Maxxing at 100
|
4saken Posted Mar 18, 2010, 3:19 pm |
To anyone who thinks a character with mediocre stats who maxxes at 100 is useless, have a look at one of my long-standing badasses:
And, yes, I know there are plenty of people out there more badass than he is, but really, he's plenty good enough for just about anything you'll have him do. Give him open space and he can whale on the enemy at ranges they can't touch. Can't ask for much more than that. PS - for anyone interested in deciphering my character tag it means he's rapid-3, rapid reload, double sniper, high courage, 100+ ballistics, trains 5 points a week, and has a maxxed stat. |
||||||
|
*Lugal* Posted Mar 18, 2010, 3:52 pm |
Nice! I've yet to see a low-maxed character be actually "worthless". Sure they won't be hyper-uber, but they can still get really good. And there's no guarantee that a high-potential character will even live to reach the same effectiveness.
I love seeing what people use the tag line for. That's probably the most descriptive one I've seen yet! Mine just show vehicle assignment and role, eg "A - DVR", "L1 - BAL". 
|
||||||
|
*Wolfsbane* Posted Mar 18, 2010, 3:59 pm |
I'd be perfectly happy if my characters maxxed at 100. Unfortunately, they all seem to want to max out at 90, or 75 :/ | ||||||
|
Flaming savage Posted Mar 18, 2010, 4:26 pm |
My lwoest amx is 80 
|
||||||
|
Groove Champion Posted Mar 18, 2010, 4:59 pm |
My lowest is 74 and he's a staple of my GW team... With proper cross training (driver/trucker/cyclist, gunnery/large guns/ballistics/handguns) a character who only gets one specialism from hitting 50 -but never 100- can become a force to be reckoned with. | ||||||
|
*Longo* Posted Mar 18, 2010, 5:05 pm |
I had one mx at 77 once. I kicked him out of my gang. I do have another maxed at 93 however, and he has 10 specs. | ||||||
|
FireFly Posted Mar 18, 2010, 5:16 pm |
I currently have a 77 ballistics person... not like mortars need that much skill to begin with...
Numbers, thats what they need 
|
||||||
|
Flaming savage Posted Mar 18, 2010, 5:45 pm |
I took one of my guys on a one way ride because he maxed at 99. | ||||||
|
4saken Posted Mar 18, 2010, 5:58 pm |
You know sometimes they can get an extra point, right?
And with the new PvP leagues it's possible to get that extra few points for the spec you just gotta have. Low cap guys (under 100) can still have many uses. If they are still training decent they can eventually make good camp mechanics. You can send a maxxed 99 mech guy to a camp and not feel bad about not using him for other stuff. And of course you can always use them to get some ped experience under your belt or other, shall we say, "high risk" duties that might be too difficult for a new hire. |
||||||
|
*Marc5iver* marcgillespie55@gmail.com Posted Mar 18, 2010, 6:22 pm |
This is what I have started using my guys who max at less then 80 for. Currently have 3 of the bums. Doesn't hurt so bad if they die. Actually can bring a smile to my face 
|
||||||
|
Groove Champion Posted Mar 18, 2010, 7:02 pm |
Town Event Driver/Gunner is statsitically the most deadly affectation for a Groove Champion
It may be of interest to new(ish) players worried about low-skill guys to know there isn't ever a pressing need for a ganger with skill over 90. I've accomplished 95% (no joke!) of my scouts/events/records/missions/etc. using gangers within a 20-100 skill bracket. I have the nasty habit of switching the trained skill as soon as a ganger hits either 50 or 100 skill. I find it's more efficient -and fatalities hurt less - when I have a high number of reserve gangers who can fill in the vacuum left by the death of a good ganger. In that respect, very few of my gangers excell at a single skill, however they are comfortable fullfilling 2 or 3 roles if needed. |
||||||
|
JS Posted Mar 19, 2010, 9:38 am |
I now have 5 gangers capped below 100. It seems the low end of caps is 70. So taking only my over 70 characters the stats are as follows for my team.
