Fellow Ex-Gunners Of Icarus Lend Me Your Ears!

[HamsterIV]

There should be some one dedicated to shooting back but they need not be a gunner. Having a buff engie as your third engie gives a captain interesting options. A buffed balloon is almost as good as having helium and chutevent, a buffed hull can give you those extra few seconds of life when all hell is breaking loose, and buffed engines, will help you get out of a jam.

I concede that every gun can make use of two different types of ammo at varying ranges. However if you spend for 90% of the damage in the optimal zone for only 1 ammo type , is the utility of a gunner preferable to the utility of a buff engineer?

[RearAdmiralZill]

What good is that buff engineer if all he is doing is shooting? He can't do both at the same time. Point being, if the third guy's job is to shoot things at your enemy, why not a gunner with multiple ammo rather than a guy with only two options, and only one being special.

[Surette]

Yeah, I'd prefer a gunner to a third buff engineer, though I'd be okay with either one.

[HamsterIV]

I spend a good deal of time not in range of the enemy or running away from the enemy with nobody shooting. The buff engie can use this time to prebuff components like the hull and balloon. At the start of combat final tapping prebuffed components doesn't take that much time. Considering how most ships are laid out two spanner/mallet/extinguisher are a must. That third slot can have equal or greater utility from a buff engineer or a gunner.

[Parkourwalrus]

Honestly what surprises me is that no one brings buff hammers as gunner. i get taking wrench or mallet on a brawling ship, but on sniping ships it's just sad to see gunners sadly whacking at their merc/artemis/heavy flak.

[N-Sunderland]

On a sniper build, the thing is that the gunner shouldn't be buffing. They should be shooting (that goes for any build, obviously). In addition, there's always a chance of a sniping enemy ship downing your gun, in which case the buff hammer is useless.

[HamsterIV]

Choice of engineering equipment for a gunner is very important. If your gun will be disabled a lot (Goldfish/Spire) bring a spanner. If the engineer assigned to watch your gun will also be shooting (Pyra/Junker/Galleon) bring a mallet or wrench. If the chances are high you will be running for your life (squid) bring a spanner or wrench. Back when flamethrowers disabled on one stack many gunners brought fire extinguisher or chem spray.

You should be shooting as much as possible, but when given the option between doing nothing and fixing a something it is best to lend a hand.

[Jomdorr]

I agree with squash the gunner needs maybe some brand new bonus ammo clip that only they can have

[RearAdmiralZill]

I agree with squash the gunner needs maybe some brand new bonus ammo clip that only they can have

This equates to the second and third ammo slots they already have.

[Squash]

Well I think what he's referring to is when I suggested that Lesmok and Heavy be made gunner only ammunition, however I've since changed my opinion on gunners and now see them as valid situationally.

[Serenum]

I think giving gunners a passive buff is the way to go, but I wouldn't give them anything that buffs damage, directly or indirecly, because that would either be too insignificant or too strong and ruin the game balance.
There is one thing that would make the gunners have a real advantage over engineers:

-give gunners more firing arc with all weapons, maybe a 20-25% more?

This would be something really really useful, that potentially allows for a much greater offensive capability but still depends on the gunner skill to be used effectively.
What do you think?

[RearAdmiralZill]

I think giving gunners a passive buff is the way to go, but I wouldn't give them anything that buffs damage, directly or indirecly, because that would either be too insignificant or too strong and ruin the game balance.
There is one thing that would make the gunners have a real advantage over engineers:

-give gunners more firing arc with all weapons, maybe a 20-25% more?

This would be something really really useful, that potentially allows for a much greater offensive capability but still depends on the gunner skill to be used effectively.
What do you think?

This too would indirectly increase the damage of guns because they can fire on you from more extreme angles. It would also break any chances of dodging in the game, leaving us less options when considering maneuverability. We learned this with when the artemis arc was buffed and became OP, and god forbid a gatling gun gets any more arc than it has already...

[Parkourwalrus]

I'm not sure about this, but what about guns overheating and setting on fire. Then you could have a new gunnery tool that cools down the gun. Maybe just heatsink.

[Serenum]

I think giving gunners a passive buff is the way to go, but I wouldn't give them anything that buffs damage, directly or indirecly, because that would either be too insignificant or too strong and ruin the game balance.
There is one thing that would make the gunners have a real advantage over engineers:

-give gunners more firing arc with all weapons, maybe a 20-25% more?

This would be something really really useful, that potentially allows for a much greater offensive capability but still depends on the gunner skill to be used effectively.
What do you think?

This too would indirectly increase the damage of guns because they can fire on you from more extreme angles. It would also break any chances of dodging in the game, leaving us less options when considering maneuverability. We learned this with when the artemis arc was buffed and became OP, and god forbid a gatling gun gets any more arc than it has already...

The buff could be something minor or only apply to vertical firing arc. I still think that a direct buff to damage or rate of fire would be far more dangerous for game balance.

[Parkourwalrus]

I think giving gunners a passive buff is the way to go, but I wouldn't give them anything that buffs damage, directly or indirecly, because that would either be too insignificant or too strong and ruin the game balance.
There is one thing that would make the gunners have a real advantage over engineers:

-give gunners more firing arc with all weapons, maybe a 20-25% more?

This would be something really really useful, that potentially allows for a much greater offensive capability but still depends on the gunner skill to be used effectively.
What do you think?

This too would indirectly increase the damage of guns because they can fire on you from more extreme angles. It would also break any chances of dodging in the game, leaving us less options when considering maneuverability. We learned this with when the artemis arc was buffed and became OP, and god forbid a gatling gun gets any more arc than it has already...

The buff could be something minor or only apply to vertical firing arc. I still think that a direct buff to damage or rate of fire would be far more dangerous for game balance.

But wouldn't vertical arc just make carronades Op again? And make a manta ray with flares able to hover under a target mercilessly burning hull? and if you gave gunner a passive, then engie and pilot need one, and soon we are drowning under stat after stat, none of which help balance. If it doesn't snowball, though, passives wold be cool.