with your idea
Example ship: Junker
Pilot:Claw kero Hydro,wrench,burst
Gunner:wrench,chem, burst lesmock
Gunner:Wrench,Buff,Burst lesmock
Gunner:Wrench,Greased Burst lesmock
Now the junker is optimal at 2 ranges and has all types of damage covered and the ability to buff .. engineer would become obsolete wrench chem and wrench buff would be the standard loadouts and say a 3rd gunner take 3 ammo types, i really don't see a need to change the class system, so drastically and it really would unbalance the system why can the pilot not get the choice for a second repair tool or the engineer the choice of a second ammo in sacrifice to one of there designated tools?
I really do not feel the gunner is an under powered class just under appreciated, 3 ammo choices are not for every light gun but can be applied to every heavy weapon i.e lumberjack lesmock burst loch is essential for all 3 ranges to remain effective within arming time,
I think it comes down to play style some captains prefer damage over tank so they take more aggressive crew load outs and need a gunner where some are more tank and snipe and take 3-4 engineers.
To counter your argument of why you can not see this not working i say why is it needed in the first place? if you change one class to have the ability to pick and choose the other 2 have to have it as well,
I think that junker will be easier to kill though, because you can't rebuild or repair as fast.. So if you fail to kill the enemy ship quickly you lose. Also if fire gets out of hand you won't be able to keep up.
But I wouldn't mind seeing that as a viable option for a crew personally, as you sacrifice better repairing power for more dmg potential - more potential effective crew loadouts would be more interesting I think.
Also I don't think the gunner class is underpowered either, but I do think it is underused because its benefits are not useful in as many situations as an engies benefits.
I also disagree this change would make engi useless, as I doubt 2 tools could main engineer most ships... Nor do I think that its necessarily better then engi in the middle slot as that would depend what your trying to achieve.. (ie as you say more aggressive/risky play or more passive/defensive play) - it should however make gunner chosen more often in the "gunner" spot.
I don't know if it is needed persay (I mean nothing is even needed anymore in the game except maybe balance fixes but that's debatable.. ), but I think it would open up more options to what crews to use.. rather then keeping it limited.. which might make more interesting games.. Maybe.. So I think that's the main benefit of the change..
Also I don't agree all classes should need to have to pick because pilot is already the best at piloting.. and engi is already optimal for repairing. Its just gunners are not always optimal for the "gunner spot" of a ship.
I think better solution to gunner problem is to remove dfailt ammo, and make it a choice of loadout - check https://gunsoficarus.com/community/forum/index.php/topic,3576.0.html
Personally I don't like this idea.. as I feel it takes away from the game more then it adds..
The problem here is that people can only use 1 ammo type when shooing and gunner doesn't seem that special if you think about it.
To make the gunner special, wouldn't it be better if they can do an small percentage more damage then other classes?
This amount should be around 5-7% I guess. It's small but its still more damage.
I personally don't like the passives idea because I like the all classes are equal except for there equipment options..
I don't dislike the idea of gunner tools(which I noticed is brought up a bit on this topic) though to add more value to them but it still wouldn't make them viable in more spots (maybe depends what they did with it I guess).. just make them better at what they do in the spots they are in.
Like geo said, gunners have to be used correctly.
Does your ship have a heavy weapon on it? Then you should have a gunner. Each heavy weapon can utilize at least 3 types of ammo.
Do you have a mine launcher as a featured weapon? Gunner, so you can modify the deploy range.
Do you have a hades? Lesmok-burst-greased, so you can fight effectively at almost any range.
Gunners always increase your situational ability. Their ammo types allow them to begin engaging an enemy sooner and maintain maximum dps throughout the engagement.
If you want to stay at one range specifically and never deviate, then maybe you don't need a gunner. But if you can't maintain that range, then your gungineers are going to be helpless.
If I am using a gunner, I want them carrying 3 ammo types to maximize their capabilities. 2 ammos and 2 repair tools makes them a glorified gungineer.
While I agree gunner is fine in all the standard gunner spots atm... Why should gunner be a situational class? Why is it bad if gunners are able to be more versatile as engineer is?
I feel the reason we opt for a 3rd engi over a gunner in the situations you do, is because the gunner can't repair and buff or just the lack of repair power.. and you don't
need more then one ammo (though two could be useful.. the second ammo doesn't out-weigh the buffs worth or the extra repair ability depending on the spot).
I do realize the current place of a gunner and its value in those places - but then those are its only spots. It is currently almost always -save a handful of load-outs- where two gunners is viable or sense-able, and many ships lose more from having a gunner then it gains.
Also if you had a glorified gungineer would you find more places to use a gunner in your ship choices? As that would be the benefit I'd want to see. Also they can still opt to bring 3 ammo types so its not like they stop filling that role. It isn't an either or question in this case.. as they would be able to opt to be either or.
My solution to the gunner problem is that there is no problem, leave the class as is and think more carefully how to utilize them.
I agree that there isn't anything wrong with the class, I just think its not able to be used in enough areas effectively.. and so limits crews to only a few combinations that are really useful.
I do suspect this change would still only make 1 gunner two engi ships more practical and not necessarily open up a lot of 2 gunner one engi able ships.. But it would make more ships able to be at lest some what effective even with two gunners compared to now.
2 ammo types and 2 repair tools makes them overpowered.
Possible issue.
Considering a gunner could buff lesmonk hades or burst hades - or Be able to buff and shoot two different guns that are optimal with two different ammos.. Also chemspray gunner = even less use for heatsink.
Also mallet/spanner burst/heavy clip for hawcha.. easier to repair with out someone to help while not losing anything.. really.. (similar for all heavy guns really).. You do sacrifice putting out fires so you can have two ammo's for hawcha.. but since you already would have a gunner on hawcha usually - its all gain in this case.
Which could be balance issues potentially, depending.
It would make gunner more useful in places he isn't usually needed.. and make it possibly useful for you to bring two gunners in more situations - but if the above issues and like issues really are game breaking issues then it could be bad for that reason.
But I don't know if I agree that they would be that game breaking..
Another issue is making to many effective crew combinations maybe make the system more confusing then having it very simplistic as it is now...
