Info > Feedback and Suggestions

The Gunner "Problem" - Range

<< < (2/4) > >>

GeoRmr:
My personal point of view is:

The class is fine as it is.

Please awkm, please, don't break everything in this reasonably well balanced game for no reason.

P.S. heatsink is also great in the mercury for the extra shot without reduced fire rate,  it has better disable potential for locking down ships. lesmok can also be used to ensure you get a needed disable in an urgent situation.

obliviondoll:

--- Quote from: redria on July 11, 2014, 09:36:53 am ---When a captain designs his ship, he can select a certain way to deal damage for each weapon, and whatever crew member will be on that gun takes the ammo that best fits that damage style. No other ammo types are needed simply because they deal damage in a way that the captain doesn't need - it doesn't fit the style of his ship. A pilot or an engineer on a gun works just as well as a gunner in most cases because they can deal damage in the way desired with just their one ammo type.
--- End quote ---

Gatling Gun: At longer ranges, Lesmok ammo so you can hit targets outside the normal range of the weapon, then in close, Greased Rounds for higher DPS. Or you could go for Incendiaries to set fires. Or if the enemy has flamers or other fire-based weapons, Heatsink rounds to counter that threat, and it also gives the weapon faster turning and more ammo, both beneficial in close quarters against the kind of fast ship that's suited to flamethrower use.

Hwacha: Heavy Clip for accurate long range fire. Then when the enemy gets close, use Burst rounds for the extra area of effect. Or Charged for heavier hitting shots. Maybe even Incendiary here too.

Flak: At long range, burst rounds let you spread damage all over an enemy ship, making Flak a good diversionary weapon, keeping engineers busy all over the enemy ship. Incendiaries can be used to increase fire chance, making the threat a bit more real against targets without a good chemspray cycle. In close encounters, you need to be reducing that arming range, so Greased or Heatsink rounds are an advantage, among other options.

Carronades: Heavy Clip in Carronades is amazing for pinpoint balloon popping past the normal effective range of a Carronade. Not beyond max range, of course, but the scatter effect usually makes them less effective at a distance, and Heavy Clip solves that problem. But when you're a bit closer, using Incendiaries can make for chaos on deck and Charged shots can shred the balloon even easier than the usual.

Artemis: Lesmok for improved firing range. Almost anything else at closer range to boost whatever you want from the weapon. Burst to make it a better AoE disable weapon, Charged to make it hit harder, Greased to up that fire rate if you prefer to fire fast and reload often.

Mines: Yep, even mines benefit from different ammo types. You can use Lesmok to deploy mines in the path of approaching or retreating enemies at longer range. Incendiary mines can be hilarious. And has anyone here seen a Lochnagar mine before? If not... TRY IT. Be careful with that one though, and make sure your teammates also know where the mine is. Friendly fire... isn't friendly.

Pretty sure I can see plenty of reasons for plenty of weapons to take advantage of multiple ammo types. When I'm crewing on board a Goldfish with Heavy Hwacha, and we have a ram-happy Captain, I like Heavy Clip for long range, Burst for mid-range and Heatsink for ramming distance because that's when the Flamers usually come our way. As a Gunner, I'm using ALL my ammo types to keep the gun working efficiently in combat, and nobody but a Gunner can do that.

Argus Finkle-McGraw:

--- Quote from: redria on July 11, 2014, 10:44:55 am ---I should add that I don't really mind the current state of gunners. They are less useful in most cases, but in some places I really want to have one.

--- End quote ---

It seems like this quote is similar to most of the threads I've read where gunner balance/new ammo/tool changes/etc all are trying to make adjustments so that one gunner is justified on a ship.

Is 'one gunner viable' what we should be aiming for?  Should there be discussions about how to make two/three/four gunner builds viable (quite situational of course) just like we see two/three/four engineer builds?

RomanKar:
I'm not really a fan of making things suck more so a role can be more effective.  I think making the gunner better would be better.

redria:
In order...


--- Quote from: GeoRmr on July 11, 2014, 02:37:08 pm ---Please awkm, please, don't break everything in this reasonably well balanced game for no reason.

--- End quote ---
I would agree. I mean, I wouldn't call it no reason, but I also don't really think this is the best solution. Just putting my ideas in an "organized" post to see if it kicks off ideas in someone else's head.


--- Quote from: obliviondoll on July 11, 2014, 04:30:31 pm ---
--- Quote from: redria on July 11, 2014, 09:36:53 am ---in most cases
--- End quote ---

--- End quote ---
There are certainly weapons that benefit from multiple ammo types, though gatling gun reaps no benefit from lesmok due to spread. Most light weapons can get around that by selecting an ammo that matches your intent in battle. Most of your break-down was pretty good though.


--- Quote from: Argus Finkle-McGraw on July 12, 2014, 02:33:12 am ---
--- Quote from: redria on July 11, 2014, 10:44:55 am ---I should add that I don't really mind the current state of gunners. They are less useful in most cases, but in some places I really want to have one.

--- End quote ---
Is 'one gunner viable' what we should be aiming for?  Should there be discussions about how to make two/three/four gunner builds viable (quite situational of course) just like we see two/three/four engineer builds?

--- End quote ---
I would argue that this is one of the few solutions that would actually possibly make multi-gunner ships viable. The benefits of being capable of fighting optimally at any range is pretty huge in this system.


--- Quote from: RomanKar on July 12, 2014, 05:37:45 am ---I'm not really a fan of making things suck more so a role can be more effective.  I think making the gunner better would be better.

--- End quote ---
I'm not sure that this would make things suck so much as it would change things drastically. I'm actually surprised a certain someone hasn't shown up interested. This would benefit fast moving ships that could control the engagement distance completely, like the squid. It would more trend the game away from point-and-shoot and even more towards the tactical positional game. Maybe it would be awful, but it would be extremely interesting to me to try. But making the gunner better is also a solution if you can find a way to do so within the bounds of what we have currently.


In all, I don't expect this to be pursued, tested, implemented, or even entirely taken seriously. It would be a radical change that might be no fun. I would love to play it just to see, but it probably isn't worth the effort and is too radical for what we are looking at.
I think the main point I was going for was for a cease to the call for gunner buffs in favor of a call for new content. A new gun, ship, map. Even new ammo types are fun. The gunner question is a dead horse we keep beating, and without going full Frankenstein to change the whole game it isn't going to be fixed.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page