Author Topic: Junker viability and builds  (Read 91653 times)

Offline Piemanlives

  • Member
  • Salutes: 155
    • [Cake]
    • 20
    • 16 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #30 on: August 23, 2014, 08:44:20 am »
A Junker is a good ship, able to fill a number of roles and take a decent amount of damage.

I'm personally flying side Carro/Banshee, side double Howitzer, front art. (For the science!)

The Howitzers are there if I need to do something at long range, and while they don't have arcs that the artemis has it's still a fairly powerful weapon. The artemis can complement both sides with its component destroying ability and the Carronade Banshee combo is a tad bit of an annoyance, because sure you have chem spray, but you still lost that balloon of yours.

It may not be the most effective build in existence but I like it.

Offline GeoRmr

  • Member
  • Salutes: 178
    • [Rydr]
    • 45 
    • 1
    • 45 
    • View Profile
    • Storm Ryders
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #31 on: August 23, 2014, 10:22:01 am »
What is a howitzer?

Offline N-Sunderland

  • Member
  • Salutes: 281
    • [Duck]
    • 15 
    • 45
    • 23 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #32 on: August 23, 2014, 12:01:23 pm »
What is a howitzer?

That's what the merc was called two years ago.

Offline Piemanlives

  • Member
  • Salutes: 155
    • [Cake]
    • 20
    • 16 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #33 on: August 23, 2014, 12:19:56 pm »
What is a howitzer?

That's what the merc was called two years ago.

I may consistently go out of my way to call them Howitzers.

Offline Baron Saturday

  • Member
  • Salutes: 2
    • [A&G]
    • 4
    • 17 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #34 on: August 23, 2014, 04:59:14 pm »
You shouldnt even need to hit at high speed.
Your not a squid. Youre a junker. Once you are in good range and arc you shouldnt need to move at all.
If shots dont hit at fullspeed it isnt the crews fault. Its the pilots fault that he is at such a speed.

I guess i mis-spoke.  While the junker is pretty tanky, there are times when you have to move and shoot to survive.  The flak is far superior in the hands of an average gunner because it's easier to hit with.  I don't think anyone likes being parked in a pyras front arc unless they just turned to face you from their starboard side.  But that's rare as they would run. 

Offline Alistair MacBain

  • Member
  • Salutes: 23
    • [GwTh]
    • 22 
    • 45
    • 19 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #35 on: August 23, 2014, 05:01:52 pm »
Well you should be able to out damage the pyra with your junker.
The junker has more armor thus is tankier and can survive a gatclip longer.
And it has a rather hard to hit hull compared to a pyra.
I agree for gallis or sth else but not for pyra. Only thing to keep in mind is not get rammed.

Offline Replaceable

  • Member
  • Salutes: 84
    • [Rydr]
    • 19 
    • 45
    • 24 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #36 on: August 23, 2014, 07:37:27 pm »
Wow that was fast. Started out with his own setup and style and got converted into the meta by the second page. Well done guys.

This. So much this.

Offline Baron Saturday

  • Member
  • Salutes: 2
    • [A&G]
    • 4
    • 17 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #37 on: August 23, 2014, 09:07:34 pm »
I'm actually curious if they got rid of arming time on flak and nudged the damage down a bit if there could be two metas.One that favors a junker and one that favors a pyra rather than having the same meta across two ships that brawl so differently.  Mortar would output more damage favoring an easier to aim front arc of a pyra and the flak would be easier to aim lending itself to the moving broad arc.of a junker.  Just a thought.

Offline Dutch Vanya

  • Member
  • Salutes: 107
    • [Clan]
    • 38 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #38 on: August 23, 2014, 10:26:33 pm »
Who cares what the meta is, or what these guys say. If that build works for you, and continues to work for you against good opponents, then use it. Hell, if it doesn't work and you still want to use it, keep doing so. You DO actually have a good point about it being a lot easier to land flak shots off the side of a junker. Same reason i use a flak on some mine builds.

And Alistair, the thing about junkers sitting still doesn't apply when you have an enemy who knows how to exploit weaknesses, like the junkers speed and its inability to keep up with other ships that are backpedaling. Plus, sitting still takes all the fun out of piloting.

Offline Battle Toads

  • Member
  • Salutes: 4
    • [kTen]
    • 29 
    • 40
    • 41 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #39 on: August 24, 2014, 02:14:20 am »
What is a howitzer?

That's what the merc was called two years ago.

I may consistently go out of my way to call them Howitzers.

Whenever I think of Howitzers I think of something with a little more kick than what the merc has and sounds like

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB1jyNwhgrM (random video from 2 seconds on youtube) compare this to what the merc feels like and the merc just looks like a dinky rifle, while a howitzer implies something a lot cooler :P. Although now that I think of it, a gun that has a really high vertical arch when shot would be really cool way to get at enemies behind those little sand mounds in dunes, also would take a new skill set  to rain shots down from above as upposed to firing straight at an enemy

Offline Kestril

  • Community Ambassador
  • Salutes: 24
    • [Sass]
    • 33 
    • 36
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #40 on: November 28, 2014, 12:05:15 pm »
A little late, but as I fly gatflak junker regularly in pubs (and well, at that), I felt obliged to put some thoughts down:

For pubs, I prefer mirrored gatflack with the front nose gun as a flare or some other utility gun. When I've got a good crew, I'll usually switch one side to a longer range focus, or replace a gat with a Hades and swap the other side to a brawly/disabl-y carronad-banshee. Whatever I feel like, really.

