Main > Gameplay

Suggestions for the Mobula and Junker

<< < (4/9) > >>

Lieutenant Noir:

--- Quote from: DrTentacles on September 22, 2015, 08:55:41 pm ---In seriousness, Mobula is not OP, junker could maybe use a overhaul, but it's problem is more fundamentally tied to it's giant balloon, and this seems like a giant problem of people getting complacent in their strategies and not experimenting. We're at a more diverse point in the meta than I've seen it in a long time. There are some problems. The Mobula isn't really one of them. Most of the problems in the meta tie to the paradigm of weapon roles that we currently have. 

--- End quote ---


--- Quote from: DrTentacles on September 22, 2015, 08:55:41 pm ---And I don't think you can make the Junker more competitive by playing with it's stats. It's a ship that's viability is more tied to the weapons that dominate the meta than it's own effectiveness. Increasing the speed still leaves it with a giant, exposed balloon. There is nothing that is going to make the balloon less giant, or less exposed, and a speed ship without a balloon is even more dead than a slow ship without a balloon.

--- End quote ---

I think people have experimented for a long time and we have seen Junkers in competitive games none the less. My problem isn’t regarding putting Junkers in competitive (although it might lead to that), my issue is in how the ship design of the Junker doesn’t make it very versatile or effective in many different situations in it’s current state.

I do agree that the nature of disables are what make the Junker as ineffective as it is. I will say though... a combination of slow speed and exposed components make disables much easier to hit and make the ship much more vulnerable to future disables.
This is bad for the Junker because the damage modifier from disable weapons will dig even faster into the hull once a component breaks, making that "Second highest armor in the game" useless.
I’m getting a little sick of having to repeat myself so please just read my previously mentioned problems with the current Junker.

-I really like comparing the Junker to the Squid because I think the way the Squid ship is designed is very similar to the Junker. They both have very close components to make it easier to engineer on, very exposed components, and a big balloon at the top.
-I think we see the success of the Squid because it has the maneuverability to nullify it's weaknesses in balloon, hull, engines, and gun exposure as well as counter many builds. I wanted to make the Junker more like the Squid in that it wouldn’t be as fast but have more firepower. I also wanted to decrease it's armor to encourage the play-style of outmaneuvering enemy ships much like the squid.

You would essentially get a less maneuverable Squid with more firepower, long range potential, and tanking capabilities more reliant on ease of engineering rather than high hull health (keeping in mind the Squid Hull health).

Next Topic


--- Quote from: DrTentacles on September 22, 2015, 08:55:41 pm ---We are at the point of GoI where we're talking about nerfing the mobula. Pack it up. Just...pack it up, guys. We've had a good run. This is where a year of nerfs, clans falling apart, and competitive instability has taken us.

--- End quote ---

-The suggestion for the Mobula wasn’t really to nerf it because it seemed OP, but I felt that the original intention for the Mobula was to have a weakness in turning capabilities. I got the impression from it having a lower turning acceleration than any other ship. Although having low turning acceleration does play into a noticeable weakness at times, from my continued use of the Mobula, it wasn’t enough to be a significant weakness because the Max turning speed was so high.
-I think this is a bit unfair considering I have the Fastest Vertical speed in the game as well as decent forward mobility to control distancing and I only really use them in emergencies. Personally I would be fine using a Mobula if it had a decrease in Max turning speed. The only difference would be that I wouldn’t just rely on turning to get in gun arcs but I would have to manipulate its vertical mobility and Forward mobility a lot more. Not to mention, it would still be able to ram as well as have really good sniping and tanking capabilities.
It would still be a really great ship... just not be as great in more cramped environments where you won’t have a lot of space to use that vertical mobility.

Next Topic


--- Quote from: Daft Loon on September 22, 2015, 10:34:48 pm ---I may have overreacted/exaggerated slightly, a slight loss of turning wont kill dedicated brawl mobulas entirely. Still can't agree with it though, the multi role mobula is powerful at the moment because multi role is more or less the meta, trying to shove everything into a niche seems counterproductive.

