Main > Gameplay
GUNS & GUNNER SKILLS Balance Discussion v1.3.1
Captain McFaceSmashy:
@AWKM
Ah, good to know there's still stuff coming out gunwise, hopefully one of those gun will be the famous junker-sized heavy gun? (I can always hold out hope <3)
I'm not too familiar with firing the heavy flak myself, but from what I've heard my gunner say it feels like both bullets don't go to the same spot, or at least don't originate from the same spot (though this may in fact just be because of slight ship movement in between shots).
Now back to the meta of the guns. While I agree making drastic changes with new guns just on the doorstep isn't the best idea, I do have to point a few things out.
With guns not being so much a rock-paper-scissors as they are a choice of tactics (none of the guns can directly counter each other, it's just not designed that way) adding new guns will open up more tactical options, and possibly invalidate old ones in some of their current roles if some of the new guns are clearly superior in that role to current ones.
However! This will only increase, not decrease the amount of guns competing for a certain firing arc on the ship. All of the guns that are currently being outclassed for a certain role (whether disabler or armour piercer or w/ever) at a certain range, will STILL be outclassed if you add in more guns, they won't suddenly become a viable option.
With all the guns competing for their spots on a ship they MUST have a clear role and function, even if that function is: average at most things. Currently we have 2 guns (artemis and mercury) competing for the role of long range disabler, with the mercury both being better at disabling AND having the additional function of piercing damage (which you want to have because there's plenty of options for explosive damage).
Let's say you add another (long range) armour piercer into the game, which is better at the mercury at piercing armour, but doesn't do a good job at disabling ships (it's full piercing damage, for example). The choice now becomes: do I want the mercury for both piercing and disabling, but a bit less piercing than I could have, or do I want the full damage piercing gun?
Now let's say you add another (long range) disabler into the game, which is better at the mercury at disabling components (yeah, OP, I know, but follow with me here). The choice now becomes: do I want the mercury for piercing armour and disabling, but less disabling than I could have, or do I want the full disabling gun?
If the new gun is better at both then there isn't any choice, you take the new gun, period.
As you may notice, in ALL of those cases there is no reason to pick the artemis. It's only other attribute is it's explosive damage, which you can get alot more of elsewhere, thus it isn't in a viable position for any slot *unless* it's firing arc allows you to shoot from that slot when you otherwise couldn't (and for the vast majority of ships that's not an issue anyway, only the Spire comes to mind) That wide firing arc is just too ship-specific of a feature to be considered a viable role, when every other gun can be part of a build in most positions with a bit of creative tactics.
Let's not even get started on the banshee if you add in another long-range fire-starter that's better at starting fires at long range. What does it's niche become then, it's explosive damage? Most everything with explosive damage has decent range on it(and a ton more damage).
The point is that adding more guns competing for roles (unless all of the guns added are very niche) won't in any way solve the current problems. At best it remains at the status quo with only empty gaps being filled in (like a medium piercing gun) but at worst the new guns are either useless or outclass one or more of the other guns in their role as described above. Guns that are currently useless will remain useless regardless, and as such you can probably get away with fixing those sooner rather than later.
Edit:
I just realized that if you DID add in a medium piercing gun which has the kind of range and accuracy of the mercury then it *might* be viable to replace the usual mercury slots with artemis slots(on a spire/galleon), to have a very long-range damage-disabling build, though I would still argue at most practical ranges (e.g. there's clouds in the way now, alot of them in fact) the light flak or scylla with lesmok rounds would outperform it when it comes to destroying ships, and the mercury would still out perform it for disabling them.
Captain Smollett:
@Captain McFaceSmashy
Due to the recent changes in the Mercury and Lesmok ammunition, the Mercury doesn't heavily outclass the Artemis as a disabler anymore. Try out the Artemis with Lesmok at long range and Burst at close range. It can really wreak havoc on enemy systems.
Captain McFaceSmashy:
@ Captain Smollet
Yes with burst rounds at close range it can do better than a mercury. At close range however, a carronade does it's job better anyway so if that's your plan, why bring an artemis?
At long range the lack of anywhere near as good of a zoom as the mercury, a slow fire rate, as well the fact it takes 2 direct hits to take out a component compared to the 1 of a mercury AND that if you miss with the mercury you will likely hit the hull and STILL do a crapton of damage.... it's just inferior on the whole.
Surette:
--- Quote from: Captain McFaceSmashy on August 17, 2013, 06:34:10 am ---@ Captain Smollet
Yes with burst rounds at close range it can do better than a mercury. At close range however, a carronade does it's job better anyway so if that's your plan, why bring an artemis?
At long range the lack of anywhere near as good of a zoom as the mercury, a slow fire rate, as well the fact it takes 2 direct hits to take out a component compared to the 1 of a mercury AND that if you miss with the mercury you will likely hit the hull and STILL do a crapton of damage.... it's just inferior on the whole.
--- End quote ---
You have to consider other variables. What are you using the gun in combination with? What's your style of flying? Depending on the answers to those questions, the small arc of the mercury will make essentially useless. You need a very particular style of play to give the mercury its maximum effectiveness. Also if you're using another piercer, you probably would rather have an artemis for its explosive damage rather than more piercing in the mercury. Two different guns for two different strategies. You can't just claim it's inferior because they don't fulfill the same purpose, you can't compare the two except for the fact that they're both longer range.
Captain McFaceSmashy:
I hope you've read the entirety of my first post, because if you didn't this does indeed not seem as obvious as it should be. (I'm asuming you didn't so let me re-iterate)
We're not JUST comparing the artemis directly with the mercury. We're comparing it with ALL other guns you could want to have in that slot.
at long range the smaller firing arc of the mercury isn't a problem, you're at long range, they aren't about to speed past you and out of your firing arc. Explosive damage at long range is available in larger quantities from the flak cannon and mortar. While, yes, they aren't AS long range as the artemis, the artemis explosive damage isn't anywhere near as high, and with the damage mattering most when the armour is down, it's slow fire-rate makes it an inferior choice there as well.
Short range the other explosive damage guns outperform it even more, and the carronade is superior for disabling components.
The problem with the artemis is that, yes, you indeed load out a ship with a certain flying style and tactics in mind. Since for any given role the artemis is outperformed by a different gun, the only time you put on the artemis in a slot is if the answer to "Can I fire any other gun with a smaller firing arc from this position" is no. Not only is that too ship specific for a gun's role (imho), it's just a shitty feeling for a gun to have. It should feel good to put a certain gun on a certain position, with the intention to actually use it as part of your tactics as such. Not "Well I can't really put anything better there".
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version