Author Topic: Guns of Icarus and the Law of Diminishing Returns  (Read 38398 times)

Offline Sammy B. T.

  • Member
  • Salutes: 154
    • [Duck]
    • 23 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Guns of Icarus and the Law of Diminishing Returns
« on: May 08, 2014, 09:35:19 am »
The need for comboed weapons is one of the great things about this game because it holds great to the law of diminishing returns. To explain this, I will use the example my college professor gave me a few years ago. Imagine you're moving into your dorm alone. Now imagine you have one person helping you, that makes things a lot easier. Add a third, things are going great. Keep adding. At a certain point, there is only so much work that can be spread around and each additional person isn't helping as much as the initial people. The difference between 100 and 101 is negligible whereas the difference between 1 and 2 is the ability to move a couch.

You have this in guns. An example near and dear to my heart is the double carronade. I used to run double carro on the side of my Junker and thought it was the greatest thing in the world. I could quickly destroy balloon which in turn allowed my gat mortar ally to not worry about balloon blocking. I swore by this build for a long time.

However, later I realized how redundant it was. The job of the carronade was to pop the balloon. The thing is, you really only need one, especially if you played with a buff engineer on the gun. So while the double carronade is faster for destroying the balloon, the single does it well enough (one clip).

It was hard to realize that because I saw the side's job as being "kill the balloon" and it was doing just that, mission accomplished.I wasn't seeing the lost opportunities. I wasn't seeing that I was realistically shooting most of my carronade into the enemy hull due to how fast the balloon went down. I wasn't seeing that I could have more different types of damage.

Finally I was shown the light and began running carronade and carousel on my right side because it allowed me to set fires and lend some explosive damage once there was an armor break, and my game became substantially better.



This game has many examples of this. Every vet of this game has tireedly told someone that their build was bad because they doubled up on some form of damage. "No you don't want two h.f flaks on your Galleon" "Your gat, hades Junker is completly reliant on your ally for the kill," "Why on God's green earth do you have have five light flaks on a Mobula?" However I wanted to go into some not as obviously bad builds.



I already went into the double carro. I will mention though at in the team scenario, if both ships are blend focus, then its not as much a problem as your strategy is already so completely focused to put the enemy on the ground.

Double Lumberjack
Quite possibly one of the most annoying Galleons in the game, this ship is a powerhouse but ultimately a flawed one. One competent lumberjack can easily suppress a balloon, and a godly lumberjack can suppress two balloons. At the range at which you engage at with this long range of a galleon, you've got time. Throw an H flak or Hwacha and you still have the enemies bouncing on the floor but you gain the ability to kill them too.

Caveat an argument could be made for the galleon to be a support galleon. While this is an effective strategy, I feel like the loss of killing power is an issue with this. Regardless of efficacy, with the double lumberjack you are still sacrificing a lot of options.

Artemis spam

The infamous double triple artemis junker config

A screenplay by Sammy B. T.

Artemis number 1; This is great, I can easily suppress two thirds of a ship.
Artemis number 2; This also great, I can keep the rest of the ship disabled.
Artemis number 3; I guess I'll shoot at the next ship and get two thirds of it
Artemis number 4; Oh, well I thought i was going to be the inital two thirds but I can do the remaining third
Artemis number 5; Well I guess I will just do explosive and shatter damage to the hull, that helps right
Artemis number 6; Surely it must be doing something.

As a long time user of the artemis, nothing angers me more than excessive artemis. It is a great weapon and while effective in competent hands, it is godly in veteran hands. But if sacrifice piercing just so you can fit a bit more shatter in there then you are being quite foolish. It fails in the same way a quad hwacha Galleon fails, its not enough to take down components if you can't kill them.





Am I wrong or oversimplying things? Are there other examples i missed? Where do y'all see diminishing returns in GOIO?

Offline GreyTea

  • Muse Games
  • Salutes: 54
    • [Muse]
    • 32 
    • 45
    • 44 
    • View Profile
Re: Guns of Icarus and the Law of Diminishing Returns
« Reply #1 on: May 08, 2014, 10:35:10 am »
First off I like this thread,

Now to pick your brains, how about a double merc pyra, that is a common enough build and seems to do a good enough job, it has shatter for disable and piercing for taking down the hull, and ultimately can ware down the hull enough for a kill, i would love to hear your thoughts on this?

