A Suggestion for the Echidna Light Flak Cannon

[Daft Loon]

I would be okay with the ability to only be able to kill in 2 clips if Muse incorporated some system of play where a severely damaged ship had permanent disable properties. Examples being:
-A broken ship being harder for crew members to move around
-Gun arcs being slightly harder to angle
-Piloting perspective distorted (Having a broken wall in your face obscuring your situational awareness)
This change however would probably make Kill weapons a little too over-powered but I would be all for having quicker matches.

I like this idea from a thematic perspective but it could have some balance problems as far as leaving suicide and re-spawn as a better option sometimes than continuing.
A variant - Hit points of all components reduced in proportion to hull damage. Maybe at 50% rate so taking half damage from a flak would reduce armor, guns etc to 75% hit points. It might be a bit hard on 90% dead squids (130 armor!) and would more or less require a hwacha nerf.

[Dementio]

If you look back, I mentioned that guns with Arming Time offer High rewards in return for difficulty of use within a short time frame. I have a tendency of not being very clear, so once again please bear with me as I will try to be as clear as I can.

I mentioned that in order to deal with the fact that Arming time makes a lot of guns not very flexible, guns with arming time utilize high rewards per clip as well as difficulty of use.

Not to mention, they are also hard to operate (Fly/Shoot) and so the effectiveness of the high reward is balanced toward this aspect.

My Points were

These are all guns that are not only popular but they are very effective at their jobs
Can you imagine how ineffective these guns would be if their first clip was not able to do their job?
They work because they are effective within a short amount of time and that works perfectly with arming time as a factor.

Yes, I can imagine how ineffective these guns would be if their first clip was not able to do their job, because most of their first clip will very often not do their job, because they are hard to hit with and sometimes even easy to dodge.

Arming time isn't even a factor in how effective the guns are within a short amount of time. Arming time only helps Muse to tell people where the guns are supposed to be used. If arming time really was that bad than think about this: Hades. If people don't use the Light Flak than they probably kill ships a lot less quicker than they want to, but luckily they manage to keep the enemy either out of arming time of the Hades or have a pair of close range guns to fight with when it comes down to it. If they had at least one Light Flak than it should mean that they kill or severly damage their target before it even gets into close range. And once they had at least one armor break to empty their entire Light Flak clip into their enemy and the enemy survived that, then they could still kill their enemy with the Light Flak even when it was inside arming time! Except for the Galleon, it would survive that second clip when it was inside arming time, but realistically speaking it would be hilarious if a Galleon managed to enter the Light Flak's arming time.
Yes, an Artemis could then easily snipe that Light Flak and if they Light Flak could one clip all ships it would at have a higher chance to win in the above mentioned scenario. But at the same time, I hope at least, the Artemis was sniping the Hades so it wouldn't even come to an armor break in the first place, which would result in the Light Flak, and all other explosive/explosive guns in that scenario, to be "completely uselss" during the fight, but luckily the Light Flak has already more dps against the armor than the Banshee, so when chem spray is perfectly up and running, the Light Flak may actually have some use.

And why do you assume that the Light Flak's job is to kill every ship within on clip? Because all those other two guns with explosive/explosive can do that? Do all explosive/explosive guns have to follow that trend and if yes, would it make the game better if all of these guns would essentially be the exact same thing? Personally, I find that the current Light Flak is a good way of killing ships, even if it can only one clip 3 out of 7 ships. I don't like the fact that ships die as quickly as they do in general, if you were wondering.
And is the Light Flak not effective in killing ships? It takes two clips to pretty much get a guaranteed kill. It takes two clip for the Light Carronade to destroy a balloon and that is effective too, isn't it? I do throw that Carronade into these arguments a lot, but when you think about it, a ship without a balloon is out of combat, which is similar to a ship that is already dead, as it leaves the other one in a 2v1.
And if the Hades is so effective at destroying armors, shouldn't it mean that a skilled gunner can drop armors left and right? So many and quick armor destructions should make it very easy for the Light Flak to kill a ship, even when it requires at least two clips.

