Info > Feedback and Suggestions
Design Paradigm, Game balance, and Gunner vs Engineer.
GeoRmr:
--- Quote from: Richard LeMoon on May 24, 2014, 02:18:42 am ---I used to have my galleon engie take moonshine for that, until I always used moonshine myself.
If you look at my tables and such, that is exactly what I was saying with the 422 ratio. 4 of your class tools, 2 of each of the others, 1 in each class is default and unselectable.
--- End quote ---
Thanks Richard, that table is much clearer than my 3 waffling paragraphs! :D
Sammy B. T.:
This starts with a faulty premise, though it is understandable to have. The idea that gunner means categorically better at shooting vs engineer being categorically better at repairing, is missing the nuance of the game. Having more tools makes a crew member more equipped to deal with a diversity of situations. However, many if not most guns in this game don't need a diversity of situations. A gatling gun is trying to strip armor very quickly at close range. An Artemis is trying to take out as many components as possible at any range. A mortar is trying to destroy perma hull as quickly as possible during the armor break window. These roles can generally be done with one ammo.
Now consider the weapons that you benefit from gunners. these are generally weapons that need to engage at different lengths or different roles. Hwachas switching between heavy and burst, Lumberjacks going from Lesmok to Lochnagar, even the short ranged H Carronade does well having heavy for long range or disable and charged for the damage. The gunner isn't making the gun better per se in as much as they are making the gun more diverse.
You want the gunner to get play time, then there needs to be more rewards for diversification. More weapons with extreme arcs, more ammos that dramatically chance how a gun works.
At the end of the day, it makes sense for there to not be a lot of ammo diversification across the ship. A rifleman doesn't have a plethora of different ammos for his gun whereas a mortar crew will have plenty. Naval ships will always have more people crewing and keeping the ship alive than gunners manning the weapons. Even the air force will have teams of people on the ground supporting the pilots. Most of any military is support. It makes sense that these wooden things, suspended from hot air balloons, being shot at weapons that are clearly more advanced than the armor of the ship, has more guys on board to keep the ship alive than guys on board to kill the enemy.
Richard LeMoon:
Just bringing one extra ammo type and flying to accommodate that ammo type is really boring and predictable. You can't do too many unexpected things.
Just to clarify, I don't play to win. I play to have fun and do crazy things with strange ship builds. Doing that, I more often win, without worrying over the best current meta.
WafflesToo:
--- Quote from: Mezhu on May 23, 2014, 09:26:16 pm ---I'd rather have engineers not be allowed to carry an ammo type at all than gunners carry two engineer tools, just throwing that out. I'm not suggesting it, but if it is that crucial to enforce a gunner on every ship this feels better than a lot of the suggestions I've so far read.
--- End quote ---
This sounds like a good idea to me, seconded.
Crafeksterty:
There have been some pretty nice ammo suggestions that make you want to have a gunner. Instead of balance, they straight up buff the gunners slots.
Basically, the engineers slot for ammo should be a bad thing. The current selection of ammo does not do it. The gunner choosing this selection of ammo has more freedom but nothing that makes those extra slots worth while to have.
The pilots tools dont count as no one else can jump on the helm.
While every one can jump out and do a bit of repairing.
And everyone can shoot a gun.
The problem that, we obviously see is that we can do enough and in a desirable ammount with just one ammo type.
What if there are some vastly different ammo that make up for gunners? Some vast diffrences that make you want atleast 1 gunner.
1 Gunner on each ship is enough to be necessary for the fix.
Nerfing pilots and engineers, is actualy not the answer. Sure it helps the gunner but it doesnt make the gunner more of what he is.
And thats the reliefe of having more options for the situation, or more options to better control what is happening.
Ammo like charged, greased, heatsink, incindiary, burst are way too mundane, in a good or bad way. The only ammo that really kicks things up differently are the heavy clip, Lesmok, Lochnagar.
You will want more of THOSE types of ammo. The mundane ammo are close to being default. And that is the issue, how these default like ammunition can be easily used without wanting to switch out. Instead of removing Default ammo, you will want to enhance the use of default because the ammo choice is way too situational. Right now it isnt. Only few hit it spot on.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version