26 Characters over 70 skill 5 capped below 100 (72, 75, 83, 90, 97) This is 20% of my over 70 skill characters One of the 5 I already fired during a small hissy fit I have 3 characters over 100 The data points are inconclusive at this time, I'll keep tracking it. However, I hired nearly all of my characters by "buying". Additionally, I had no recruiter when I hired them so something in the order of 90% of my team was a 20 or lower in their "primary" skill. I have 50 gangers, if this trend continues I will end up with 10 of my 50 capped below 100. My advice to other new guys is to not accept anyone who starts at 20 or less. Also, minimize your "paying" as much as possible. The vets talk about the uses of capped gangers, but they are on the other side, as they also have some excellent gangers. When you slave away for a few months and all your leading gangers start capping below 100, it is very frustrating. Lastly, I will throw out once again that enjoyment of the game would be enhanced greatly if the lowest cap possible was 100. Specialisms are one of the coolest parts of the game, it would be nice to know you could at least get 2 in each area. |
||||||
|
*Ninesticks* Posted Mar 19, 2010, 11:29 am |
I would disagree with that advice JS.
Pretty much all of my gangers are paid for, over half of my crew of 65 are capped. Of those only 5 have capped below 100, the vast majority have capped between 100 and 200. Even those who have capped low can form an important part of your scouting teams in the northern part of Evan or fill less important roles (e.g. Driver) further south. This is the skill set of a 78 cap character that leads my SS team - I have found him to be very useful what ever role I put him. Rapidshot Special Skill Combat Psychologist Special Skill Negotiator Special Skill Jury Rigging Special Skill Deathracer Special Skill Recruiter Special Skill Machine Guns Special Skill Ballistic Prediction Special Skill Motivator Special Skill Level 2 Field First Aid Special Skill Sniper Special Skill Defensive Driver Special Skill Reload In Motion Special Skill |
||||||
|
JS Posted Mar 19, 2010, 1:16 pm |
Nine, I agree with your point that they can be useful. However, my point is that new guys should attempt to keep their sub 100 cappers to a minimum. Like I said, if things continue I will have double the amount of low cappers you have. While you no doubt have many excellent gangers. I think the advice is solid for avoiding low cappers, while it is true that they can be useful. I still think 100 should be the min. |
||||||
|
Groove Champion Posted Mar 19, 2010, 1:42 pm |
The only real argument you’ve presented to justify a 100 skill minimum cap is: (and I paraphrase)
“Vets already have a solid base of 100+ gangers so they can afford -100 caps while new players cannot.” In opposition to your argument, we’ve had listed examples of gangers with sub-100 skills that have a shopping list of specialisms. Cross-training a sub-100 ganger can get you better overall driving/gunnery skills than a +100 skill ganger with only 2 specs: If your ganger caps at 70(lowest known cap)in gunnery and you choose the Sniper spec, you can cross-train him in handguns to get him to Sniper lvl 2 and you can get other related specs using heavy guns and ballistics. Honestly, I think the assurance of capping above 100 would take away from the game and exposes a lack of perseverance more than an actual game issue. |
||||||
|
*jimmylogan* Posted Mar 19, 2010, 1:52 pm |
I also disagree with making a skill cap minimum (100 or otherwise). | ||||||
|
Serephe Posted Mar 19, 2010, 1:57 pm |
I suggest allowing under-50 caps.
|
||||||
|
Groove Champion Posted Mar 19, 2010, 2:02 pm |
Lol CF for the win! | ||||||
|
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Mar 19, 2010, 2:51 pm |
minimum cap isnt required, all gangers have a use even sub 100 skill, multi...multi...multi skill ( Jack of all trades, master of none ) them, we all have done it...we all use capped gangers, in fact the gangers i use the most in somerset on solo scouts are the capped under 100 skill, they earn there weight in gold.