You said "high rewards in return for difficulty of use within a short time frame". The Light Flak is not that difficult and so returns not that much reward. You want it to be more difficult so it would give more reward, as in, you mentioned "more like the Heavy Flak", so:

Instead of making the Light Flak more like the Heavy Flak, why not use the Heavy Flak to begin with?

If I want to destroy a balloon in one clip, I will use the Heavy Carronade or Lumberjack. If I want to kill all ships in medium/long range with only one clip, I would use the Heavy Flak (or still the Light Flak). Why buff one gun, a gun that is in my opinion just fine as it is, when you can use another gun to achieve what you want to achieve? I suppose it is not the same if you are forced to use a heavy gun which only 3 ships in the game allow you to do (or just 2, because the Goldfish doesn't support Heavy Flaks), but that is where pilot skill comes in: Make a ship loadout that does exactly what you want it to do and then make it do that in-game.

I would also find it rather silly, if the Light Flak would be as powerful as its heavy version, its not even as big as a Mortar, but that's just design.

All of these ships carry something that disables in order to stand up against the Current (Super Quotation Marks) Multi-Range Disable Meta(Super Quotation Marks)
On all of these ships, you would pretty much be able to replace the Explosive Explosive guns for something that disables such as a Hwatcha, an Artemis, a Banshee, etc. I remember flying these ships because

we often got the kill very quickly, while disabling our own enemy

I said that, because, as you pointed out, explosive/explosive guns tend to be rather useless outside of armor breaks, so I gave you one example scenario where you can use the Light Flak during somebody else's armor break. The Light Flak, and all explosive guns in general, are not limited to killing the one ship that you decided to 1v1, it can still kill other ships too. The Lumberjack gave us many opportunities to just kill whoever our ally is fighting. At the same time, the Lumberjack only made these kind of things easier, since we could have very well gone for the other ship from the very beginning and probably killed it with Hades/Flak Pyramidion, before we would have needed the disable power of the Lumberjack.

I'm want the Flak to have the Potential to one clip a ship. You can miss shots with the Mortar or Heavy Flak, you don't always kill with two clips on those either.
The Flak is still pretty hard to use as I mentioned

(The spread at range, the projectile speed in terms of predicting Armour break, Determining effective range, Flying at mid-range etc)

You wouldn't always land every shot with the Flak just like with the others. If you increase its overall clip damage... lets put it this way, you would increase the chances of killing a ship in a second clip (Without the use of a buff hammer). In return, being able to land every single shot would be up to the skill of the shooter.

The above also applies here.



Now that's just a shot into the dark, but I believe we have found ourselves in a position where it is "I want" vs "You want" and we will continue in circles from here on out. You want a Light Flak that can do around the same damage as the Heavy Flak while also being as hard to shoot with as the Heavy Flak. I don't want that, because I believe it would make the gun, and the gameplay of killing, more dull, whereas you could keep it as it is, as I believe it is fine as it is, even in comp, and even newer players have a gun that they can actually hit and kill with.

[Lieutenant Noir]

I apologize, I miss calculated. I thought it was 512 not 743.68 all this time (Forgot the Explosive multiplier). Oops
Silly me

Now that I realize that the Light Flak does have the damage potential to back it up, I think I would like a clip size reduction while keeping it's overall damage per clip.
Yes, I'm still leaning towards the Flak being able to kill within a shorter period of time.

Yes, an Artemis could then easily snipe that Light Flak and if they Light Flak could one clip all ships it would at have a higher chance to win in the above mentioned scenario. But at the same time, I hope at least, the Artemis was sniping the Hades so it wouldn't even come to an armor break in the first place, which would result in the Light Flak, and all other explosive/explosive guns in that scenario, to be "completely uselss" during the fight, but luckily the Light Flak has already more dps against the armor than the Banshee, so when chem spray is perfectly up and running, the Light Flak may actually have some use.

I think from this post the point was that in a scenario where the light Flak was used, it wouldn't be effective because it would be disabled or Armour stripper being disabled. Do tell me if I'm wrong because I'm having a hard time understanding (This is nothing personal but I do have trouble sometimes understanding people).

I'm going to mention the list of Builds that incorporate Explosive Explosive weapons again

Brawler Spires and Mobulas, the Meta Galleon, and the infamous Loch Spire all incorporate these weapons.

