Bushwhacker + Spotting

(JJMAJR) #1

Bushwhacker’s turret (not-so) recently got a very big nerf. The cooldown time regained upon reclaiming his turret was decreased, while the DPS is at a paltry 40.

I think it would be a good time to suggest a buff idea for Bushwhacker.

The turret should automatically lock on to enemies that have been spotted recently and are in the turret’s view.

This would make Lock-On dramatically less important for Bushwhacker and make a lot of the previously-trash loadouts for the class viable. It would also create synergy between Bushwhacker and spotters like Redeye or Vasilli.

(ProfPlump) #2

Interesting idea, but I think what Bushwhacker really needs is a much faster cooldown after reclaiming a turret. Bushwhacker should be left with a long cooldown if his turret is destroyed, but if he reclaims it he should only have about 2-3 seconds before he can redeploy.

(frostyvampire) #3

A buff that I think would be nice is allow all Bushwhackers repair friendly deployables by melee’ing them. Noobs will probably not use it but good Bushwhackers would camp a health station or their own sentry and keep them at full health until Bush himself dies.
You will be able to hide behind your own sentry which will be in a corner (so you can’t get flanked) and hold left click to constantly heal your sentry and getting easier kills.

But your idea is nice too, I can add it to my overall balancing thread (I will credit you of course, if you don’t want it to be there just reply and I will remove it)

(hoyes) #4

@FrostyVampire isn’t that just tf2? Nah Bushwhacker needs some sort of buff to the turret, to which i am suggesting a health buff and the ability to rotate the turrets placemeng. You would be able to hide it better and would be more formidable in a 1v1 situation.

(ProfPlump) #5

[quote=“FrostyVampire;193904”]A buff that I think would be nice is allow all Bushwhackers repair friendly deployables by melee’ing them. Noobs will probably not use it but good Bushwhackers would camp a health station or their own sentry and keep them at full health until Bush himself dies.
You will be able to hide behind your own sentry which will be in a corner (so you can’t get flanked) and hold left click to constantly heal your sentry and getting easier kills.

But your idea is nice too, I can add it to my overall balancing thread (I will credit you of course, if you don’t want it to be there just reply and I will remove it)[/quote]

I like the idea, but I also think that it would become overpowered very quickly on health stations - maybe if his ability to repair deployables was like the ‘help up’ system, rather than the usual repairing system?

(JJMAJR) #6

I am trying to address more than just the weak nature of Bushwhacker’s turret. It reacts too slowly to enemies to be of much use without Lock-On being on his loadout cards. This makes Lock-On a mandatory perk, which isn’t really a good thing.

None of these ideas you came up with would address this problem.

Yes, I do wish to be able to have more cooldown time for reclaiming Bushwhacker’s turret, but I also want the turret to be able to function effectively without requiring Lock-On.

(ProfPlump) #7

[quote=“JJMAJR;194131”]I am trying to address more than just the weak nature of Bushwhacker’s turret. It reacts too slowly to enemies to be of much use without Lock-On being on his loadout cards. This makes Lock-On a mandatory perk, which isn’t really a good thing.

None of these ideas you came up with would address this problem.

Yes, I do wish to be able to have more cooldown time for reclaiming Bushwhacker’s turret, but I also want the turret to be able to function effectively without requiring Lock-On.[/quote]

You want MORE cooldown time for the turret…? Wtf dude - get out.

In a game that is so fast paced, a Bushwhacker who doesn’t move his turret every few SECONDS in a pro match will lose that turret to an indirect shot from a nader/fletcher/fragger/stoker or even an Arty/Kira if the location is outside. As soon as its position is given away and the opponents learn where it is, it becomes pretty much worthless against a decent team, which is why you need to reclaim and replace whenever you can.

Having long cooldown times limits this flexible, strategic play for defence, and COMPLETELY messes him up if he is on the attacking team (because he needs to keep reclaiming the turret as he pushes up, whereas on defence you don’t need to move it as often). Before this (stupid) reclaim-time nerf was implemented, Bushwhacker players on the attacking team would be able to jump around a corner, drop a turret, then start firing at the enemies with his primary as the turret sets up. This could actually put the defenders at a large disadvantage if the turret was placed well and if it wasn’t reacted to fast enough. This strategy could be done corner after corner after corner if you kept reclaiming it after each push, but NOW you have to wait so long to have that turret replenished after reclaiming that your enemies get more than enough time to set up their own defence for you with health stations/proxy mines/other turrets.

So yeah, definitely don’t give him ANY longer cooldowns for his turret, especially on the reclaiming timer.

