Main > Gameplay

Major and Minor Playstyles

<< < (3/14) > >>

macmacnick:
Also, shouldn't there be for the minor styles, a 'Bait' designation, designed to lure one or more opponents into a trap waiting, such as a dual burst hwacha barrage from a galleon that has its allied squid doing the baiting? (more significant in 3v3 play, squid bait leads to a disable galleon for control, then squid switches into offensive control, or even reactive DPS.)

Sammy B. T.:
That is not so much a style as it is a specific tactic. The more specific a classification system goes, the less useful it is for broad observations and ease of access and you get just a list of everything.

I would say the three ranges (short, mid, and long) would be further minor styles. A merc/heavy flak spire and a gat/mort pyra would both be type A, however their play style differs tremondously.

Long range is characterized but low risk in beginning engagement but high risk once in engagement due to missing shots with low clip guns or getting rushed. Short range is the opposite, high risk in beginning engagement low risk once in engagement due to high dps nature of close range. Mid range is clearly the hybrid of the two.




For me, I had always classified by two metrics. Range and kill v disable. I like yours better

Mod Josie:
The Spire truly is a strange creature. My favourite Spire build does exactly what a Spire isn't meant to do. It works as a [C] ship and tends to work well alone.

I coat my Spire in mines and use those with Tar to split allied ships off from each other. The other weapons unleash their fury and the dust clears either with my own ship being annihilated or with my enemies confused and decimated.

This is an excellent strategic post and is going on my Favourites :D

redria:
I'm glad everyone likes this post so much. ^.^

Tonight I'll try to post a first draft of how I'd classify each weapon for discussion.

In the meantime, since I have a hard time being neutral, what style/blend do you prefer (alone or in a team) and why?

I have a hard time writing this stuff because I love close range control over aggressive and reactive, and I can't even do it properly. I fly hybrid [A]-[C] because I'm impatient and not a tactician. I fly by the seat of my pants and make up for it by being aggressive. But I love control. I feel like true control requires the pilot to be on top of everything at once. Since you are playing for longer engagements, you have a much greater opportunity to make a mistake. Since other people fly with more killing power, your mistakes are punished with death much more often. I feel like while part of the reason that we don't see control in competitive as often is that the control ships may be slightly underpowered in the current meta, the other reason is that we just aren't good enough (myself included). Puppy Fur is the best control pilot I know, with Alistair Silas probably coming in second with his hwacha-fish. Simply put, I can't do what they do. I don't even know how they do it. I can't tell you how much I wish Alistair hadn't had DC problems against the gents so that we could have shown him off in competitive, and you all saw how well Puppy's squid did. It makes for more tense, more action packed matches as things are constantly happening, with ships always inches from a fatal mistake. I am far too impatient for reactive play, and pure aggressive play usually feels somewhat monotone to me. The control aspect of things is so vastly different and I love it. ^.^

Alistair MacBain:
I cant claim a preferred style. Due to my experience as a gent i am very used to longrange control engagements. Thats where i know the most and thats what i can do best.
However i also like good old reaction play.
The only thing where i dont feel to comfortable is closerange aggresive play. Take the beating like a man and then just outdps the enemy.
I am limited by the Cooldowns and numbers. I know i did everything correct but i still take alot of permahull damage.
Yes it is a great feeling when it works out and the enemy ships breaks apart but i always have the fact in mind that i did take alot of permahull damage and will probably not survive a similiar fight again.
In a control or reactive ship the hwacha or lumberjack will prevent the enemy from shooting at me so i know i got more time even with less permahull. It saves my ass.
I cant count the times anymore where the hwacha on the gents pagoda gave me the time i needed to rebuild the armor and saved us. Couldnt do such a thing with a aggresive dps ship.
I also know that it doesnt matter to much if the enemy is behind a cloud or way across the map. I know that we can hit him and wear him down slowly but surely. I also know that they wont reach us if they charge us straight. I can simply prevent him from doing it again.
For a aggresive dps build i first need to get in close to make things work.


Dont missunderstand me ...
I really like to watch those things. I felt the pain when a good CSR rush killed us and we couldnt do anything against their superior focus fire. Or the well executed split when one of their ships just played distraction and even if i expected it i couldnt do something just because our weapons werent in arc and they could pick us off.
Ive also felt the pain of a well prepared Thrall ambush.

Those are great things and i really like to see such things. Its just that i am not used to fly on such a ship.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page