Main > Gameplay

A Suggestion for the Echidna Light Flak Cannon

<< < (8/15) > >>

Kamoba:
Send that post to feedback@musegames.com or email the forums link and mention the post number as your conclusion.  8)

Extirminator:
A few points I would like to make:



--- Quote from: Lieutenant Noir on September 12, 2015, 06:23:42 am ---For one,
I don't like you guys comparing the Banshee and the Artemis to the Flak.
While the Flak does have more killing potential, these guns have uses in disabling which means that they have uses for outside the armour break.
As such, I don't think it is very nice to compare it to the light carronade either. Light Carronade can pop balloons in two clips but I think it still isn't fair to compare it to the light Flak. Mainly because popping balloons can disrupt arcs, make a ship vulnerable to Terrain, make the Hull more exposed, and separate enemy ships.. Even damaging balloons can cause a decrease in vertical mobility. The Flak can only kill and there is plenty of time for an enemy to incapacitate/ disable you in the time of that second clip.

--- End quote ---

It is viable and necessary to compare the light flak to a banshee or an artemis, exactly because of their multi-role purposes and varied circumstances of usage. At the end of the day, when you are creating a ship load-out, and you are contemplating which gun you want that can damage hull, you have a wide range of choices simply because the light gun slot is not restricting you with which gun you can place where - you have an unlimited range of options to go for, so you need to weigh all the options before you and pick for yourself which gun will be best suiting your case.
That is why you ultimately NEED to consider and put into equation all other 'semi-explosive' guns.


--- Quote from: Lieutenant Noir on September 12, 2015, 06:23:42 am ---I don't think I like the idea that a gun that is only useful for when the armor is broken can't kill a ship in one clip when we have two guns that have that ability. It means that we have a gun that is only good for killing ships and can't do it faster than two other guns. I find it annoying that a gun that is useless for a vitally important portion of a fight will have to have the help of other guns that speed up the killing process.
You have a gun that is useless until the short window of opportunity in the armour break, only useful at the small window of mid-range where engagements are less common, and you can't kill a ship faster than other guns that are useless until armour break.

--- End quote ---

The reason why the mortar is able to kill a ship with one clip is because the extremely limited range it has, due to jitter and low projectile speed I would place it as not reliable for killing on ranges above 200m.
The reason why the heavy flak is able to kill a ship with one clip is because the extremely low projectile speed it has for a gun with such range, and quite arcing shots over distance. At long ranges, the bullet travels so much time in the air, that it gives you an impressively small window for your shots to land if you are trying to time the armor break. What most people end up doing is to just spam it all the time and hope for the best. All-in-all, the heavy flak's ability to one-clip-kill ships I will place as reliable only at about below 1-1.2k range, and around 1.5k range for more experienced gunners. Factor in that a lot of maps will not give you the opportunity to snipe someone all the way from 1.5k until he's right in your face, and you get shorter effective ranges, with the enemy being at about 500m already and closing in fast - it almost always spells failure for a long range heavy flak build.

Switching to the flak, first of all, the flak is able to one-clip-kill Mobula, Pyramidion and Junkers. With placing significant damage to kill any other ship with the second clip.
With an arming time of 150m that can be manipulated a bit with ammo types, an a max range of 1000m, I will place the effective range of the flak from 200m to 850m. Those are 650m of range it is effective on, compared to 200m of range for the mortar, which explains why taking a mortar has to be a lot more rewarding due to the higher limitations. As to the heavy flak's effective range - around 500m~1200m which is pretty much the same range window as the light flak's give or take 100m, but the heavy flak needs to be able to perform those one clip kills due to the relatively hard nature of firing the weapon.
There needs to be a reward factor when using a weapon as hard to use as the heavy flak, or as range limiting as the mortar. The light flak is an inbreed, both possessing the higher range window of the heavy flak, and ease of use of the mortar - a combination of traits that make the light flak the go-to weapon if it could one-clip kill every ship, there needs to be a penalty for it and that is the limiting factor.