--- End quote ---

Let me better explain the effects of the suggestion.
Both ships would have capabilities in multi-role engagements because both ships have Long and Short range guns. My point is that One ship would be more effective than the other for short and long range engagements but both would still have the potential for Multi-range capabilities.
I wouldn't be shoving the two ships into niches but vague Niches that overlap between each other~

Next Topic


--- Quote from: Daft Loon on September 22, 2015, 10:34:48 pm ---My speculative changes:
Junker
Max turn: 16 --> 14
Turn Acc.:15 --> 13
Vertical Acc.: 3 --> 4
Max Speed: 26 --> 30

--- End quote ---

-I thought about it a bit and I think 30 Max speed is still a bit too slow for a ship like the Junker with really exposed components.
-I was thinking around 35~ for the ability of making the Junker harder to hit by disables (Keeping in mind the big Balloon and exposed engines).
Also I was thinking that I wanted the Junker to have an advantage in terms of mobility and in this case, have extremely high Turn speed and acceleration with poor Vertical mobility as a weakness.
-I sort of wanted this to balance out with the Junker having low Armor and Health in my previous suggestion.  :-\

Next Topic


--- Quote from: Daft Loon on September 22, 2015, 10:34:48 pm ---Artemis
Down Arc: 35 --> 20

Hwacha
Up/Down Arc: 20 --> 15

The junker would still have good close range turning but wouldn't be able to rely on swapping sides in 3s. The vertical acceleration would make it suffer less from balloon damage and the speed boost would be enough to kill 'fly backwards laughing' as a strategy.

Dropping the artemis arc would force the mobula to chose between safety and attacking and would be an indirect buff to the spire, junker and galleon.

--- End quote ---

I think a certain somebody will try to hunt you down for suggesting a change like this to the Artemis  :P
I don't know if I like the idea of decreasing the Arcs because I kinda like how there are good arcs and weak arcs in terms of upward and downward aiming.
However, I might as well add fuel to your fire......
I would want the Artemis to break components only in two shots considering we have a Nerf of the Heavy Clip Light Carronade in disabling as well as the Carronades having to break balloons in two clips. Also make the Artemis only break components in one shot if using charged. I would want to increase component health instead of decrease Shatter damage because there are still achievements where people have to break Armor with Rockets.
--------
I'm not taking this one too seriously because I'm sure many people like the current Artemis and it's ability to literally make any ship effective if you have enough of them.


As for the Lion gun, an increase in Jitter would make me happy. I think it's current arcs are fairly decent and I think what most people agree upon is the fact that there is so little spread on the rockets.

Daft Loon:
Obligatory math dump:
A mobula turning full speed:
14 deg/s
= 25.7s/rotation
A squid 'orbiting'
25.7 * 47
= 1200m
=192m circle radius (maximum distance for the squid to not get caught by turning)

A mobula turning full speed and reversing:
25.7s/rotation
28*0.7
= 19.6m/s backwards
Effective squid speed
47 - 19.6
= 27.4 (not 100% sure the geometry actually works out like that)
=704m
=112m circle

Its theoretically possible for a squid to keep permanently out of arc but maybe not practical, particularly if losing speed to turn a second gun. Is it something that should be possible?


--- Quote from: Lieutenant Noir on September 23, 2015, 03:33:06 am ---This is bad for the Junker because the damage modifier from disable weapons will dig even faster into the hull once a component breaks, making that "Second highest armor in the game" useless

--- End quote ---
I thought that mechanic was gone a while ago.


--- Quote from: Lieutenant Noir on September 23, 2015, 03:33:06 am ----I thought about it a bit and I think 30 Max speed is still a bit too slow for a ship like the Junker with really exposed components.
-I was thinking around 35~ for the ability of making the Junker harder to hit by disables (Keeping in mind the big Balloon and exposed engines).
Also I was thinking that I wanted the Junker to have an advantage in terms of mobility and in this case, have extremely high Turn speed and acceleration with poor Vertical mobility as a weakness.
-I sort of wanted this to balance out with the Junker having low Armor and Health in my previous suggestion.

