Denied CI Type Blue Role Choice

This suggestion has been denied and will not receive development.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Kisuke

Kisuke

Civil Gamers Expert
One Year Club Two Year Club
Jan 15, 2024
67
8
111
What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
Allow the CI-Type Blue be able to choose between going Combative Type Blue (The one they had pre-rework) or Supportive Type Blue (Current Type Blue) upon switching.

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
I don't believe so due to the suggestion being about something semi-recent, and is for flexibility rather than reverting/removing anything.

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
- More flexibility for CI to choose the type of TB based on their playstyle that fits what they like playing/stronger at
- Let CI have a balance between support and pressure/offense
- Lets CI get more strategic and choose between which TB is better for X situations

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
- May need extra balancing in order to prevent combative from being chosen every time.
- Could be seen as a straight CI buff if not balanced
- Extra Dev work needed to be able to choose between the roles

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
The Type blue rework changed how the role is played significantly, it forced everyone to shift from aggressive to mostly supportive. The suggestion doesn't remove the current support Type Blue the dev's worked hard on, but instead adds flexibility and choice. Support TB is good in defense situations and roaming surface because of the ability's and no decay, while combative TB is better for raids and pushing. With these two comparisons, we can see that its not just a pure upgrade giving access to the combative TB and actually situational between which two you should pick. With allowing CI to choose between them, we gain a lot of flexibility/adaptability without ruining any dev's work, improving gameplay for CI and letting people choose their playstyles.
 
Upvote -4 Downvote
-support.

The entire reason TB was made into a supportive class was cause The old TB was so strong it can run raids with like 2 people and nobody (but Ci) found this fun to play or fight against.

NOBODY will use supportive TB, I mean.. who would pick giving a little bit extra health to a jug over head popping.. immortality + gun Bullet freezing..
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zen and Dennid
SamPaval said:
-support.

The entire reason TB was made into a supportive class was cause The old TB was so strong it can run raids with like 2 people and nobody (but Ci) found this fun to play or fight against.

NOBODY will use supportive TB, I mean.. who would pick giving a little bit extra health to a jug over head popping.. immortality + gun Bullet freezing..
Click to expand...
new tb should def get destabilize tho or rebalance how reality anchors are being given out
 
All ill say in regards to this is, I've messed with the support reality bending a bit, and the support type blue is definitely a powerhouse if you get good communication and get used to the abilities
 
Walter Smoth said:
All ill say in regards to this is, I've messed with the support reality bending a bit, and the support type blue is definitely a powerhouse if you get good communication and get used to the abilities
Click to expand...
when you say messed around does that mean you put yourself on the job and not used in a raid because they are very different
 
Yoyo said:
most -supports will be coping UK Foundation players who cant combat CI, this wont get accepted tho because the role is so new, content will (hopefully) monitor this and adjust it if need be.
Click to expand...
That's just because UK CI are actually decent at combat. You fight USA CI and think it's not that hard and don't realise you're playing on easy mode.
 
While I do like the idea of flexibility with the job (Despite it, people will min max what’s better lol),

Your suggestion does seem a bit baseless. You’re saying this and that but you haven’t really brought up any ideas for what each utility would have. All you have really said is you want it to survive longer and still have a combative advantage, but what type? Damage Reduction? Perhaps a life sap mechanic from doing damage that you get for using said ability and damaging and it heals you for a little bit?

There’s not really much here to go off of unfortunately.
 
Zen said:
That's just because UK CI are actually decent at combat. You fight USA CI and think it's not that hard and don't realise you're playing on easy mode.
Click to expand...
Half of the combative clips on the UK Foundation side I’ve seen less than 20 fps. That’s basically the equivalent of fighting some random person who doesn’t know how to play an FPS game. The FPS is a bit crucial if not important if you actually want to kill someone lol
 
Yoyo said:
cope stands.
Click to expand...
I main a non-combative role, my guy. I'm speaking from experience. I once spectated a pair of CI DCs on USA and watched them struggle for like an hour to steal some 008 syringes because they couldn't figure out how to hack a CL4 or that you couldn't door fault an airlock - and not once did E-11 check or in any way notice this. CI raids would also consistently be stopped at the EZ elevator, whereas on UK, if an elevator push fails (or they might just deliberately do it), UK CI will just hold back and keep Foundation from getting to surface at all as like their whole raid. UK CI use actual tactics, whereas USA CI is like infinite monkey theory.
 
Suggestion Denied​


Hi @Kisuke,

Thanks for taking the time to make a server suggestion.
The Content Team has chosen to deny your suggestion due to the following reasons.

This change aims to make Type-blue a more supportive role and due to various complaints that it was unfun to play against because of a few abilities. It is not meant to be the role it was previously which served like a One-man army.

Your suggestion will now be locked and marked as denied.​
 
  • Like
Reactions: Emilia Foddg
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back