Scorpion is a joke.

[mr. Duck]

I would not mind pinpoint accuracy on the scorpion, I thought it was supposed to be a combat SRV, so I expect it to outperform the scarab in all combat situations (at all ranges, not only very short range). This however does not automatically make the scarab useless. Perhaps lessen the cargo (or be bold and lose it all together, note however, I do not mean the cargo that a person can carry) on the scorpion so it really becomes a combat focused SRV.

I still do not understand why the choice was made to deliberately miss the first rounds (essentially wasting ammo) before things become more "accurate". Why not the other way around? Or why not keep the accuracy but make the first rounds very weak before it becomes very strong (warming up period)? Or if you insist on wanting to keep the gun a short range weapon, why not make it a shotgun type of weapon?

 

[Sighman]

I still do not understand why the choice was made to deliberately miss the first rounds (essentially wasting ammo) before things become more "accurate". Why not the other way around? Or why not keep the accuracy but make the first rounds very weak before it becomes very strong (warming up period)? Or if you insist on wanting to keep the gun a short range weapon, why not make it a shotgun type of weapon?

So human players get a little warning instead of getting killed in the first 0.5 seconds.

Everyone wants to hold the all-conquering weapon, but nobody wants to be on the other end. As a multiplayer game, Elite has to balance both sides.

 

[Gleitfrosch]

Can't wait for the "omg scorpion kills me from 500m away nothing I can do so OP!!!!" posts if it gets buffed.

Balancing does not mean to move from one side to another. It's more about finding the middle.

 

[Cmdr Derzelat]

Can't wait for the "omg scorpion kills me from 500m away nothing I can do so OP!!!!" posts if it gets buffed.

That would also imply that Frontier won't do a proper job balancing them, other than on a Excel spreedsheet, like for give them a proper test in game before releasing such stats. But its easier to assume what players would say in a case like that, rather than assuming that Frontier would try to make a proper test for once. Even so, as you already anticipate in a sarcastic way, would still be "doom" players that dont understand "game development" and be caught in a "never happy" loop.

 

[Winterdyne]

My 2p is that the Scorpion is currently just crap. Seriously up the effectiveness of it and make it situational. Its limitation could / should be that you can only get it replaced/rebuilt in military economies (NOT yourself). That makes using it all the time a more difficult prospect and more of a deliberate choice. You'd use it when it's useful and appropriate - against a hard target, whereas you'd use the scarab for most tasks where you don't actually need a tank and getting it worn down is pointless. It's pretty much the same with e-breaches - there aren't many places where I actually bother using them (rather than cloning someones profile after murdering everyone).

 

[Ian Skippy]

That would also imply that Frontier won't do a proper job balancing them, other than on a Excel spreedsheet, like for give them a proper test in game before releasing such stats. But its easier to assume what players would say in a case like that, rather than assuming that Frontier would try to make a proper test for once. Even so, as you already anticipate in a sarcastic way, would still be "doom" players that dont understand "game development" and be caught in a "never happy" loop.

There is nothing to balance against "tank should casually kill hordes of infantry". If people get their power fantasy it would simply suck being on the other end of it.

It's another round of:"FD please buff engineering I worked so hard for it cool my shields are now so strong this feels great hey why does it take so long to kill others omg unbalanced!"

You dont just balance scorpion to scarab, but also scorpion Vs whatever it is shooting. And people here completely forget the latter.

 

[Ian Skippy]

Balancing does not mean to move from one side to another. It's more about finding the middle.

But "FD please remove the one weakness" is moving it to one side. It can do some things better and some things worse, so it already is in the middle.

 

[oblivionmanman 2476]

you can please people some of the time but you cant please people all of the time.if you dont like the scorpian just dont use it

 

[mr. Duck]

So human players get a little warning instead of getting killed in the first 0.5 seconds.

Everyone wants to hold the all-conquering weapon, but nobody wants to be on the other end. As a multiplayer game, Elite has to balance both sides.

I understand the balance act, it just seems like a counter intuitive weapon design in my opinion, the question was more to figure out if there wasn't there another method to do this? For example, make the first shots just as strong as half the strength of the scarab for example? And try to balance things out from here, for example, take the ttk for an average NPC with the scarab and during that period make sure that the scorpion does not go beyond it in terms of weapon strength, would that be an option?

Not everybody wants an all-conquering weapon, I just wanted the scorpion to make more sense

 

[Winterdyne]

There is nothing to balance against "tank should casually kill hordes of infantry". If people get their power fantasy it would simply suck being on the other end of it.

PIAT users from WWII would like a word. Tanks (infact pretty much any AFV or emplacement) should casually kill hordes of (improperly equipped) infantry if they're stupid enough to stand where they can be shot/seen. Throw some proper AT weapons into the mix and all of a sudden that armour surrounding you is nothing more than a pressure cooker for you, you deliciously melty gooey centre, you.

Remove the weapon identifier from NPC infantry and they become a much higher threat. If you can't tell who is carrying the AT weapons, you can't specifically target them.

Stop infantry from showing up on the radar of a vehicle and you add another layer. Personally I'd set this on a per-radar-system (or entity) type (for example the Scarab* might be able to spot infantry, but the Scorpion can't). Ground attack specialised craft (dropships) might be able to spot ground vehicles but something like Viper can't, and so on. Pretty simple table in database terms. Coupled with the above and you open up options for equipping SRVs or including other vehicles or suits with differing specialisations into the game - consider for example a 'stealth' suit that doesn't show up on vehicle radar. A baddy wearing that an equipped with an anti-tank weapon is a serious consideration. Similarly a sniper - this would scupper the current 'by the numbers' method I use of driving round fast in the SRV and spotting sharpshooters and killing them before I then go on a long-ranger murderfest. I generally take no hits at all doing this.