Lieutenant Noir:
I have a tendency to do this where I state a point and I don't explain it so bear with me as I try to explain my points.

Banshee:
Utilities in fire stacking
multi-range capabilities
low explosive damage for killing ships
I didn't want to compare the Flak to this gun because it has ulterior effects other than full on kill potential due to having fire and explosive damage. Other than being able to kill a ship, fire can pressure crew members off guns, potentially incapacitate components, and a multitude of different factors other than being able to kill. The trade off being that it has relatively low dps in explosive damage to compensate.

Artemis:
Utilities in Disabling components
Multi-range capabilities
low explosive damage for killing ships
I didn't want to compare the Flak to this gun because of the nature of it's disable potential. Other then being able to kill a ship, this gun can break components and so crew members will be spending less time pressuring your ship with firepower if the gun is broken and less time making sure the armor doesn't go down if engines are broken when they shouldn't be. The trade off being relatively low dps in terms of explosive damage.

I would argue that the effects of these guns are what make the disable meta shine and thus I consider these weapons disable weapons. I understand that the Flak has greater killing potential and this should give the Flak an edge over these guns. These weapons however have the ability to be used to greater effect in more versatile circumstances due to usage outside of Armour break. Even in the time of Armor break, they have the ability to potentially decrease the effectiveness of a ship at killing your ship. I would argue that comparing explosive Dps is largely problematic due to the fact that the disable potentials of these guns have extremely versatile uses.

Although the decision to put one of these guns on your ship could be for ranged killing potential (A niche that the Flak occupies), they have ulterior purposes that factor into the nature of the gun itself. I would say that it is arguable whether this makes these guns superior in comparison to Kill focused guns like the Flak, but I wanted to keep the discussion based on kill focused weapons as I feel it would deviate from the reasons people put Flaks on their ships. The reason being to kill ships at range.



I would say that because it is an Explosive Explosive weapon, it is a weapon that is going to be ineffective for a reasonable portion of the fight. I understand that there should be limitations put in place due to the factor of having increased range, ease of use, and low damage. I would say; however, that having low damage potential on a weapon that is solely focused on killing as well as arming time has cause a decline in the usage of the Flak. I wish that the Flak was harder to use and had more damage because damage becomes a big factor in deciding whether to bring a gun that can only kill a ship. I say that Arming time on the Flak has made it not very versatile. Even though there is a fair percentage of effective area the Flak has to utilize the Aoe damage, engagements in my experience of using the Flak have tended to emphasize Brawl or Mid-Snipe ranges. There is always the risk of Arming time coming into factor and I wish that that damage was used to compensate for this limitation instead of ease of use.

That being said, as I stated before. I am all for an increase in smoke stacks or longer duration of smoke stack emission as I feel utility weapons that occupy the Piloting Blind spot disability are a neat idea.

Dementio:

--- Quote from: Lieutenant Noir on September 12, 2015, 01:02:09 pm ---I would say; however, that having low damage potential on a weapon that is solely focused on killing as well as arming time has cause a decline in the usage of the Flak.

--- End quote ---

What really has caused a decline is the current Meta. It consists of disable in all ranges and close range brawling. The Light Flak would beat a Pyramidion since its easy to hit with its hull everywhere and a Galleon for its large and unmoving profile. Spires would also be easy to hit, but often tend to ambush with Hwacha, so Flak doesn't work here. Mobulas and Junker often have one too many Artemises and the only way to beat an Artemis is to outarc it, outplay it or out-Artemis it, which the Light Flak isn't particularly good at. Squids and Goldfishes often go for brawling too.

The Light Flak doesn't really have a place here, so it appears to be "weak".



--- Quote from: Lieutenant Noir on September 12, 2015, 01:02:09 pm ---That being said, as I stated before. I am all for an increase in smoke stacks or longer duration of smoke stack emission as I feel utility weapons that occupy the Piloting Blind spot disability are a neat idea.

--- End quote ---

I would be up for that.

BlackenedPies:
The smoke effect seems largely determined by graphics settings.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page