Offline RearAdmiralZill

  • CA Mod
  • Salutes: 144
    • [MM]
    • 31 
    • 44
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Guns of Icarus and the Law of Diminishing Returns
« Reply #2 on: May 08, 2014, 10:38:33 am »
Two gunners. Diminishing returns.

Offline Alistair MacBain

  • Member
  • Salutes: 23
    • [GwTh]
    • 22 
    • 45
    • 19 
    • View Profile
Re: Guns of Icarus and the Law of Diminishing Returns
« Reply #3 on: May 08, 2014, 10:41:06 am »
You got a point there but there are things i disagree with you.
I wouldnt count the all explosive ships. This is not the same as your examples. The aim of explosive weapons is to finish the enemy permahull once armor is down. But they usually cant get the armor down fast enough. Thats why you need to pair them with other weapons.
Your carronade example is different to this. A carronades job is to kill the enemy balloon. They dont need another weapon to do that. They can easily perform alone. A all explosive weapon cant do its job alone.

Then i disagree on some of the diminishing returns some disable weapons have.

Double Lumberjack
Ive flown on a Galleon for alot of my competetive time. The dual lumberjacks ability to pop the enemy balloon so fast gives you the ability to kill enemys much closer to you. Yes a hwacha could do a similiar thing.
But the hwacha isnt as good as a lumberjack on range. (1.2k hwacha range compared to above 2k lesmok lumber) So you sacrifice a bid of closerange ability for a better longrange.
A flak would add a different dmg thats true. But when do you need that when your enemy is just bouncing in the ground forever. And you never fly alone. Your ally usually brings the explosive dmg you miss with the dual lj combination.
Also the split fire of a dual lumberjack is 10 times superior to the one of a single lumberjack.
I wont compare that to a dual carronade cause the higher rate of fire of the carronade leads to a much faster pop of the enemy balloon.


Artemi Junker
With those its similiar. Yes you sacrifice alot of different dmg types. But you also get a much fastened ability to do what you want. That can count alot. Usually 3-4 is all you need thats true.
The decreased effects are sometimes higher than expected.


Dual mercs is a different thing.
They are usually a counter to any other longrange longrange build. They are much easier than any other gun to shoot on the longer ranges. They are a hardcounter to any longrange build aslong as you can operate at their maxrange. Sure they lack alot of things when the enemy gets closer but as long as you stay in your optimal window you can easily outsnipe any other opponent.

Diminishing returns are there thats true. But they are higher than in some of your examples. You always have to keep in mind what the individual gun can do and what more of it can do. They are definitly existing but sometimes they are still better than other things.

Offline RearAdmiralZill

  • CA Mod
  • Salutes: 144
    • [MM]
    • 31 
    • 44
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Guns of Icarus and the Law of Diminishing Returns
« Reply #4 on: May 08, 2014, 10:45:07 am »
First off I like this thread,

Now to pick your brains, how about a double merc pyra, that is a common enough build and seems to do a good enough job, it has shatter for disable and piercing for taking down the hull, and ultimately can ware down the hull enough for a kill, i would love to hear your thoughts on this?

Double merc pyra? Its nice because you nearly always start a match in its prime position, being opposite ends of a map, and across some for of open terrain. It still lacks versatility, killing power, and accuracy due to the arc of projectile weapons.

More times then not, double mercs cant kill a ship if that ship flat out charges them and gets within a range where the merc fire is consistent enough to do much. One merc and an arty has more potential to, plus added disable and explosive. Merc/L.flak has the quickest kill potential.

Offline GreyTea

  • Muse Games
  • Salutes: 54
    • [Muse]
    • 32 
    • 45
    • 44 
    • View Profile
Re: Guns of Icarus and the Law of Diminishing Returns
« Reply #5 on: May 08, 2014, 10:52:07 am »
Double merc pyra? Its nice because you nearly always start a match in its prime position, being opposite ends of a map, and across some for of open terrain. It still lacks versatility, killing power, and accuracy due to the arc of projectile weapons.