--- End quote ---
I was thinking of those changes as standalone. Change the armor and 35 would indeed be needed, i like the current obnoxiously high armor though - there's nothing quite like having a carronade fish just flat fail to kill you on the ground (if you hit the ground slow with drogue chute and terrain denies them much in the way of rams its almost inevitable)

I really think the artemis needs something though, in its current form it essentially nullifies the spire and galleon unless you bring a top rate lumberjack gunner. Reducing the downward arc is one of the few things i can think of that isn't dumbing it down or breaking ship builds and happens to be relevant to mobula in particular. Making it need 2 shots goes a bit too far i think and would essentially become 3 shots on any gun manned by an engineer with mallet.


--- Quote from: Lieutenant Noir on September 23, 2015, 03:33:06 am ---I would want to increase component health instead of decrease Shatter damage because there are still achievements where people have to break Armor with Rockets.

--- End quote ---
Why on earth (or in the sky as it may be) would anyone use the artemis for this when we have the hwacha and banshee??

MightyKeb:

--- Quote from: Daft Loon on September 23, 2015, 09:01:17 am ---Obligatory math dump:
A mobula turning full speed:
14 deg/s
= 25.7s/rotation
A squid 'orbiting'
25.7 * 47
= 1200m
=192m circle radius (maximum distance for the squid to not get caught by turning)

A mobula turning full speed and reversing:
25.7s/rotation
28*0.7
= 19.6m/s backwards
Effective squid speed
47 - 19.6
= 27.4 (not 100% sure the geometry actually works out like that)
=704m
=112m circle

Its theoretically possible for a squid to keep permanently out of arc but maybe not practical, particularly if losing speed to turn a second gun. Is it something that should be possible?

--- End quote ---


Each engine of the squid makes up 25% of it's accel, top speed, and I believe turning speed/accel aswell. This means when one engine is down, the ship functions at 75% of it's speed instead of 100%, whilst 2 engines would bring it down to 50% and so on. In high level, it's pretty easy to shoot a single engine of a squid down and sometimes that's really all it needs to lose the fight.

Divide 47 - 19.6 by 50%, and you get 23.5 - 9.8. Add the +25% and I believe that should make it somewhere around 30 - 13. Even then, it's more than enough for the mobula to keep up. So yes, I think it should be possible, considering Squid is the best suited ship for playing into Mobula's weaknesses. Right now it's possible to gain some speed over a Mobula's turning but once it picks up momentum it matches almost exactly the same speed. This is okay if you start the fight with a good angle on the mobula, not so much when you're making a charge. One could argue that Squid isn't made for charging, but then the Mobula's only true weakness comes from the very niche and advanced practice of flanking. This makes me the mobula one of the most if not the most powerful ship for mid, and sometimes even high level play.

Dementio:

--- Quote from: MightyKeb on September 23, 2015, 09:29:00 am ---One could argue that Squid isn't made for charging, but then the Mobula's only true weakness comes from the very niche and advanced practice of flanking. This makes me the mobula one of the most if not the most powerful ship for mid, and sometimes even high level play.

--- End quote ---

A Junker has guns on all sides except at its back, which it more often than not can easily turn away. This should make the Junker better against flanking enemies than the Mobula for its guns would always be ready and on target, making it more viable in mid/high level play.

A Squid, and many other ships, could try charge the Mobula from below or above it. All it takes for the Squid is getting behind it once.



A Junker can also circle around the Mobula actually. Not in terms of speed, but in terms of making the Mobula burn its engines. This can happen when the Mobula wants to build distance, but gets shot at at the same time, since balloon and armor engineer are responsible for engines and to make sure the Junker stops shooting, the Mobula needs the third guy to shoot back, who is responsible for the main engine. Thus, it is not unlikely that the Mobula loses a huge amount of speed and gets stuck on the horizontal plane. A Mobula with only one working turning engine can never hope to move straight ever again, it is already bad when one of the turning engines is at half health while the other is at full health, that thing turns easily, which causes a reduction in distance traveled in relation to the chasing Junker.

