Info > Feedback and Suggestions
Please Make Gunners Useful
Thomas:
Personally I think that says more about the debate than anything else. That's a screen taken from past videos of the Cogs Tournament Finals. Meaning that these are high skill teams going for the gold. You'll notice that most of them opt out of taking a gunner. To put it another way, when it comes down to getting every advantage you can for the best chance of victory, they chose to get rid of the gunner.
Gunning does have some advantages over being an engineer, there's no doubt about it. But those advantages are minimal at best. And when you weigh the pros and cons of that last slot being an engineer or gunner, competitive teams often go with engineer.
So why do other people still require a gunner on their team? Maybe they feel they should have one just in case, or maybe it's just to help define the roles on the ship. Usually they just like having a gunner, as most of the time they'll be using one particular ammo type, switching to the other types relatively infrequently. Of course it all really comes down the ships and guns being used.
Either way, Muse seems to have plans in the works to address this.
Imagine:
Look, there's arguments to be made from both sides, but using a screenshot for something... how many months ago from two teams that are(were) known to not use gunners, on the ships which may or may not arguably be able to get away with not using a gunner the best (because, btw, there is a gunner on the galleon) isn't going to give you much ground to stand on.
HamsterIV:
I alternate between 3 engineers and 1 gunner 2 engineers depending on the build I am running. There is a place for gunners in this game but it is not as large as the place for engineers or even pilots.
The impression that gunners are useless comes from the fact that inexperienced gunners are useless. Unlike inexperienced engineers, whose actions are easy to observe and correct, it is hard to get a handle on what the gunner has done wrong and what he needs to do to fix it. Also the act of shooting in GOI is more different from most FPS's than the act of navigation. People who come in with experience with other FPS's tend to have a higher navigation ability than shooting ability which make them better engineers than gunners.
Gunners tend to occupy a mission critical roll. When they under perform they bring down the entire ship in a way that a 2nd or 3rd engineer can not do. It is safer when flying with random PUG's to favor engineers so that a poor gunner doesn't bring down the performance of the entire ship.
Alistair MacBain:
I still say the problem are the guns not designed for 3 ammo types and not the gunner as class.
The most of the ships in your example were a pyra or a junker. Both of this ship can utilize a gat mortar very well and currently both guns dont need more than 1 ammo.
RearAdmiralZill:
--- Quote ---It's not really a matter of opinion, though.
--- End quote ---
I give you this thread, and any other "gunner is useless, please buff" thread as proof. I do not agree with your, nor any other person's opinion to buff x or change y mechanic to somehow make a gunner "better."
I build my ships to use a gunner. I train my gunners to use various ammo types, even on light weapons. This is my opinion.
--- Quote from: Alistair MacBain on October 25, 2013, 03:37:09 pm ---I still say the problem are the guns not designed for 3 ammo types and not the gunner as class.
The most of the ships in your example were a pyra or a junker. Both of this ship can utilize a gat mortar very well and currently both guns dont need more than 1 ammo.
--- End quote ---
All light guns can benefit from 2-3 ammo types. A junker with different guns on its broadsides will benefit highly from a gunner vs an engineer, which forces a pilot to take the same guns (gat/mortar example) on each of his broadsides. That is the tradeoff one makes out of an opinion that it is better.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version