I want to mention that all these ships usually contain a disable weapon of their own whether it be a Hwatcha, Artemis, Merc, or Lumberjack. I also want to mention that not all of these ships are seen in competitive and they shouldn't.
The reason I bring these ships up is the fact that they are used, not all the time but see regular use.

These ships often incorporate a combination of guns that disable as well as stand well on their own. Some examples being Double Gat/Hwatcha, Merc/Art, Hades/Lumber, etc. They are incorporated in order to make the ship stand up in the Age of the (Super Quotation Marks)Multi-Range Disable Meta(Super Quotation Marks)
I also want to mention that the Explosive Explosive weapons are effective within a short period of time, whether it be the fact that the Mortar can one clip or Flak can two clip at a fairly faster rate.
These are the types of ships I want the Light Flak used more on and I think being effective within a shorter period of time would mean more opportunities to use the Flak.

Next Point

If I want to kill all ships in medium/long range with only one clip, I would use the Heavy Flak (or still the Light Flak). Why buff one gun, a gun that is in my opinion just fine as it is, when you can use another gun to achieve what you want to achieve? I suppose it is not the same if you are forced to use a heavy gun which only 3 ships in the game allow you to do (or just 2, because the Goldfish doesn't support Heavy Flaks), but that is where pilot skill comes in: Make a ship loadout that does exactly what you want it to do and then make it do that in-game.

-I want the Light Flak to be effective within a shorter period of time because it is an Explosive Explosive weapon that incorporates Arming Time (The inability to Brawl). I believe that if you make the Flak more effective within a shorter period of time there would still be reasons to use the Heavy Flak. The Heavy Flak would have more range as well as the quick time it takes to unload a clip. You wouldn't kill as fast and you wouldn't have the range, I believe this would make the two guns able to stand on their own.

-I believe there are not that many opportunities to use the Light Flak and I want to see it used by more people

-When you stick an Explosive Explosive weapon on a ship and your build is effective, it sort of defines your build load-out. The kill potential is impressive and most ships that incorporate Explosive Explosive weapons are build around the fact that you want the Kill Potential (and you want it fast against the potential of disable). Unless your ship is going full troll, there's not a lot of flexibility a weapon like the Light Flak can have (Especially when you have Arming Time to factor into the equation).

Next Point

It takes two clip for the Light Carronade to destroy a balloon and that is effective too, isn't it? I do throw that Carronade into these arguments a lot, but when you think about it, a ship without a balloon is out of combat, which is similar to a ship that is already dead, as it leaves the other one in a 2v1.
And if the Hades is so effective at destroying armors, shouldn't it mean that a skilled gunner can drop armors left and right? So many and quick armor destructions should make it very easy for the Light Flak to kill a ship, even when it requires at least two clips.

Okay, I know that I said that I didn't want to compare Disable weapons to Kill-only weapons because of how effective disables are in comparison to Killing potential. I think I might as well compare them since it's going to keep popping up anyway.
You already compared the Flak to the Artemis and so that fight is lost
-I will now compare the Light Flak to the Light Carronade
-Now you mentioned in the quote above that a disabled Balloon means dead ship right?
so Popped Balloon = Killed Ship
-Bear in mind that one of these guns is only effective when the Armour is down, where as the other gun can be used immediately
-That means the Light Carronade can effectively kill a ship faster than a Light Flak can.
-There that's it... Comparison over. Kill-only weapons suck and that's why we have a Disable Meta, why am I even talking about a Kill-only weapon?


Next Point

You want a Light Flak that can do around the same damage as the Heavy Flak while also being as hard to shoot with as the Heavy Flak. I don't want that, because I believe it would make the gun, and the gameplay of killing, more dull, whereas you could keep it as it is, as I believe it is fine as it is, even in comp, and even newer players have a gun that they can actually hit and kill with.

-Here is where our points differ because I don't think the Flak is very easy to hit with
I don't think that it is because of the points that I mentioned

(The spread at range, the projectile speed in terms of predicting Armour break, Determining effective range, Flying at mid-range etc).

This is the only point that I fully believe we have reached a Stalemate on because I see this gun as one of the harder guns to operate and especially for new players.

