Main > General Discussion

Fellow Ex-Gunners Of Icarus Lend Me Your Ears!

<< < (21/71) > >>

Squash:
As it stands currently no class has intrinsic advantage in others, it's all about equipment allotment. It would be a shame to make one class the exception to that pattern, as it encourages skillful play and doesn't sacrifice it for RPG style benefits. I was certainly in the camp of 'gunners are useless' when this thread started, but I'm not anymore. We always take a gunner when we go into a match on a galleon now, the lumberjack isn't so versatile that it allows an engi-gunner.

There are certainly other situations where gunners are useful. The front gun of a goldfish will certainly always have a gunner, manticore-spires would be wise to bring them as well. I think it's safe to say every medium gun (excepting maybe the heavy carronade) would majorly benefit from a gunner. The problem is really that the same isn't true with light guns.

Or is it? The new junker popularity might of fixed that, as now typically on a junker two people are each responsible for two guns. If they're of different types then having a gunner would make a lot of sense. But yeah, useful and required are two different things. A ship can run just fine with three engineers, it's definitely the rarist class in play, or at least it should be. I think 1 gunner for every 2 ships is pretty typical of the current meta.

Machiavelliest:
I think the strength of the manticore and the need to switch between heavy and other rounds has reduced the marginalization of gunners.

JaceBoojah:
Gunner solution: take all ammo types away from non-gunners.
Think about it.

Kyren:

--- Quote from: JaceBoojah on May 13, 2013, 03:35:49 am ---Gunner solution: take all ammo types away from non-gunners.
Think about it.

--- End quote ---

Very radical, even though it sounds good at the first moment. What makes me unconvinced is that we'd only go half of the way - take gunning functionality away from the Captain and Engineer, but leave the Engineer & Captain functionality to the gunner. (Meaning, Gunner has Engi & Captain Slot, Engi & Captain don't have a Gunner slot). Kind of unfair, but limiting the classes to only their respective slots would also take a lot of.. features away.

LazerusKI:
i think its also situational and ship based.
on our pyra we like to have 2 gunners and 1 engi
while our spire has 2 engi and 1 gunner.

with our pyra i like to switch between longrange (lesmok, heavy) and closerange (burst) ammo.
also with the gunner i can use different guns without disadvantages. if our pyra is loaded with long-range guns on the front and close-range guns on the side, i dont need to use lesmok for the side weapons. i want something to bash the enemy there. with an engineer im fixed to one ammo type. the same goes for random-teams. some ships have a colorfull mix of weapons, if you cant communicate with them, you are forced to adapt to different situations.

but: i have also thought that there should be a passive bonus, engineer should have a better repair skill, gunner should have more damage and the pilot should have more movement, if they are in their specific roles.
i have also thought of switching my gunner to engineer because if our main-tactic goes well, i only need to use one gun with one ammo. Only if the situation changes a second ammo can be nice.

with a passive bonus you can still play a different position with your class (gungineer), but a gunner would be always better in dealing damage. a gunner could repair his own gun (and maybe a system next to him), but the engineer would be better for this.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page