The buff hammer, and guns.

[RearAdmiralZill]

I feel it's been long enough for this thread to finally get started. I want anyone reading or posting to keep in mind this is not a gunner vs engie thread. With that in mind:

The benefit of a buff hammer + special ammo in a gun really seems to counteract what Muse seems to want which is slightly longer engagements over previous patches.

The Gatling currently comes to mind when I think of this scenario. They changed it to a short range gun that fires tons of bullets to break hull. Toss any ammo in there and you get a nice perk but also a new weakness (like greased ammo lowering damage for more ammo and rof). Buff that same gun currently with ammo, and you break the very weakness the ammo introduced, netting an unbalanced result.

Sure, the buff is short, but I honestly think the % damage gained by buffing guns is too high. Discuss.

[shadowsteel]

The problem as I see it, is that buffed guns only have one advantage.

Higher damage per projectile/particle.

So any ammo with a con that lowers damage is going to have that con negated, thereby removing whatever balance the con made.


The simple answer is to remove all cons that reduce damage. Place new cons that reduce a different property.


The other way is to change how the buff hammer works.

Maybe buff the guns other properties but reduce the damage buff. Quicker turning speed or reload speed are good properties to start with.


The most complicated and direct solution is to change buff properties depending on ammo. Give a slight buff to whatever their primary function is.

Examples:

Lesmok + buff = longer range/faster speed.

Greased + buff = quicker firing rate

EDIT: The buff hammer would increase damage on vanilla rounds.



Lemme know what you think Zill.

[Captain Phil]

Why bother having a gunner when the engineer does more damage? Most small guns and a few heavy guns can get off using only one ammo type making the use of a gunner useless. I personally say forget about increasing the damage and increase a different value or two. For instance, how about buffed guns taking less damage so they can keep shooting under fire longer, or quicker turn speed. Just having buffs add damage only helps make gunners obsolete.

[GreyTea]

A buff Artimus with charged rounds is going to become the new broken combo i feel, The increase in artimus usage is becoming the new meta i feel so a Nerf is probable incoming,

Also i feel the buff and charged round combo in general is just overpowered, timed right that is an extra 50% damage per shot so it negates the charges 20% clip reduction like mentioned,

The buff Hammer is a very viable tool for the gunner, over a wrench to self repair the gun,  Hopefully more people relies so the buff hammer is not an instant no on every ship,
But to balance this perhaps  a Nerf for the buff hammer or the rounds them self's possibly?

[Urz]

What if the gun buff reduced incoming damage instead?

[Captain Phil]

Maybe buff the guns other properties but reduce the damage buff. Quicker turning speed or reload speed are good properties to start with. Remember, most guns only use one round, so having buffs that effect different rounds would not achieve anything. For instance, I run greased on gats, so having increased fire rate would be a benefit to me as a guninneer. Buffs need to give assistance, but not in a way making it so you can pass up having different rounds for different scenarios.

Quicker reload speed would count as increased damage output. And the idea of buffs helping a particular ammo type would not solve the issue.

[GreyTea]

What if the gun buff reduced incoming damage instead?

is their an armour ratings on the guns currently? Because that is a genius idea to stop them being instantly taking out

[Captain Phil]

What if the gun buff reduced incoming damage instead?

Thought I said that.. But yea, this would be very nice, especially for galleons. Actually, now that I think about it, I brought up this idea in my boiler room topic. Adding power to the guns to reduce incoming damage and make it easier to repair them.

[RearAdmiralZill]

Well you could change the effect a buff hammer has on guns, but if any of those differences also coincide with an ammo type, you'll get the same problem (ie, turn speed buffs with lesmok).

Again, this is not a gunner vs engie thread. Only look at the tool for the sake of keeping this out of the latter territory.

Easiest route for Muse is to lower the damage %. If we want to go all technical, then Shadow and Phil have fair points. Either change the buff on guns that doesn't just negate an ammo's weakness (ie, buffed gun is now harder to disable by adding x health) or changing ammo. I hesitate to change ammo because then a buff hammer might then be a requirement vs a nice thing to have but not required to win.

[Sammy B. T.]

Before we go about nerfing the buff hammer, shouldn't we first establish that in its current state it has issues. Sure you get the pro of extra damage. However you still have the cons of

Time spent buffing. During this time you are giving up other potential things you should be doing.
Short duration of buff. Requires timing and makes it difficult (though not impossible) to keep up during a fight
Use of a repair tool slot. A buff engineer has to either give up specializing his repair or rebuild or has to sacrifice a fire tool.

I think these make up for the 20% strength.

[RearAdmiralZill]

Before we go about nerfing the buff hammer, shouldn't we first establish that in its current state it has issues. Sure you get the pro of extra damage. However you still have the cons of

Time spent buffing. During this time you are giving up other potential things you should be doing.
Short duration of buff. Requires timing and makes it difficult (though not impossible) to keep up during a fight
Use of a repair tool slot. A buff engineer has to either give up specializing his repair or rebuild or has to sacrifice a fire tool.

I think these make up for the 20% strength.

Pre buffing negates the first con. Subsequent buffing happens during reloads.
The short duration yes, but I know of no gun that takes longer then a buff cycle to unload a clip of ammo, which could equate to a downed hull armor, full disable of a ship, or a kill.
That's a weak con to me given that I value a buff engie on most of my boats anyway. Sure you sacrifice something but buffs don't only work on guns. They will still be valuable. 20% is a rather large boon to a gun in any aspect.

[Captain Phil]

Before we go about nerfing the buff hammer, shouldn't we first establish that in its current state it has issues. Sure you get the pro of extra damage. However you still have the cons of

Time spent buffing. During this time you are giving up other potential things you should be doing.
Short duration of buff. Requires timing and makes it difficult (though not impossible) to keep up during a fight
Use of a repair tool slot. A buff engineer has to either give up specializing his repair or rebuild or has to sacrifice a fire tool.

I think these make up for the 20% strength.

Time spent buffing, Sammy, you know most guns can be kept constantly buffed during reload cycles, and the fact that before most battles all the guns are pre-buffed to get a quick kill. Point is, it is still more worth while to run buff engi then to go gunner (sorry for bringing up class vs class Zill, but currently the buff hammer is a big selling point to not have gunners on a ship, so it is bound to come up.) Also, I would not call this idea a nerf, but a repurposing of the tool. Changing it from a tool to assist in kills to a tool to assist in defense.

[RearAdmiralZill]

(sorry for bringing up class vs class Zill, but currently the buff hammer is a big selling point to not have gunners on a ship, so it is bound to come up.)

I know so I can't fault you entirely. I just don't want this spotlighted as an attack on engies but rather as you put it, a look at the buff hammer on its own.

[Captain Phil]

Don't know about you guys, but anyone else thinking that having the buff hammer reduce damage to guns may also help alleviate the arti problem going on too?

[Sammy B. T.]

First there would need to be an artemis problem. But honestly I feel like reduction of incoming damage would then make the buff only really useful against disablers and its not exactly like the disabler is the meta.

I am not saying the cons of buffing can't be worked around, otherwise I wouldn't use the double buff. However,t hose work arounds require skill and practice and can still cause issues even among seasoned veterans. It makes ammo trickier, it slows down your fire rate and accuracy as you're not spending the reload time getting your next shot aimed.

If all I gained was a more resilient gun then I would never let a buff on my ship in most situations. Decrease the damage, perhaps, I would need to spend some time crunching numbers.

I know its not supposed to be a class vs class thread, but continuing as they have with weapon and ammo specialization, gunners will be equal to buffengineers in more and more cases.