-In terms of changing the game play of killing, I believe with the inclusion of this change it will not have any effect on the Disable Meta.
What we would see would be an increase in use of the Flak in "Disable" builds or currently existing Kill Builds. My point was never to change the Meta but to get the Flak into the current meta or more than it is currently.



I do sort of enjoy these discussions as it helps me with my inability to be clear with my points. Do let me know if you don't know where I'm going with a point. The feedback helps.

[Daft Loon]

The light flak can be easy to hit with but it suffers the same from turning as the artemis, possibly more. Just yesterday i had an engineer on my flak-hades-hades mobula hitting full clips consistently at around 700m, mostly because having only 10 degrees of effective arc means flying very carefully. (unfortunately he was an awful engineer and the gunner was hitting nothing but air with his hades so i didn't get to see what kind of effect it could have had, as it was we killed the galleon at least as fast as double artemis would). The timing is also an overstated difficulty since mobula,pyra,junker and galleon armor takes long enough to rebuild that even the worst case where rebuilding starts at the same time as the reload the flak can still get hits on hull and squid,goldfish and spire are in serious danger of losing the last of their armor to the flak and taking half the clip to hull.

Going back to the original suggestion there is a slight limitation to compressing the damage into fewer shots - Lochnagar
The current loch-L.flak does an almost respectable 250 hull damage and as much fun as it would be to dish out 500-750 (compresing to 3 or 2 shots) damage with a single light gun shot people might find it objectionable. Especially since an arming range reduced to 75m is essentially no obstacle (loch mines are 66m). So 4 shots minimum.

One thing that is annoying is that it gets very little from ammo choice, you can lose 50 damage per clip to gain half a second or lose a second to gain 100 with no real effect on average damage over time.

Pointless nitpick:
The light carronade can 1 clip balloons, you just need perfect burst or buff shots (if they get the mallet hit in perfect buff-burst shots)

[Lieutenant Noir]

I would say I would be happy with a 4 shot clip for the Flak

In terms of damage output for the Flak if we were to keep the normal round total explosive output the same
meaning 480 explosive damage into 4 shots.
So maybe 75 direct damage and 45 Aoe damage

This would mean ammo types would only be either Heat-sink or Charged as recommended
Heat-sink would do a total of 5 shots with a clip potential of 480 so same as normal but you get a decrease in Arming time

Charged would do a total of 3 shots with a clip potential of 468 so it's less but you have a smaller clip so less shots to make (I have yet to factor in the 25% decrease in rate of fire)

With this you would still be able to one clip a Pyra and Junker for both Ammunition
This would be overall less damage than the previous heat-sink Flak damage potential of 512 but would have a higher rate of fire due to less shots and not having to land as many shots to be effective.
You would be able to get that second clip ready in time for the next armor break.

Yeah, I would say it would be better than having to land all 8 heat-sink shots at a distance while predicting the armor break to pull off the total damage potential.

The light carronade can 1 clip balloons, you just need perfect burst or buff shots (if they get the mallet hit in perfect buff-burst shots)

Shhhhhhhhhh, no more

[Lieutenant Noir]

Ugh, scratch the previous post due to wrong calculations

Heat-sink clip would actually have a damage potential of 498 Explosive so a little higher but not quite enough to one-clip a mobula

I think the only really ammo would be greased with the same damage potential as normal rounds (480 Explosive)
Since you have the same damage as normal rounds, a pilot could tell the shooter to switch to normal if the enemy is farther away. That way you could hit farther and need only 4 shots to do the job.

If you use greased then you would have the same damage potential but higher rate of fire and an Arming Time Decrease for 5 shots.
A plus plus when you're dealing with needing to empty that second clip as fast as possible within a short time frame.

[BlackenedPies]

http://ducksoficarus.servegame.com/

[Lieutenant Noir]

Alright, Let me clean up the previous calculations just to make it more clear

So currently the Light Flak does a total of 480 explosive damage per clip with 6 shots
My suggestion was to decrease that clip to 4 shots but keep the same Normal explosive damage

That would mean each shot from the New Flak would hit 120 total Explosive damage
In this case, I suggested it having 75 Direct damage and 45 Aoe Damage.