Once the Junker has managed to get onto the Mobula's side one thing happens: Hardcore tanking, by the Mobula. A good Junker that got to this point is very likely in a position where the Mobula cannot achieve victory anymore, since one hydrogen or chute vent may not be enough to save it and instead just delay the inevitable loss.
I know this from experience! When I was the Mobula! Against a basic Metajunker, the one with the Gat/Mortar!

Btw, during a scrim against a team which Sammy was sub-piloting for, we ended up in a 1v1 disable lock on the ground as a Mobula against Sammy's Junker. I went was very close, but we still weren't winning so I tried to back up by using Kerosene again, thinking that normal speed wasn't enough speed, I ended up with damaged engines so I was kind of stuck at a weird distance. If the battle had taking a bit longer, we would have died, but luckily the Junker gave in, in time. Mind you that was him sub-piloting with a crew he maybe never played with before at all, and certainly not at comp level, against a full Rydr ship which was very well practised at what it did. So the Junker may not be so weak as it is made out to be, even against a disable Mobula, and it certainly can trifecta in close range too, even I can do that.



But now to these things


--- Quote from: Lieutenant Noir on September 22, 2015, 10:40:16 am ---Mobula

Suggestion and suggested effects
-I would want the Max Turning speed to be similar to that of a Galleon (8.02 deg/s)

--- End quote ---

A problem that the Mobula always had, which still persists, is when people used it like a gunning platform, which is easy to do, but not the winning strategy, since if you don't want to make use of that vertical mobility, a long range Junker would be the better choice, because the Junker has an easier time repairing and buffing and can dodge just as well in long range, except maybe against Lumberjack.
I see where you are going with this idea, but out of the few ways you can actually fly it, you will remove the one that requires skill and is the rewarding one, while leaving the one in the game that people constantly whine about being tired of (Hades/Merc and double Artemis hardcore sniping for 10 minutes straight). I would rather have one of its light guns removed, making it less of a gunning platform and more something that pilots actually have to think about how to fly, and although I am not favouring this idea, I personally don't think it is that bad of a decision to remove one of its light guns.


--- Quote from: Lieutenant Noir on September 22, 2015, 10:40:16 am ---Junker

Suggestion
-Then I would see the Junker being more of an Ambush ship with Pilots bringing it for High risk (In regards to the Low Health and Armor) for High reward (Good mobility and Firepower)

--- End quote ---

The Junker does by design not fit into the ambush section. Unlike every other ship except the Galleon, it has to waste its ambush time to get into a position and then shoot the enemy, because its guns are on the side. Pyramidion, Mobula and so on, do better because when they ambush they can go directly forward towards their enemy meaning they already are in position. The forward gun of the Junker can help put some damage on the enemy or even disable them, but generally that alone just won't do the trick for the Junker.

MightyKeb:

--- Quote from: Dementio on September 23, 2015, 01:24:58 pm ---

--- Quote from: Lieutenant Noir on September 22, 2015, 10:40:16 am ---Mobula

Suggestion and suggested effects
-I would want the Max Turning speed to be similar to that of a Galleon (8.02 deg/s)

--- End quote ---

A problem that the Mobula always had, which still persists, is when people used it like a gunning platform, which is easy to do, but not the winning strategy, since if you don't want to make use of that vertical mobility, a long range Junker would be the better choice, because the Junker has an easier time repairing and buffing and can dodge just as well in long range, except maybe against Lumberjack.
I see where you are going with this idea, but out of the few ways you can actually fly it, you will remove the one that requires skill and is the rewarding one, while leaving the one in the game that people constantly whine about being tired of (Hades/Merc and double Artemis hardcore sniping for 10 minutes straight). I would rather have one of its light guns removed, making it less of a gunning platform and more something that pilots actually have to think about how to fly, and although I am not favouring this idea, I personally don't think it is that bad of a decision to remove one of its light guns.


--- End quote ---


Then why not just tone it down just enough that using Claw on mobula gives you almost exactly the same top speed that it does now, so the "skillful" part of playing mobula isnt exactly gone, except now there's an actual downside to being able to keep up with the enemy?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page