note: i have a maxed oiut gang list of 58 members, you cannot have a gang as large as 100+ , i have 7 capped guys at under 100 i have been playing for nearly two years, had many deaths, many low caps... at no time have i found a gang member useless, its how you use them and the skill you gain in the game that counts, not the uber top echelon gangers some talk about, remember not all vets have 300+ skilled gangers. |
||||||
|
Groove Champion Posted Mar 19, 2010, 3:10 pm |
That's right... I think some forum pundits need to take a good long look at veteran player rosters before wailing about them having a bunch of 200+ skill gangers... | ||||||
|
JS Posted Mar 19, 2010, 3:28 pm |
That is incorrect Groove. My main argument, again, is that specialisms are one of the best parts of the game. It would be an excellent draw to the game to know that our characters could at least get to 100, which ensures 2 levels in a spec, or 4 if the spec is cross skill. Your paraphrase is in reference to my note that the vets arguments are all couched in their particular situation, which is that they can argue easily against this change because it does not effect them near as much. It is telling that the vets nearly to a man oppose this, while I'd say the new players would support it. That is perhaps the most interesting thing about the debate to me. |
||||||
|
Groove Champion Posted Mar 19, 2010, 3:39 pm |
Having 2 specs is hardly a "draw" to a new player: they have no idea what specs are.
I'd say this is intermediate player greed: you've taste the benefits of specialisms and you want to be assured you'll have more. In case you haven't noticed, nothing is assured in Evan. You think new players would support your suggested change? I'd love to hear from them, and I'd like to read arguments that are less subjective. |
||||||
|
JS Posted Mar 19, 2010, 3:54 pm |
I have not called low cappers useless. I would characterize them as "less" useful than a character who capped above 100. But I have never called them useless. That is a mischaracterization of my argument. In other words, you said that, I did not. |
||||||
|
*jimmylogan* Posted Mar 19, 2010, 4:01 pm |
While I don't pretend to know everything, I've learned in my time here that making things "better" like this doesn't always have the desired effect... Having perma death, perma damage, lost limbs, etc. These all add flavor, diversity and challenge to the game. Guaranteeing a 2nd spec does not ADD anything in this regard. Yes it adds a spec and you know that you'll get at least 100 out of all the skills, but IMHO this adds nothing to the game. |
||||||
|
theHumungous Posted Mar 19, 2010, 4:22 pm |
Yeah, I'll agree with jimmylogan and Groove Champion. I'm still a fairly new player with only on character capped (85 scout), everyone else is sub 60 in skills.
Adding minimum cap of 100 doesn't seem like it would add anything to the game. I had my first taste of a multi-specced character (he died) and loved it. He was a mechanic (jury rigging) scout (negotiator) and driver (death racer) with a gunnery that was starting to climb up. Deciding what role characters have increases the playability of the game I think. |
||||||
|
*sam* Posted Mar 19, 2010, 4:48 pm |
Apart from death and taxes. And who said DW wasn't realistic? 
|
||||||
|
Groove Champion Posted Mar 19, 2010, 5:18 pm |
I show Death or Taxes who's boss on a regular basis 
|
||||||
|
4saken Posted Mar 19, 2010, 5:25 pm |
One of the reasons for my post was to help illustrate that all characters can be of some use. The way you hire and manage your characters will be greatly influenced by whether you are a starting player (few or no specs, just trying to survive), intermediate (concerned on which specs to get and how to get them), or a vet (concerned on getting the best use of your capped characters and, indeed, your characters of all skill levels).
