Background Image

UAT - Testing / Playing with Devs

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by jbregg, Mar 30, 2017.

?

Are you interested in testing/playing with the Devs on the latest build?

  1. I'd want to play but not test.

  2. Not interested.

  3. Sign me up!

  4. I would be interested but the time of the test is an issue.

Results are only viewable after voting.
  1. Lady Rheeva Steam Early Access

    The Hawk-discussion is stupid AF. No, Hawks and JPA's are not comparable, but Hawks and Tacticals are. Hawks are literally flying Bolters. Less EHP, worse weapon but with the power of permanent high-ground.
  2. Makes sense. How balanced would a flying tactical with bombs that stop tanks be?
    LOBOTRONUS likes this.
  3. Mainfold Mainfold Preacher

    they are on there for testing purposes, testing what damage models work and what outcomes they have. What comes of it is primarily going to be used as data for future balancing

    The most likely usage of the data gathered from the testing is going to be shaping new stormbolters and such.

    Even if @jbregg commented on not being so pleased with where the bolters are currently at on life, it doesn't mean he'd instantly implement a bolter that's even better than the old bolter that got addressed to be the current live bolter. The data has much more value for stormbolters than normal boltguns overall, but there is also a necessity for creating data for new plasma gun variations, as well as maybe creating combi-bolters that function like combi-bolters (both barrels at the same time instead of alternating for twice the rate of fire). The same goes for creating data for other weapons as well. More data = good, it makes the job of generating fitting damage-models for the future far easier and less time has to be done in terms of testing it before putting it in, if there is a chart of what worked and what didn't, and then adapting other factors to it rather than designing a new weapon just to test if it would work every time someone suggests something (hence why having varied damage models tested makes perfect sense to do)
  4. Krayt Krayt Preacher

    25 is too much , with enhanced it goes up to 30 , not even gonna speak about the TLSC buffed on top of that , Eldar is at a good spot atm , they dont even need the +15 armor
    LOBOTRONUS and Ivrain like this.
  5. ye mb, thats the problem of enhance, it was a bad idea cut to much ehp and then add this buffbot spell, devs shoot themselves in a knee, eldar are in rage, and devs cant buff them

    no, 15 is okay if you face ork shitters or LSm drawning in healing beacons

    DA needed some armor buff, because he had stats of flyer or backline support, not a tactical, okay 90 is just FINE, because 75 is a joke
  6. Spookums MasterSpookums Well-Known Member

    Now, i will say i don't know who did it. But. Weapons have been knee-jerk nerfed before. Taking as litttle as a joke comment on a livestream. If there was any fact checking, any atall. It wouldn't have been touched. It might even have actually got a buff to be usefull. But nope.
  7. Lerdoc Katitof Well-Known Member

    [​IMG]
    Aislinn, jbregg and Mainfold like this.
  8. Mainfold Mainfold Preacher

    a bad idea to add elements that enforce teamplay? "oh no, my lone-wolfing! I don't like it when I have to actually play as a team mimimimi:EldarBanshee: "
  9. Lerdoc Katitof Well-Known Member

    The IRONY of you, saying that as power armor main makes even Tzeentch confused.
    MasterSpookums likes this.
  10. that enforce only fuckery when orks csm and lsm is strong as it is

    enhance added as a crutch just because devs didnt listen and cut TOO MUCH ehp


    now what we have - eldar suck without enhance, eldar Op with enhance, why not to have something middle ??

Share This Page