(JJMAJR) #8

More cooldown time recovered for reclaiming the turret. I would guess that this statement could be taken out of context…

(Drac0rion) #9

In my opinion the Turret like many other heavy defense favored abilities could use a slight rework, not just buff/nerf by the numbers.

If the turret isn’t destroyed, I do think it should be easily reclaimed to reposition it.
Personally I’d prefer the turret to be less of a second gunner you can simply deploy that doesn’t need to reload/overheat and auto aims, but I’d like to to be more of a distraction.

So I’d suggest a faster deploy time with maybe additional deploying range, reduced dps, but increased HP and increased surveying radius.
With decent HP, dropping a turret mid fight would make it fairly scary and it wouldn’t be that heavily defense favored. This way the turret would become more of a sentry alerting you and your team than just gun down whoever happens to wander into its range.

The value of Lock-On would still be reduced as it wouldn’t be a dps machine it used to be and also it would be a nerf to defense Bushwhacker while buffing the offense Bushwhacker.
Playing him now on offense, players might favor the Steady augment while the defense would still prefer Lock-On, actually creating some variety.

Teams pushing as a group could then take over an area held down by a defensive turret easier and also the offense Bushwhacker could then bring more pressure to a room just by dropping that turret mid combat, actually forcing the defense to either focus it down together or take cover.

The next part to make Bushwhacker more viable would be to balance him compared to Fletcher, but I think I’m already dragging it long with my usual walls of text…

(ProfPlump) #10

I’d personally just like to see some of the cards have some of the useless augments replaced with Extra Supplies, so that they reduce the cooldown for the turret respawn.

It’d be best if it weren’t on any of the KEK-10 loadouts though - that way there’d be a trade off between a better primary and better turret regeneration.

(JJMAJR) #11

[quote=“ProfPlump;194350”]I’d personally just like to see some of the cards have some of the useless augments replaced with Extra Supplies, so that they reduce the cooldown for the turret respawn.

It’d be best if it weren’t on any of the KEK-10 loadouts though - that way there’d be a trade off between a better primary and better turret regeneration.[/quote]
Amazing idea. Brilliant, even.

[quote=“Dracorion;194331”]Short version:

If the turret isn’t destroyed, I do think it should be easily reclaimed to reposition it.
The turret should only serve as a distraction instead of as a second player.

Faster deploy time.
Added deploying range.
Reduced DPS
Increased HP
Increased surveying radius.

With these changes dropping a turret mid fight would be a favorable offensive maneuver.

The value of Lock-On would be reduced because the turret wouldn’t be able to kill things as effectively, but it would be a nerf to defense and a buff to offense.[/quote]
The turret has 40 DPS; trust me, I measured the TTK it has on a proxy. That’s extremely low. Reduce it any further and an Aura would be a direct counter to Bushwhacker.
I like having the turret act as a second player, being able to help me watch large maps with fewer people or giving support fire that could push my DPS above what a shotgun does in point blank.
I like Gallery for that reason, and again for that reason it is great for players who like using turrets, snipers, or Sparks. I find that it’s not so great for fire support characters or Fletcher though.

And oh boy I love having a break from that dose of poison.
(And to be clear, fire supports are actually not the problem I’m referring to.)

Finally, objective specialists are supposed to have incredibly defensive abilities to offset their offensive-oriented passive. Fletcher is an exception to this rule, an outlier.

(Drac0rion) #12

[quote=“JJMAJR;194418”]
objective specialists are supposed to have incredibly defensive abilities to offset their offensive-oriented passive. Fletcher is an exception to this rule, an outlier.[/quote]

I don’t see why engineers are supposed to be that heavily defense favored, I mean I simply don’t like to play any engineer other than Fletcher for offense just cause of his ability.
Why do I have to be limited to a single merc out of 3 in that role just to have an effective ability on offense?
And lets say Fletcher’s ability will be nerfed to the ground on offense, would that mean I’d have to settle for an engineer without an effective offensive ability?
Or did I miss it somewhere that stated that X mercs are only meant for defense? Kind of like Overwatch?

I mean sure, certain abilities will remain more effective on offense or defense, but there are still many ways to reduce that gap.
I don’t think any merc is too defense favored to need a rework, but there’s always room to improve and there’s no harm in theorycrafting.

(hoyes) #13

In my opinion the turret is simply not powerful enough to fend for itself let alone get kills. I undestand it is more of a tactical defrnsive tool, but i think it needs to be better at getting kills. I really think they need to buff the turrets damage as 40dps is terrible. Something like 70 would suffice and then would justify the cooldown nerf with bad placement being detrimental in top of an already long cooldown.

