Author Topic: Class Passives!  (Read 10530 times)

Offline Sliced And Diced

  • Member
  • Salutes: 13
    • [♫]
    • 45 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Class Passives!
« on: May 15, 2014, 07:02:32 pm »
To be Honest, i though of this because i want gunners to be more relevant on most ship builds.

Think about it, If a gunner had a passive that makes him reload slightly faster or do slight more damage, he would be picked more often than an engineer.

If an engineer had a passive that make them repair slightly better or rebuild faster, or a captain had passive that can either made the ship steer, move, or take less damage while as using captain items.

I mean think about it if we had a new slot on the character creation menu where you can changes passives depending on your class.  It will add a degree of customization.  And Player can have a more focused build :D

Offline Crafeksterty

  • Member
  • Salutes: 73
    • [GwTh]
    • 17 
    • 28
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Class Passives!
« Reply #1 on: May 15, 2014, 07:16:59 pm »
It has been suggested before. What this does is it takes away the... i forgot the word.

It takes away the [overall system where classes are no more than just extra slots, much like how ships have stats but dont effect the guns]

Ive made a thread that absolutely no one responded to https://gunsoficarus.com/community/forum/index.php/topic,4009.0.html
which is about a new gunner tool TYPE.

I believe mostly that its the ammount of tool types gunners have that is the problem. There is only 1 type, and that is something engineers and pilots can handle because they have enough slots for 1 type. While pilot and engineer tools are 2 or 3 different types, something only the class can handle having.

Offline -Mad Maverick-

  • Member
  • Salutes: 30
    • [WOLF]
    • 12
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Class Passives!
« Reply #2 on: May 15, 2014, 08:41:49 pm »
tbh with you passive ideas I would still want 3 engis...

Offline Squidslinger Gilder

  • Member
  • Salutes: 287
    • [TBB]
    • 31 
    • 34
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Class Passives!
« Reply #3 on: May 16, 2014, 09:01:15 pm »
Yeah, I'd still take 3 engineers over gunners.

Now if you really want to turn things on it's head. Redo the tool system. Instead of 3, 1 ,1. Turn it into 3, 2, 1. Gunners can then take 2 engineer tools, Engineers take 2 gunning tools, and pilots take 2 engineer tools. It won't solve the problem but you'd probably see a few more gunners since they could actually be somewhat useful for repairs.

Offline Velvet

  • Member
  • Salutes: 45
    • [Gent]
    • 19 
    • 22
    • 41 
    • View Profile
Re: Class Passives!
« Reply #4 on: May 16, 2014, 09:32:22 pm »
Yeah, I'd still take 3 engineers over gunners.

Now if you really want to turn things on it's head. Redo the tool system. Instead of 3, 1 ,1. Turn it into 3, 2, 1. Gunners can then take 2 engineer tools, Engineers take 2 gunning tools, and pilots take 2 engineer tools. It won't solve the problem but you'd probably see a few more gunners since they could actually be somewhat useful for repairs.
that'd just make engineers even more obscenely good... I don't think there's a single gun where I wouldn't prefer to have an engineer with 2 ammo types than a gunner with 3. Every gun where I'd consider running a gunner, the 3rd ammo type tends to be a more of a nice bonus ammo while only the 1st two are vital. (eg. lesmok and greased are the important ones for Hades; burst is a little bonus for midrange... heavy and burst are all I'd seriously care about on a Hwacha... just heavy and charged on a heavy Carronade..) The Gunner would be fully relegated to.. hmm, maybe the lumberfish, but even then a 3rd engineer would allow another spanner on hull without losing the buff... so, maybe no gunners at all. ^^
« Last Edit: May 16, 2014, 09:37:44 pm by Velvet »

Offline -Mad Maverick-

  • Member
  • Salutes: 30
    • [WOLF]
    • 12
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Class Passives!
« Reply #5 on: May 16, 2014, 11:27:27 pm »
Ive been thinking about it and I think the issue is how long reload times are... hear me out,  since between reloads any player worth his cogs can multi task to something else, this is why being an engi is often a better option since as an engi you are way more versatile.  so of the gunner was able to uniquely cut down on the reload time that just might do the trick... e.g. when gunner maintains seat through reload the time is decreased by 30%?  something like that?

Offline Captain Phil

  • Community Ambassador
  • Salutes: 13
    • [Rydr]
    • 37 
    • 44
    • 45 
    • View Profile
    • DeviantART
Re: Class Passives!
« Reply #6 on: May 17, 2014, 02:28:31 am »
Yeah, I'd still take 3 engineers over gunners.

Now if you really want to turn things on it's head. Redo the tool system. Instead of 3, 1 ,1. Turn it into 3, 2, 1. Gunners can then take 2 engineer tools, Engineers take 2 gunning tools, and pilots take 2 engineer tools. It won't solve the problem but you'd probably see a few more gunners since they could actually be somewhat useful for repairs.
that'd just make engineers even more obscenely good... I don't think there's a single gun where I wouldn't prefer to have an engineer with 2 ammo types than a gunner with 3. Every gun where I'd consider running a gunner, the 3rd ammo type tends to be a more of a nice bonus ammo while only the 1st two are vital. (eg. lesmok and greased are the important ones for Hades; burst is a little bonus for midrange... heavy and burst are all I'd seriously care about on a Hwacha... just heavy and charged on a heavy Carronade..) The Gunner would be fully relegated to.. hmm, maybe the lumberfish, but even then a 3rd engineer would allow another spanner on hull without losing the buff... so, maybe no gunners at all. ^^

Make it so an engineer brings two Pilot tools then instead of two gunner tools? Also, two engineer tools as a pilot could possibly make the galleon flyable as a captain agian...

Offline Squidslinger Gilder

  • Member
  • Salutes: 287
    • [TBB]
    • 31 
    • 34
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Class Passives!
« Reply #7 on: May 17, 2014, 05:08:58 am »
Galleon is already flyable as a pilot, just isn't very terrifying cause the guns have been nerfed to heck. Engineers having pilots tools would be pointless as they'd be more apt to using guns, not piloting. That would just encourage more engineer pilots which is a disgrace imo.

Think ultimately for it to work you'd need tool/ammo restrictions. Like along with it, gunners get to use all the ammo types, Engineers only get half that. Gunners for engineer tools are limited as well. So...

Engineers say wouldn't be able to use...hmmm...Loch, Incendiary, Lesmok, and Charged rounds. You know the special ammo types which bring either extra power or distance to the fight. Engineers would basically get short to regular range ammo types.

For Engineer tools, Gunners would say be limited to Mallet, Wrench, Extinguish. That gives Engineers the quicker rebuild option and advanced firefighting skills.

Pilots...Wrench, Spanner, Extinguish. Pilots would be quick on rebuild but weak on overall repair.

Do a similar lock up for pilot tools. Pilots get full access. Engineers and Gunners get restricted access.

Offline Velvet

  • Member
  • Salutes: 45
    • [Gent]
    • 19 
    • 22
    • 41 
    • View Profile
Re: Class Passives!
« Reply #8 on: May 17, 2014, 11:54:33 am »
that's basically doubling the number of tool categories. Which would make this the most complicated and confusing solution to the gunner issue so far.

Honestly I think the classes are fine. Gunning as a niche role really doesn't bother me. I would like to see that niche expanded a bit, however I think Muse are already making the steps in the right direction with additions such as the Hades and the more specialised ammo types they're considering.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2014, 11:56:21 am by Velvet »