More times then not, double mercs cant kill a ship if that ship flat out charges them and gets within a range where the merc fire is consistent enough to do much. One merc and an arty has more potential to, plus added disable and explosive. Merc/L.flak has the quickest kill potential.

I run a galleon with merc duel flak left side hwatcha carro right,mine launcher rear, and with a buff engineer down stares and a gunner it is normally devastating within 1000m charged merc, double flak charged buffed, in this thread though that could be better with a lumberjack or hwatcha to complement the flak and instead maybe change ammo to loch buff? or is this where duel explosives comes in handy like alistair stated?

Offline RearAdmiralZill

  • CA Mod
  • Salutes: 144
    • [MM]
    • 31 
    • 44
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Guns of Icarus and the Law of Diminishing Returns
« Reply #6 on: May 08, 2014, 11:15:43 am »
While you gain the additional chance to flat out kill something when the armor is down, you lack the versatility of a H.Flak and x. I don't like a merc paired with Lj because 1. the Lj will spoil the merc arcs and 2. LJ can take out hull armor pretty handily on its own. So a H.Flak/Hwacha would lessen your chance at the kill shot and lower your max range, but opens up disables, and a gun that would work at close range in case you get charged on that broadside.

In the end its what you want your boat to be doing, and how versatile you want to be. Guns is funny in that I think you just lose more versatility (and thus become more counter-able) vs just flat out getting less return. This is why people still take builds of doubling up the same gun.

Offline Alistair MacBain

  • Member
  • Salutes: 23
    • [GwTh]
    • 22 
    • 45
    • 19 
    • View Profile
Re: Guns of Icarus and the Law of Diminishing Returns
« Reply #7 on: May 08, 2014, 11:38:55 am »
A dual flak is barely ever useful imo ...
A single flak can instagib everything thats not a galleon or goldy. The first will be slow enough to get another clip in before it reaches you. The second has a frontgun that can be disabled quite easy. And you have your teammate ;).
A lumberjack merc flak is probably the best and most versatile build at longrange. The arc limits doesnt matter when your enemy is at above 1k. Below your already screwed.
A hwacha has a maxrange of 1.2k so you might want to swap the merc for a hades instead which gives you nearly the same longrange potential with good gunners but a much better closerange.
But with a hwacha you dont really need the flak as a hwacha can do severe damage to everything just like a flak does. And it is much easier to hit with if you only care for the explosive dmg hitting the enemy.
Then i would always use a lj hwacha hades ...
Superior midrange and a similiar longrange.

The diminishing returns on explosive weapons are usually pretty high if they dont have anything else to offer. A hflak will kill an enemy just as good as 2. You will barely ever need it.
I also think that you dont really need a gunner for a flak. All you need is a buffkit and charged. I would barely use a gunner for a flak on a galleon. There are much better guns for the gunner.
Lesmok isnt to useful due to 1 shot only. Yes you get your shots easier but you have alot of time if you pair it with other weapons and differentiate your dmg types.
Sure heatsink and lochnager are nice to decrease the arming range but you already have a problem when your enemy gets within your 300m.

Offline GeoRmr

  • Member
  • Salutes: 178
    • [Rydr]
    • 45 
    • 1
    • 45 
    • View Profile
    • Storm Ryders
Re: Guns of Icarus and the Law of Diminishing Returns
« Reply #8 on: May 08, 2014, 11:52:47 am »
I feel this topic is somewhat in reference to the Sky-league finals and the recent flame-thrower buff. (please forgive me if this is entirely unrelated) In defence of the double carronade pyramidion build I would like to briefly explain the rational behind our ship choice.

You can use heavy-clip to exploit the carronades secondary shatter damage type. Heavy-clip also allows for faster dps and range than greased rounds but sadly lacks enough ammo per clip to pop a Balloon (4, where 5 shots would be needed) with 2 carronades you have the potential to both pop the enemies balloon and disable 3 components (guns or engines) in a very short space of time. In practice our ship choices were very effective (more so than flamer carronade* which we also experimented with) against the double meta-junkers we sparred with in preparation, rapidly disabling and popping enemies. Once the first target had its guns disabled the metamidion would then have a chance to secure the kill (Usually a junker using gattling mortar would win due to its smaller hull profile and greater armour value).