(JJMAJR) #14

[quote=“Dracorion;194449”][quote=“JJMAJR;194418”]
objective specialists are supposed to have incredibly defensive abilities to offset their offensive-oriented passive. Fletcher is an exception to this rule, an outlier.[/quote]

I don’t see why engineers are supposed to be that heavily defense favored, I mean I simply don’t like to play any engineer other than Fletcher for offense just cause of his ability.
Why do I have to be limited to a single merc out of 3 in that role just to have an effective ability on offense?
And lets say Fletcher’s ability will be nerfed to the ground on offense, would that mean I’d have to settle for an engineer without an effective offensive ability?
Or did I miss it somewhere that stated that X mercs are only meant for defense? Kind of like Overwatch?

I mean sure, certain abilities will remain more effective on offense or defense, but there are still many ways to reduce that gap.
I don’t think any merc is too defense favored to need a rework, but there’s always room to improve and there’s no harm in theorycrafting.[/quote]

Okay, look at this:

Offense:
[spoiler]Medics are able to heal attackers and allow them to remain fighting until defenses break. They also revive attackers to keep the offensive push going.

Fire supports wipe out defensive positions.

Recons give information to friendlies and allow players to predict where the enemy would be.

Assaults are on the front line.

Objective specialists are supposed to be the ones that use their double objective completion speed in order to start a bomb or repair a vehicle.[/spoiler]

Defense:
[spoiler]Medics share their role of healing and recovering friendlies as their offensive counterparts.

Fire supports deny an area, prevent enemies from encroaching on their space, and destroy vehicles faster than everyone else.

Recons use their spotting to detect enemies breaking through their defenses, and use their increased range to help offset that.

Assaults destroy enemy forces that try to break through.

Objective specialists are supposed to help the assaults prevent enemies from breaking through, otherwise they will only see use when something goes wrong.[/spoiler]

Or, to be blunt, engineers need to be better at holding the fort than attacking an objective, otherwise they wouldn’t be used in defense at all, or be overpowered as fuck like Fletcher.

Fletcher is pretty good at making traps. He’s also a better Nader because of said trap-making, explosive spam, and the ability to capitalize off of an offensive ability by sealing victories faster than anyone else.

Excuse my previous hyperbole, but I disagree with the idea of making everyone with doubled capping speed as powerful as Fletcher.

(ProfPlump) #15

[quote=“JJMAJR;194494”][quote=“Dracorion;194449”][quote=“JJMAJR;194418”]
objective specialists are supposed to have incredibly defensive abilities to offset their offensive-oriented passive. Fletcher is an exception to this rule, an outlier.[/quote]

I don’t see why engineers are supposed to be that heavily defense favored, I mean I simply don’t like to play any engineer other than Fletcher for offense just cause of his ability.
Why do I have to be limited to a single merc out of 3 in that role just to have an effective ability on offense?
And lets say Fletcher’s ability will be nerfed to the ground on offense, would that mean I’d have to settle for an engineer without an effective offensive ability?
Or did I miss it somewhere that stated that X mercs are only meant for defense? Kind of like Overwatch?

I mean sure, certain abilities will remain more effective on offense or defense, but there are still many ways to reduce that gap.
I don’t think any merc is too defense favored to need a rework, but there’s always room to improve and there’s no harm in theorycrafting.[/quote]

Okay, look at this:

Offense:
[spoiler]Medics are able to heal attackers and allow them to remain fighting until defenses break. They also revive attackers to keep the offensive push going.

Fire supports wipe out defensive positions.

Recons give information to friendlies and allow players to predict where the enemy would be.

Assaults are on the front line.

Objective specialists are supposed to be the ones that use their double objective completion speed in order to start a bomb or repair a vehicle.[/spoiler]

Defense:
[spoiler]Medics share their role of healing and recovering friendlies as their offensive counterparts.

Fire supports deny an area, prevent enemies from encroaching on their space, and destroy vehicles faster than everyone else.

Recons use their spotting to detect enemies breaking through their defenses, and use their increased range to help offset that.

Assaults destroy enemy forces that try to break through.

Objective specialists are supposed to help the assaults prevent enemies from breaking through, otherwise they will only see use when something goes wrong.[/spoiler]

Or, to be blunt, engineers need to be better at holding the fort than attacking an objective, otherwise they wouldn’t be used in defense at all, or be overpowered as @$!# like Fletcher.

Fletcher is pretty good at making traps. He’s also a better Nader because of said trap-making, explosive spam, and the ability to capitalize off of an offensive ability by sealing victories faster than anyone else.

