Author Topic: Another one of those 'gunner balance' threads.  (Read 26412 times)

Offline James T. Kirk

  • Muse Games
  • Salutes: 182
    • [Cake]
    • 19 
    • 25
    • 43 
    • View Profile
    • The Cake Official Website!
Another one of those 'gunner balance' threads.
« on: September 26, 2014, 07:58:39 am »
It's not exactly a secret that the gunner isn't quite up to par with the other two classes. You need a highly specialized build to not require a pilot, and oftentimes, triple engineer works just as well (sometimes better) than engie/engie/gunner.

What I am saying should be no huge surprise to anyone, and most of you at this point are probably wondering what suggestion could possibly be new.

Well, I've been fiddling around with this idea for a little bit now, bouncing it off of a few of my fellow Cakes, and even a few Dev buddies, and I think it's time to bring it to the general opinion of the Forum.

Gunner tools.

Not gunner ammo, gunner tools.

For probably about 85% of the guns in this game, one ammo type is enough to get the gun working at maximum efficacy. Every engineering job needs a MINIMUM of two tools (repair and fire suppression) but for maximum efficiency, they need 3 tools (rebuild, repair, and fire suppression). Pilots need as many tools as possible to out maneuver their opponents (with the possible exception of a sniper galleon).

Imagine how OP it would be if an engineer could take 4 tools.
Imagine the shift in gameplay if a pilot could bring an extra tool.
Giving a gunner a 4th ammo would change next to nothing.

That's because everything the gunner has to choose from is far too similar.

Every class has a large selection of tools to utalize with a few scattered specialized tools. The Buff Hammer and Spyglass come to mind.

If we gave the gunner a few tools to use off the gun, I believe that would encourage the necessity of more than one gunner tool, AKA, bringing gunners.

Let's take an example.
The most balanced thing I've been able to come up with is a "greace can." You apply the greace to the gun similar to how one uses a buff hammer, and it charges up a bar to the left (but make it blue), that once fills, it activates, allowing the gun to be turned faster. You could then use an ammo ON TOP of the greace. Engineers could only do one or the other, and a gunner would have an advantage over a gungineer.

Applied effects would be less drastic than gunner ammo, but would have no downsides.
Applied effects run out of time, just like a buff hammer effect.

Now. I open the floor to you, community.

Stupid idea?
Meh idea?
Game saving idea?

Let's see what you all think.

Offline Milevan Faent

  • Member
  • Salutes: 15
    • [Cake]
    • 8
    • 31 
    • View Profile
Re: Another one of those 'gunner balance' threads.
« Reply #1 on: September 26, 2014, 09:37:35 am »
Muse has already stated that they will never give the Gunner a tool to use while not on a Gun as it breaks paradigm. Likewise, new tools for the gunner in general will not happen before new ammo types and tweaks to current ammo types are tried FIRST. This is far from the first time this idea has been tossed around.

Offline Crafeksterty

  • Member
  • Salutes: 73
    • [GwTh]
    • 17 
    • 28
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Another one of those 'gunner balance' threads.
« Reply #2 on: September 26, 2014, 09:41:51 am »
https://gunsoficarus.com/community/forum/index.php/topic,4009.msg69386.html#msg69386

Again, a new tool TYPE needs to be done for the gunner. Like a secondary activatable while on a gun.

Offline Hoja Lateralus

  • Member
  • Salutes: 135
    • [ψ꒜]
    • 45 
    • 45
    • 23 
    • View Profile
Re: Another one of those 'gunner balance' threads.
« Reply #3 on: September 26, 2014, 10:57:15 am »
Quote
Imagine how OP it would be if an engineer could take 4 tools.
Imagine the shift in gameplay if a pilot could bring an extra tool.
Giving a gunner a 4th ammo would change next to nothing.

Excellent point, although 4-slot roles would be a neat idea for some (closed) event. Tournament maybe? I'm afraid it can be pain in the ass to implement and the effect wouldn't be big enough.

I think a game-changer could be the ammo that changes the secondary type of damage on the gun.

Quote
Muse has already stated that they will never give the Gunner a tool to use while not on a Gun as it breaks paradigm. Likewise, new tools for the gunner in general will not happen before new ammo types and tweaks to current ammo types are tried FIRST. This is far from the first time this idea has been tossed around.

I'm afraid this is right.

Offline James T. Kirk

  • Muse Games
  • Salutes: 182
    • [Cake]
    • 19 
    • 25
    • 43 
    • View Profile
    • The Cake Official Website!
Re: Another one of those 'gunner balance' threads.
« Reply #4 on: September 26, 2014, 11:33:19 am »
In the pilot slot, we have tools you can use off the helm, the engineer has access to tools that do not repair.

I don't see why the gunner has to be so specialized.

Offline HamsterIV

  • Member
  • Salutes: 328
    • 10 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
    • Monkey Dev
Re: Another one of those 'gunner balance' threads.
« Reply #5 on: September 26, 2014, 12:03:25 pm »
The spy glass already breaks this paradigm as it is a pilot tool that can be used off the helm. Muse wants the gunner class to be the newbie class despite of the incredibly negative reaction powdermonkeys get when they join an established crew. I would welcome giving the gunner more versatility off the gun but that would involve making the gunner game deeper.

I am of the opinion that the engineer, not the gunner, should be the newbie/default class. It is easy to train a new engineer on ship routes than it is to train a new gunner on leading, shot drop, and inherited momentum. Engineers are pretty interchangeable and can be position swapped if one engineer is under performing due to lag or inexperience.