I still very much feel that our choice of ships was the correct viable counter at the time, but (along with myriad of positioning and focusing mistakes on our part) we were simply out-classed by the ducks who had far more experience flying their usual iconic play-style.

*prior to the flamer patch
« Last Edit: May 08, 2014, 11:57:39 am by GeoRmr »

Offline RearAdmiralZill

  • CA Mod
  • Salutes: 144
    • [MM]
    • 31 
    • 44
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Guns of Icarus and the Law of Diminishing Returns
« Reply #9 on: May 08, 2014, 11:53:19 am »
Quote
A single flak can instagib everything thats not a galleon or goldy.

Thus double H.Flak could kill everything. An advantage.

Quote
The arc limits doesnt matter when your enemy is at above 1k. Below your already screwed.

Not true. Most kills will actually happen at that range because your shots would be much more consistent at or below 1k vs farther out. That is of course unless you fancy sitting at map edges.

I wont get into gunner vs engie. And really at this stage we hit the difference of opinion, so truly gauging diminishing return is based on personal thoughts.

Offline Sammy B. T.

  • Member
  • Salutes: 154
    • [Duck]
    • 23 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Guns of Icarus and the Law of Diminishing Returns
« Reply #10 on: May 08, 2014, 12:08:04 pm »
First off I like this thread,

It started as a response in the Flamer thread but I realized it was getting off topic but still worthy of being a topic.

Quote
Now to pick your brains, how about a double merc pyra, that is a common enough build and seems to do a good enough job, it has shatter for disable and piercing for taking down the hull, and ultimately can ware down the hull enough for a kill, i would love to hear your thoughts on this?

Support ships aren't as effected by diminishing returns due to them not needing the efficiency of of kill ships. Now, if your ally is double merc as well then beyond being a jerk, you're an inefficient jerk and will probably get smote by a good enough team.




You know, this thread kind of dips into the idea of ship specialization.

Support ships are basically forms of specialization. The more you specialize, the more specific firepower you bring and this can be effective. Its basic hammer and anvil tactics. The more you specialize, the more you rely on your teammate and the more the teammate has top specialize. If you bring too much piercing, your ally need to compensate with too much explosive. If I traded one of my artemis for a hades on my boat in the Mandarains then Frogger would then need to compensate by changing his hades to an artemis. While the number of guns didn't change that we are using in engagement, our specialization did.

Ducks have found it best to keep a relatively low range of specialization between the two ships as we want to make it difficult to choose a target. I learned this facing the classic Paddling, "Do I attack Squash and get killed by Smollet or do I attack Smollet and get killed by Squash?"

To bring this back on subject, when looking at returns, this comes up because if a ship becomes too specialized it is either targeted (double lumber galleon) or ignored (art junker)



BTW, I put this in gameplay instead of guid for a reason. This is hardly something set in stone and is far more about style than objective facts. I welcome discussion and disagreement.



Geo, this did start as a response in the flamer thread about y'all's double carro. However this is a discussion the Ducks have been having for a year now and I just thought it would be fun to get more thoughts. As i said, this is in gameplay and not guides for a reason.

Concerning the double carro, yes that is indeed true and back in my days of double carro I would heavy on my bottom deck carro and greased on my top to make use of the weapon's two skills. Overtime though the complete lack of explosive with the exception of front artemis pot shots, became apparaent as a major flaw even with a good teammate. I found with the carousel I could still get gun damage as well as I still have an art on the front.

Something I've been seeing recently is the carronade/art combo. Seeming opposites working well together. If a heavy clip barking dog is a poorman's artemis, why not just use an artemis and have explosive?
« Last Edit: May 08, 2014, 12:14:03 pm by Sammy B. T. »

Offline HamsterIV

  • Member
  • Salutes: 328
    • 10 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
    • Monkey Dev
Re: Guns of Icarus and the Law of Diminishing Returns
« Reply #11 on: May 08, 2014, 12:13:37 pm »
Speaking as one who likes to double down on weapons there are some advantages to having 2 or 3 of the same weapon on a ship.
 