I don't find the arming time problematic on the flak gun with the mirrored build in casual play. I can usually stay at arm's length away, on the edge of the gats range. Plus, i find that the flak punishes the enemy for mis-maneuvering into my arcs more. Also, the gat and flak are easier to aim for random pubbies. (But even then, I get a player that can't lead worth a darn with the flak, let alone mortar.)

I guess it's because I play my junker like an escort rather than a brawler or sniper. I just stay near my ally and cover their sides from medium to close range. It's worked well for me so far.  I prefer the flak because the playstyle is passive, and I find it harder to cover my allies with the short range of a mortar or odd arc and the arming time of the hadies.  The gat-flak is that "sweet spot" off of 120 meters where the  enemy ships  are most of the time.

It's also easier to coordinate by saying: Shoot the gatling all the time, and then wait until the red to shoot the flak. That way, when I change sides, spin to avoid a ram, or do some other evasive maneuver everyone knows that their job is the same, just on the other side. I love it when a pyramidion overshoots and my gunner instantly gets on the opposite side to continue shooting as if nothing has happened. Also, the flak is much easier to aim in the thick of things while spinning and dodging enemy fire.

So yeah, as of now, I think the range and accuracy of the flak is better suited to how I play "escort" junker than the close-in range of the mortars.

---

Of course, when I get a good organized crew (like many people coordinate to do), I'll change it up to play with what my crew is good at/wants. And make it something that requires more knowledge and coordination.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2014, 12:09:16 pm by Kestril »

Offline Alistair MacBain

  • Member
  • Salutes: 23
    • [GwTh]
    • 22 
    • 45
    • 19 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #41 on: November 28, 2014, 01:14:26 pm »
Gat flak is extremely bad on broadside ships like junkers and it will most likely get punished quite hard ocne you get to higher lvls.
Broadside ships like junkers cant control the range they engage a opponent very good.
ITs up to the ships with frontpointed weapons to decide on which range they want to engage you and that will most likely punish your gat flak if they are clever.

Offline Bronzium

  • Member
  • Salutes: 11
    • [HMCS]
    • 10 
    • 22
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #42 on: November 28, 2014, 01:27:43 pm »
Not sure if it's been talked of, but has anyone tried Gunker? (full gat Junker?) I've used quite a bit in the matches I've piloted in, and from my experience it works very nicely if you have good comms with your ally. Get 3 gats on one ship, strip the hull in seconds, and slowly but surely you wear the hull down too.

A Carronker works very effectively as well as a disabler. A friend and I tried it in a Crazy King match (where we both piloted Carrnonkers), and we were victorious. :)

Offline Alistair MacBain

  • Member
  • Salutes: 23
    • [GwTh]
    • 22 
    • 45
    • 19 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #43 on: November 28, 2014, 01:43:04 pm »
Seen? Alot. Useful? No.
Every build that suffers if it gets split into 1v1 isnt useful. And with the power of disable builds its just to easy to get forced into 1v1.
Why not swap one gat out for a mortar or banshee?
2 gats strip hull pretty fast aswell. Faster as any other build that doesnt bring 2 gats.
Thats the reasoning why brawlmobula is so strong.
2 gats and a mortar.

Offline Kestril

  • Community Ambassador
  • Salutes: 24
    • [Sass]
    • 33 
    • 36
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #44 on: November 28, 2014, 02:33:09 pm »
Gat flak is extremely bad on broadside ships like junkers and it will most likely get punished quite hard ocne you get to higher lvls.
Broadside ships like junkers cant control the range they engage a opponent very good well.
ITs up to the ships with frontpointed weapons to decide on which range they want to engage you and that will most likely punish your gat flak if they are clever.

Well yeah, I'm aware. Although i still maintain that the gat flak junker has the lowest skill barrier for new crews, which I find myself playing with very often. 

Though I wouldn't say "extremely bad", but rather "just like a gat/mortar"  an opponent will punish you just as much with a gat/mortar combo on both sides. In fact, It's easier to avoid the gat/mortar than a gat/flak on the side of a junker. You just stay far away, preferably with a lumberjack.

If it's "run asymmetry to make up for the range gaps" then yes, i agree.


Not sure if it's been talked of, but has anyone tried Gunker? (full gat Junker?) I've used quite a bit in the matches I've piloted in, and from my experience it works very nicely if you have good comms with your ally. Get 3 gats on one ship, strip the hull in seconds, and slowly but surely you wear the hull down too.

Nope. I always like to have a killgun. Although, I could see it working with a hwatchafish with some good cordination.

Quote
A Carronker works very effectively as well as a disabler. A friend and I tried it in a Crazy King match (where we both piloted Carrnonkers), and we were victorious. :)

When i run carronades, I pair them with banshees. If it's not disabled, it's on fire.

-----

I'd also disagree about the not useful if they can't hold their own in a 1v1. The lumberfish is useful. Galleons are useful and they can't handle a brawly 1v1 against a pilot that knows how to approach.

« Last Edit: November 28, 2014, 02:39:34 pm by Kestril »