Offline sparklerfish

  • Member
  • Salutes: 124
    • [Clan]
    • 45 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
    • DJ mixes and original tracks on SoundCloud
Re: Another one of those 'gunner balance' threads.
« Reply #6 on: September 26, 2014, 02:38:09 pm »
I am of the opinion that the engineer, not the gunner, should be the newbie/default class. It is easy to train a new engineer on ship routes than it is to train a new gunner on leading, shot drop, and inherited momentum. Engineers are pretty interchangeable and can be position swapped if one engineer is under performing due to lag or inexperience.

Dude, this.  I have such a hard time convincing new players to switch to engineer.  Everyone just wants to shoot guns all the time, and I don't think a lot of new players understand that engineers CAN and DO also shoot guns, and that you are more useful having tools than ammo types.  I also think that in order to be a good gunner, you also need to know how to engineer, as your job as a gunner is to make the enemy engineers unable to repair, so in order to be as effective as you can be, you need to be aware of what you are damaging and when to make it hard for them to repair.  I don't like the idea of gunner being the "newbie class" because people just get stuck in the "all I do is shoot guns all the time" mindset and then never want to change.

Offline Sprayer

  • Member
  • Salutes: 14
    • [SPQR]
    • 45 
    • 45
    • 27 
    • View Profile
Re: Another one of those 'gunner balance' threads.
« Reply #7 on: September 26, 2014, 03:08:36 pm »
Back to topic.

We'll just have to wait until MUSE sees they have to break their paradigm again in order to fix things.

Offline sparklerfish

  • Member
  • Salutes: 124
    • [Clan]
    • 45 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
    • DJ mixes and original tracks on SoundCloud
Re: Another one of those 'gunner balance' threads.
« Reply #8 on: September 26, 2014, 03:57:10 pm »
Why the resistance to break the paradigm?  It seems pretty arbitrary to say that they don't want a gunner to have tools other than ammo.  Isn't balance more important than all classes functioning with the exact same "I have three tools that can only be used on helm/gun/component" paradigm?

Having gunner be a more viable option would really cut down on arguments with powder monkeys, too...

I think the very fact that there have been SO MANY of these threads is pretty indicative that the community at large really wants/needs a change to the paradigm.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2014, 03:59:55 pm by sparklerfish »

Offline GeoRmr

  • Member
  • Salutes: 178
    • [Rydr]
    • 45 
    • 1
    • 45 
    • View Profile
    • Storm Ryders
Re: Another one of those 'gunner balance' threads.
« Reply #9 on: September 26, 2014, 04:33:31 pm »
Why the resistance to break the paradigm?  It seems pretty arbitrary to say that they don't want a gunner to have tools other than ammo.  Isn't balance more important than all classes functioning with the exact same "I have three tools that can only be used on helm/gun/component" paradigm?

Having gunner be a more viable option would really cut down on arguments with powder monkeys, too...

I think the very fact that there have been SO MANY of these threads is pretty indicative that the community at large really wants/needs a change to the paradigm.

And yet they already break the paradigm with the rangefinder and spyglass, why not give the gunner extra tools and just redefine the paradigm it would even be neater than the current mess!

+1

If anyone's interested here's the link to my original thread about how new extreme ammo types solves nothing, and how gunner tools are the way forward, (not that anyone in muse really cares about player opinions, they only pretend to) https://gunsoficarus.com/community/forum/index.php/topic,4125.0.html

Offline Richard LeMoon

  • Muse Games
  • Salutes: 284
    • [Muse]
    • 33 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Another one of those 'gunner balance' threads.
« Reply #10 on: September 27, 2014, 03:28:51 am »
Really, just adding a second tool slot to Gunners would solve a lot of ewwwww-a-gunner problems. No special 'gunner' tools. Maybe some Engineer tools that would help with the guns, though. That and getting rid of DPS buff increases.

Offline shaelyn

  • Member
  • Salutes: 73
    • [◉‿◉]
    • 40 
    • 42
    • 10 
    • View Profile
Re: Another one of those 'gunner balance' threads.
« Reply #11 on: September 27, 2014, 12:36:34 pm »
most of the gunner balance idea, I have mixed feelings about.

this is the only idea I can 100% get behind that I've seen so far.  no added slots, just bring in a couple of tools that are gunner-specific and add them as an alternate option to a third ammo type.

Offline DJ Tipz N Trix

  • Member
  • Salutes: 20
    • [♫]
    • 45 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Another one of those 'gunner balance' threads.
« Reply #12 on: September 27, 2014, 01:07:10 pm »
Something as simple as:

  • Dynabuff Hammer no longer works on guns
  • Gun Buffer (gunner's tool) buffs guns in the exact same way Dynabuff Hammer used to

Offline Canon Whitecandle

  • Member
  • Salutes: 8
    • [DAGZ]
    • 10 
    • 24
    • 14 
    • View Profile
Re: Another one of those 'gunner balance' threads.
« Reply #13 on: September 27, 2014, 04:42:55 pm »
Honestly, passive buffs that are straight performance upgrades would be helpful for gunner usability, such as an ammo bag that increases the clip size of the gun you're on but forces you to carry one less ammo type, or WD-40 that lets you turn the gun faster while you're on it but with the same 'one less ammo type' consequence. That way the gunner can shoot longer and track faster but still keep an ammo type. The popular consensus is that you only need one ammo type anyways.

Offline GeoRmr

  • Member
  • Salutes: 178
    • [Rydr]
    • 45 
    • 1
    • 45 
    • View Profile
    • Storm Ryders
Re: Another one of those 'gunner balance' threads.
« Reply #14 on: September 27, 2014, 04:45:03 pm »
Something as simple as:

  • Dynabuff Hammer no longer works on guns
  • Gun Buffer (gunner's tool) buffs guns in the exact same way Dynabuff Hammer used to

THIS.

*10