Anyway TLDR, there are LOTS of ways of balancing a very effective weapon and armour setup against infantry.

*: The scarab needs a tone-down now to accomodate the Scorpion. As has been mentioned elsewhere if it's role is not combat, it probably shouldn't be quite so good at it. When you expand the gamespace, a rebalance is necessary.

 

[Eldragon]

So human players get a little warning instead of getting killed in the first 0.5 seconds.

Everyone wants to hold the all-conquering weapon, but nobody wants to be on the other end. As a multiplayer game, Elite has to balance both sides.

Elite is barely a multiplayer game. Even then by that logic why does the Scarab not have a similar inaccuracy? I don't think a single player has ever complained about how fast a Scarab kills another player. Especially considering how the infantry weapons can 1 shot other players too.

 

[Ian Skippy]

PIAT users from WWII would like a word.

Unless they want to talk about computer games I dont really care. We should really stop with the ad-hoc 'realism arguments'.

Remove the weapon identifier from NPC infantry and they become a much higher threat. If you can't tell who is carrying the AT weapons, you can't specifically target them.

Stop infantry from showing up on the radar of a vehicle and you add another layer.

Agree, and should happen in general. Its dumb I can find my assassination target by cycling between all NPCs from 1km out.

Anyway TLDR, there are LOTS of ways of balancing a very effective weapon and armour setup against infantry.

Sure, not disagreeing on that.

*: The scarab needs a tone-down now to accomodate the Scorpion. As has been mentioned elsewhere if it's role is not combat, it probably shouldn't be quite so good at it. When you expand the gamespace, a rebalance is necessary.

Absolutely agree too.

Thing is that while I pretty much agree with all you say, what you propose will add depth, challenge, risk and challenge to the mix. That is not what this community typically wants. In this case the request is "make my gun better k thx bye". Not "create an exciting context where I am in real danger in my tank and it will be more challenging to determine where the threat is."

And while I am all for what you propose, I am very much against the blanket "buff plz" requests we get literally every single time any weapon, vehicle or ship is added.

 

[Guyperson]

Because a scorpion that can snipe infantry from 500m away on top of all it already does sounds cool until you are the one being sniped by a tank you can barely see in the distance.

It's a little late for that when the supposedly not-combat-focused Scarab already does this.

 

[Winterdyne]

Oh I am saying the scorpion needs a buff, hugely. It (I suppose like Odyssey in general) just isn't quite (yet, if you're optimistic) what it purports to be. Unfortunately I think (for a decent game) several or all of the other tweaks I mention are required to make it work as that. FDev's typical half-arsed approach just isn't going to cut it. Nor is blindly listening to the vocal mass of the community - a proper top-down review of the game is required.

 

[St0rmFury]

I just want to outfit my ships with the scorpion's surge repeater.

 

[zimms]

Because a scorpion that can snipe infantry from 500m away on top of all it already does sounds cool until you are the one being sniped by a tank you can barely see in the distance.

Is it much worse than getting sniped by a Scarab I can barely see in the distance?

Also, maybe I shouldn't have fought said tank in an open field with nothing but my knife.

I don't care too much, but I'd have preferred some "realism". Taking an SRV to a CZ isn't really beneficial anyway.

 

[Cmdr Derzelat]

There is nothing to balance against "tank should casually kill hordes of infantry". If people get their power fantasy it would simply suck being on the other end of it.

It's another round of:"FD please buff engineering I worked so hard for it cool my shields are now so strong this feels great hey why does it take so long to kill others omg unbalanced!"

You dont just balance scorpion to scarab, but also scorpion Vs whatever it is shooting. And people here completely forget the latter.

I deny none of what you say... I don't care about Scorpion as it is, i jump in it, see if fullfills my "power fantasy" and if it doesn't, its okay, i won't use it. What i do care tho, and wish to see more, is Frontier testing till the whatever they release, ship or srv or weapon, reaches the balance THEY strive for ingame. At this moment neither you nor the other side(the "buff this thing") are wrong or right, frontier does what they always do : throw it in battle with some standard stats, then tune it according to peoples "power wish" which shows little to no vision on how everythings placed in ED universe,and only the bigger and vocal side wins : its either balanced on what it does or it will be buffed as you predict. Both of them seems plausible to me, as frontier released this srv for........

 

[Ian Skippy]

Is it much worse than getting sniped by a Scarab I can barely see in the distance?

"Is it much worse to give the cutter 75 degrees pitch per second if the Eagle already has it?"
"Is it much worse to give a missile launcher 30 shots per second if a machine gun already has that?"
"Is it much worse to allow a T9 to boost to 700m/s if the iCourier can already do that?"

Like the above questions I will assume yours was rhetorical. If not, the answer is: "Yes, duh."

 

[bangermsuk]

scorpion should be a bit of a beast, has for gunners have you tried driving and shooting from a turret the gun will be shaking around like it is driving over rocks,and stuff. 1 hit wonders i don't want to see.

 

[zimms]

"Is it much worse to give the cutter 75 degrees pitch per second if the Eagle already has it?"
"Is it much worse to give a missile launcher 30 shots per second if a machine gun already has that?"
"Is it much worse to allow a T9 to boost to 700m/s if the iCourier can already do that?"

Like the above questions I will assume yours was rhetorical. If not, the answer is: "Yes, duh."

Not really fair comparisons.

What I meant was that a Scarab can already drop foot soldiers within 1-3s. Giving the Scorpion the same capability wouldn't really change the game that much.