It's taken me two years of play time to get where I am, and I have learned that the entire time the way you manage characters is in a constant state of discovery and adaptation. This keeps the game ever-changing, interesting and challenging on a long-term basis and is, IMHO, part of the genius of the game. The way you look at your characters a year from now will be different than you do now. Five years from now, if you were to keep playing, you would undoubtedly see an entirely new aspect. To get some idea: Look at the game as you see it now. Ok, now imagine that you have several characters that are 150+ multi-rapidshot snipers that can reload while in motion and fire at no penalty while driving. Suddenly a phoenix armed only with a car rifle is an entirely different beast. But it's doubtful you'll be driving torn up loot cars back with such a character! You'll need people to fill that role, too. In the end result to get back to what was brought up, no, I don't think all characters should cap at 100+. Sure the lower cap guys are less useful, but half your guys or more will cap over 100 anyway so you'll manage. And if you're clever you'll find a use for those lower level characters, I'm sure. You've probably already thought of something cool you could do with that guy you fired the other day! Oops! |
||||||
|
Groove Champion Posted Mar 19, 2010, 6:09 pm |
On paper, any player -new or not- stands to benefit from the promise of a second spec at 100 skill. In practice, it would make the game less surprising/frustrating/challenging as 4saken and jimmy pointed out. | ||||||
|
JS Posted Mar 19, 2010, 8:42 pm |
You are absolutely correct. This kind of change would have 2nd and third order effects. It doesn't matter what the intentions are in a given action, the consequences matter. Of course, the Factions chage is an example of that. Change is not inherently bad or good, but can be a bit of both. This is obviously a long standing game mechanic that people are comfortable with. I agree that there needs to be limits, but I still think a modest change to 100 would not really effect game play, but would reduce frustration for new players. There are many pitfalls to this game when yo start, which is admittedly a lare part of its charm. The number of low cappers is just frustrating and I find it adds little to my enjoyment. It is as I have said before, the only real complaint I have about the game. I would be interested to hear your opinion after you start getting more characters over 70, something you ahve spent a lot of hard effort to do, and they begin to cap. If you still feel that way then, I would be interested. Perhaps it is just me... |
||||||
|
JS Posted Mar 19, 2010, 8:46 pm |
I'm in violent agreement. If this game mechanics point is to increase frustration then it has done that admirably. If we are all happy with that kind of frustration, then so be it. I am not of course. Admittedly it won't stop me from playing or considering this one of the greatest games and game communities I've ever played/met, but it as I have said before it's the only chink in this games armor I have found so far. |
||||||
|
JS Posted Mar 19, 2010, 8:48 pm |
Indeed, I could have fed him to the bugs. Lost opportunity! |
||||||
|
*Marc5iver* marcgillespie55@gmail.com Posted Mar 19, 2010, 10:38 pm |
Rather then a minimum skill cap I would love to see skills maxing at different levels. At least the different “groupings”. Gun and Lg Gun max at the same but Scouting would be a different level.
Now back to your regularly scheduled thread 
|
||||||
|
JS Posted Mar 19, 2010, 11:02 pm |
That idea has merit! I'd be on board with that. Then you still might get a high skill in another area. Nice idea. |
||||||
|
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Mar 19, 2010, 11:16 pm |
well as i and others have pointed out we consider characters that cap under 100 to be just as useful as those that cap just over that border. I was not attempting to argue with you, just share my experience. |
||||||
|
*Bastille* Posted Mar 19, 2010, 11:55 pm |
James 'Earl' Jones died the other day. A 78* character with 3 or 4 skills over 50. One of my favs. he did the tough stuff, and he did it well. Like previously mentioned, its good to have a guy that can do the tough rolls. Drive back that 4% motor Rare with no armor, and be willing to get out and defend it with his rifle. Robert 'Chief' Price wouldn't do that. Every army has its fodder, and sometimes the fodder becomes the hero. 'Earl' was one of those heroes, at least for Bastille. We'll miss you.
In two minds about this all depending on how I view the cap. Some people are better at some things than other things, but then some people just don't have the guts, motivation whatever to improve past a certain point. Overall, be nice to see caps vary, but not by too much, and there is methods for this now. I'm also all for caps under 50. Not everyone has greatness, although here I think many will start to complain. Just look at my english skills, definitely capped at about 38* |
||||||
|
Joel Autobaun Posted Mar 20, 2010, 12:18 am |
More players know my man William "Zerk-Jerk" Barker (capped at 75 or so) than any other member of my gang. | ||||||
|
JS Posted Mar 20, 2010, 1:51 am |
Grog, this is a debate friend, not an argument! |
||||||
|
*Longo* Posted Mar 20, 2010, 2:20 am |
I don't know him. Means he is still breathin.
|