By this statistic, the most used ammo types would be Greased, Charged, and normal

Greased rounds:
(Total clip damage: 480)  w/ Explosive modifier of 1.4 = 672
Increase clip size to 5
Decrease Arming Time
Increase rate of fire

Charged Rounds:
(Total clip damage: 468) w/ Explosive modifier of 1.4 = 655.2
Decrease clip size to 3
No decrease in Arming Time
Decrease rate of fire but load next clip quicker

Normal Rounds:
(Total clip damage: 480) w/ Explosive modifier of 1.4 = 672
Clip size 4
No decrease in Arming Time
No change in rate of fire


My idea is that it would make it easier to pull off the damage potential for the first clip in order to make the second clip more effective.
My problem with previous Flak:
-land 8 Heat-sink shots
-At Relatively far distance
-Also predict when armor would break
-Shots that land don't even do enough damage since you would never land enough before the armor comes back up

New Flak:
-Still predict shots
-Still relatively far distance
-Less shots to make
-Less overall Clip Damage potential
-Would increase chances of unloading full clip in Armor Break (Increase consistency of Clip damage potential)

Let me know what you think about this suggestion

[Mr.Bando]

The miniflak takes up a light weapon slot. Should it be expected to take out ships easily when armor drops? Considering the lower risk/reward balance of attacking enemies from range as opposed to getting in close to the enemy and using short ranged weapons I still like where the miniflak is at the moment. I bring up the concept of risk/reward to explain how being able to survive closing the distance to your opponents should be rewarded with potent short ranged weapon attacks of high damage and disable power. That's why mortars can take out most ships with just one magazine. Miniflak doesn't require the captain to risk bringing the ship in close hence requiring a reload or two to destroy said target. Want to take out a ship like lightning from a cloudless sky? Better deal with taking a ship with a heavy weapon slot, a heavy flak and a gunner who knows how to use said heavy flak.

Back on the miniflak tho. You might make it more user friendly for newer players to get in the damage with less hits, it will be a lot more devastating when used by experienced players. You may end up seeing more boring shooting contest in competitive games that is based only on who shoots more accurately than ships trying to outmaneuver each other with flankings, turning or height battles.

[Lieutenant Noir]

The miniflak takes up a light weapon slot. Should it be expected to take out ships easily when armor drops? Considering the lower risk/reward balance of attacking enemies from range as opposed to getting in close to the enemy and using short ranged weapons I still like where the miniflak is at the moment. I bring up the concept of risk/reward to explain how being able to survive closing the distance to your opponents should be rewarded with potent short ranged weapon attacks of high damage and disable power. That's why mortars can take out most ships with just one magazine.

I understand that the weapons like the Mortar and Heavy Flak should have higher rewards based on the range, ease of use and this is shown in the ability to kill ships in one clip.
Currently the Flak has the ability to kill in two clips because it has relatively decent damage potential per clip.
My issue is that the Flak isn't that easy to shoot and I don't care how good at shooting you are, you are not gonna be able to land 8 of those shots consistently at range and while predicting the armor break.
You're gonna miss some shots and every shot counts on a big clip that needs to do it's job within two armor breaks.


I never stated that I would be increasing the damage per clip, in fact compared to the previous Flak damage per clip you would do less.
Previous Heat-sink Flak does a total clip damage of 531.2 Explosive and 743.68 damage to hull health.
My point is that you would have to land less shots to pull it off.


This doesn't mean much of a change to the current Flak when you think about it (You would still have to wait for a second Armor break to pull off enough damage to kill). All this means is that you would be increasing the consistency of damage output.
That first shot or first two shots you missed wouldn't mean as much as it would have because:
-Each of your shots would do more damage
-That second clip will reload faster in time for the second Armor break

The time it takes to unload a clip shouldn't be more than the time it takes to rebuild armor, especially if your gun is a kill-only weapon that only kills in two armor breaks.

Next Point

Back on the miniflak tho. You might make it more user friendly for newer players to get in the damage with less hits, it will be a lot more devastating when used by experienced players. You may end up seeing more boring shooting contest in competitive games that is based only on who shoots more accurately than ships trying to outmaneuver each other with flankings, turning or height battles.