Excuse my previous hyperbole, but I disagree with the idea of making everyone with doubled capping speed as powerful as Fletcher.[/quote]

He’s [Fletcher] not a STRICTLY better Nader, for the record - the ability to rebound nades around corners is HUGELY advantageous in some situations.

(Drac0rion) #16

So the engineer passive wouldn’t matter on defense to disarm faster?

I don’t see how the engineer passive has any different effect on offense vs defense. They arm faster, disarm faster, repair faster, they are only not needed for their passive when the objective is to carry something as I don’t think they have any advantages there.

Arming twice as fast is just as good as disarming twice as fast, so I don’t see a reason why their abilities should be more focused on defense.

(bizarreRectangle) #17

@JJMAJR Alright you hate fletcher, we get it…

(JJMAJR) #18

[quote=“Dracorion;194559”]So the engineer passive wouldn’t matter on defense to disarm faster?

I don’t see how the engineer passive has any different effect on offense vs defense. They arm faster, disarm faster, repair faster, they are only not needed for their passive when the objective is to carry something as I don’t think they have any advantages there.

Arming twice as fast is just as good as disarming twice as fast, so I don’t see a reason why their abilities should be more focused on defense.[/quote]
[spoiler]The passive wouldn’t matter unless the attacking team got themselves into a position where they are able to fulfill their objective and the defending team needs to push back, in which an offensive ability in tandem with an Objective Specialist would be the best way to solve the problem, and a defensive ability wouldn’t be able to pull any weight.

The engineer passive is only helpful when players need to push, but it is extremely helpful in that regard. Therefore engineers need another ability that would work best when they are standing their ground, and trying to prevent a push from occurring.[/spoiler]

[spoiler]Bushwhacker, Turtle, and Proxy have abilities that are easily countered when the player tries to use said ability to advance, but work better as a tool for holding a position. Their passive makes up for the fact that they can’t advance as effectively as other mercs.

Fletcher has an ability that, as it works right now, enables the player to advance as effectively as an Assault. Therefore he’s the first character that comes to mind when players need to address a problem (DEFUSE THE F**KING C4!) in defense, or pull weight in offense.[/spoiler]

You didn’t want to read all that? Here’s a summary.
Defensive abilities are useless when players need to disarm C4.

But, it’s situational. 7 times out of 10 Fletcher and Nader share a similar ability, and lay down the enemy with a barrage of explosives.

(Drac0rion) #19

I’m sorry, but I can’t follow your logic @JJMAJR.

Firstly I still don’t understand how the objective specialist passive is offensive oriented when it fills the same role on defense and secondly, why are engineer abilities meant to be defense focused.

Then how do the other, currently defensive abilities correspond to other roles.
Rhino’s minigun, due to it’s range and mobility I don’t think anyone would consider it equally effective on offense. Why does it have to be so immobile next to other assault abilities?
For medics, why should Aura’s ability be that immobile, leaving it more defense favored compared to the abilities of other medics?

I’m asking the same questions again, because I found your last comment not to be well worded. Either that or my skills in english are simply lacking and the only excuse for that I can use is that it’s my fourth language.

(JJMAJR) #20

[quote=“Dracorion;194690”]I’m sorry, but I can’t follow your logic @JJMAJR.

Firstly I still don’t understand how the objective specialist passive is offensive oriented when it fills the same role on defense and secondly, why are engineer abilities meant to be defense focused.

Then how do the other, currently defensive abilities correspond to other roles.
Rhino’s minigun, due to it’s range and mobility I don’t think anyone would consider it equally effective on offense. Why does it have to be so immobile next to other assault abilities?
For medics, why should Aura’s ability be that immobile, leaving it more defense favored compared to the abilities of other medics?

I’m asking the same questions again, because I found your last comment not to be well worded. Either that or my skills in english are simply lacking and the only excuse for that I can use is that it’s my fourth language.[/quote]

-Rhino’s trash.
-Aura is able to keep a offensive push going by keeping attackers alive; just because that her health station is immobile doesn’t mean that the patients are too.

Most of the time in this game, defense would be in a position where objective specialist wouldn’t be really helpful whatsoever, while offense would be in a position where most objective specialist abilities wouldn’t be helpful whatsoever.

When C4 is armed, this situation reverses. At the same time, however, offense wouldn’t benefit as much from a defensive ability compared to what the situation is like before the C4 is armed.

Objective Specialist is used to complement extremely defensive abilities. It’s a passive ability that works best when ramping up/maintaining defenses would be the least optimal decision for the team.