Consistent vertical arcs - Having a Merc and an Artemis on the same side limits the sweet spot where you can have both guns shooting where double merc or tripple Artemis gives a much wider vertical range where you can be at max effectiveness.
Less need for gunners - I know it is an old sticking point in this community, but if I can get by with three engineers and still have more or less optimal ammo I am going to go for three engineers. Having a ship built with duplicate guns reduces the need for multiple ammo types.
Only one optimal range - I don't need to worry about being in range for both guns. It is the same argument as the vertical arcs only made on the distance between ships vector.


Offline Battle Toads

  • Member
  • Salutes: 4
    • [kTen]
    • 29 
    • 40
    • 41 
    • View Profile
Re: Guns of Icarus and the Law of Diminishing Returns
« Reply #12 on: May 08, 2014, 09:25:03 pm »

As a long time user of the artemis, nothing angers me more than excessive artemis. It is a great weapon and while effective in competent hands, it is godly in veteran hands. But if sacrifice piercing just so you can fit a bit more shatter in there then you are being quite foolish. It fails in the same way a quad hwacha Galleon fails, its not enough to take down components if you can't kill them.


I assume the best way to make an artemis junker work is to put a hades on the lower gun deck. Although it is hard to get all 3 guns in arc, a hades is capable of major hull damage, light balloon damage and annoying fire damage while the artemis can do major gun/engines damage and light hull damage. If you have the hades shred armor and 2 other artemisis firing, you should be able to disable with the arts and get some decent permahull damage with each armor pop

Also on the subject of quad hwatcha galleons (one of my favourite silly builds) the 2 hwatchas per side should not be fired instantly. The benefit of this build is that a gunner capable of multitasking can reasonably man all 4 heavy guns, which leaves an extra engie to repair. The way I set up quad hwatcha galleons is that I have a gunner fire an opening shot with the hwatcha, and a burst round shot  can disable the entire ship up close while a good heavy shot can hit either their guns or engines hard from afar. After this the gatling should be able to easily shred the armor of the disabled ship, and this is the only time the second hwatcha should be fired. By that time the galleon should be very close to the target and the hwatcha should easily take out all of a ship's perma hull in 1 salvo (also remember that the 1st hwatcha should be reloaded by this time, incase more firepower is needed)

Offline Mysterious Medic

  • Member
  • Salutes: 35
    • [Rydr]
    • 39 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Guns of Icarus and the Law of Diminishing Returns
« Reply #13 on: May 08, 2014, 10:18:17 pm »
Quote
Something I've been seeing recently is the carronade/art combo. Seeming opposites working well together. If a heavy clip barking dog is a poorman's artemis, why not just use an artemis and have explosive?

There are a few reasons why artemis doesnt perform very well in close range brawls. First is yaw speed; at distances, not much turning speed is needed, you only really need it to lead shots sometimes. On a ship that is closing distance fast, the yaw speed of the artemis will be the death of you, its just way too hard to be able to turn it fast enough at close distance. Second is rate of fire; unlike at mid or long range, where leverage is usually gained slowly, in close range, every mistake could be your last. Thats why there is high risk for high reward, you either have to kill the ship fast enough so that it wont kill you, or disable it fast enough so that you have more time to adjust positioning. The artemis just shoots too slow to do either of these things. - Oh and as for the "need" for an explosive weapon... Rams (;

Although I agree that there is a "Law of Diminishing Returns" for weapons, you are neglecting the bi-functionality of weapons. Double merc doesnt work because it does piercing damage. It works because it does piercing damage AND shatter damage. Double merc would be useless if the merc only had one damage type. There are very few times where having two guns that are imputing the same type of damage is useful, mainly because if you need two of the same gun for the same damage, it only means that the one alone is not doing its job sufficiently. Thats why two artemis are useful, you can actually get enough explosive damage between the two of them to kill a ship quickly.  Same goes for having two gats on a brawl mob, you just need MOAR piercing. But most of the time, muse has designed its guns to be effective by themselves. One flamer is enough to cause chaos, one mortar is enough to kill a ship, one hwacha is enough to disable a ship, etc.

Offline Spud Nick

  • Member
  • Salutes: 130
    • [✦✦45]
    • 40 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Guns of Icarus and the Law of Diminishing Returns
« Reply #14 on: May 09, 2014, 01:15:24 am »
I'm a sucker for symmetry. I know It's better to have one side of the junker different from the other but it doesn't look as cool.