I don't think this change would affect the Competitive meta much at all. In fact you still keep the limitations of the Flak's killing ability in turn with ease of use. We are still in the era of the (Super Quotation Marks)Multi-range Disable meta(Super Quotation Marks), which means a gun that can only kill (in two armor breaks) and can't brawl will have limited use much like it does now.
I only want to increase the efficiency of being able to kill in two armor breaks.

It has ease of use and if that is the case, it should have reliable damage.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On a side note, I found a flaw with my suggested change:
I just want to label some information
So with a Charged Heavy Flak clip you would do 1202.2 hull health damage
With a Greased Mortar clip you would do 1411.2 hull health damage

With the change to the suggested Light Flak
In two Greased clips (Each doing a total of 672 hull health damage) you would do a total of 1344 hull health damage
In two Charged clips (Each doing a total of 655.2 hull health damage) you would do a total 1310.4 hull health damage
Do you think it should be more damage considering you can't kill a Galleon in two clips?
I think that considering you have to land a full two clips, it should do more damage

[Mr.Bando]

I wouldn't increase damage for mini flak just so you can destroy a galleon in two reloads. Galleons have a load of HP for the purpose of soaking the damage. They are also a large target with longer armour rebuild so there shouldn't be an issue with landing hits in a relatively large opportunity window from its optimal range.

[DJ Logicalia]

Would a decent enough buff for the light flak be a nerf to the double barreled mortar

[MightyKeb]

Would a decent enough buff for the light flak be a nerf to the double barreled mortar

More importantly, would the current flak be balanced and desirable if Mortar was nerfed in some way? (I got the idea by misreading the quote above.)

[Mr.Bando]

Well that depends on if the aforementioned weapons function they way that they were suppose to function. While debating if it is acceptable for a light mortar to take out most ships without needing to reload and then to consider it "balanced", mini flak usage involves greater target leading and volley timing all because of the projectile travel time.  Not to mention your target will try to evade your attacks. Too hard to use and needs a buff? I don't know for sure.

I don't think the mini flak is always desired for all opponent ships fought against. Goldfish and squids being the harder targets because of their speed and low armour rebuilding times. They work best against larger and/or slower targets. However you can plan along with ally captain who can bring disables to help fix your target in place, for example.

Therefore I think it's a lot more complicated than just simply buffing the mini flak to make it more useful in a given matchup. What ships your ally and opponent uses, their load outs, the map being fought in, tools being used, etc, etc, etc. All those things need to be taken into consideration.

[Lieutenant Noir]

Would a decent enough buff for the light flak be a nerf to the double barreled mortar

If you were to buff the Flak in the previous suggestion I made before,
The Flak would be an explosive explosive weapon that would need to kill in two armor breaks and would be unable to brawl.

The mortar would be an explosive explosive weapon that would need to kill in one armor break and would be able to brawl at the sacrifice of range.

My previous suggestion would only increase the chances of killing within two armor breaks by decreasing the amount of shots
I think that would be reason enough to bring either of those weapons

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for the being only able to kill a Galleon in three armor breaks...
If we compare the Heavy Flak and Mortar to the suggested Light Flak
Heavy Flak:
Charged
-Difficulty of use
-Long-mid range
-slow projectile speed
-Kill galleon in 3 shots (two clips) (Two armor breaks)

Mortar:
Greased
-Ease of use
-Short range
-Slow projectile speed
-Kill galleon in 14 shots (1 clip) (1 armor break)

Suggested Light Flak:
-Ease of use
-mid-Longish mid range
-Fast projectile speed
-Kill galleon in
---Charged: 9 shots (Three armor breaks) (Three clips)
---Greased: 15 shots (Three armor breaks) (Three clips)

My problem that I came up with for the suggested Flak was that three armor breaks is still a lot of time for something to creep up because you're dealing with a weapon with Arming Time. Remember also, in both those two ammo types, you would have to land exactly every single shot of those three clips (although you do get the added benefit of having to land less shots). Personally I think having to kill a galleon in three Armor breaks is a bit much considering you would be bringing something to have kill potential without disable in a weapon slot. I might come up with something later.