definitely doesn't point to me supporting suppression affecting healing. As I have stated many times, I understand where OP is coming from. I get the thinking behind it. That's it. I never actually addressed how I feel about the OP's suggestion. I initially made a counter argument to one post based on a miscommunication. I thought people were only talking about targeting of the spell and not maintaining it, and apparently I've been hallucinating my heal beam bending around walls. Following that, I pretty much only debated hypothetical situations without giving my opinion on it. It's a bad habit of mine, getting wrapped up in a discussion that's not directly related to a thread. I don't think I would support suppression canceling the heal beam entirely. I could understand if it affected targeting, but I can see why people would take issue with it. If I am crazy and sorcs can't bend the beam around walls, then that would be a big hit to them. I was basing a lot of my argument on that, but that's been called into question at this point. I'm going to try testing it out on my own, but I have a feeling I'm mistaken about it. Not sure how I got this far thinking they wouldn't cancel considering it's basically all I play. If offensive spells become very powerful then I think suppression should affect their aim, just like a gun.
I'm glad that I don't have to balance this game. A pretty vocal group wants all the sides to have all the same skills and all the same options. They point to things in a void and say thats op cause the other side doesn't have the ability to do that exact same thing. Seems like a nightmare to me.
