Guns Of Icarus Online
Info => Feedback and Suggestions => Topic started by: GeoRmr on May 22, 2014, 02:58:50 pm
-
I've made this post to try to collate all the ideas I've had since the ‘Call for Gunner Ammo Ideas’ thread: https://gunsoficarus.com/community/forum/index.php/topic,4079.0.html (https://gunsoficarus.com/community/forum/index.php/topic,4079.0.html)
All though the initial purpose of that thread was enticing, my main problem with it is that awkm intends the new ammunition types to be a solution to the ‘an engineer is more favourable than a gunner’ problem. I hope to address why the addition of more ammo-types to the game is not a viable solution to this ‘problem’, and then repost Captain Smollett’s initial solution and justify why it is viable. The first section on gunners vs engineers is extremely verbose in order to address the issue of paradigm in the later section.
The gunner vs engineer ‘problem’ and why it exists.
Firstly, one of the reasons why engineers tend to be more favoured than gunners is down to an imbalanced class overlap in what are intended polarised roles: The purpose of the engineer is to repair; engineers have access to 3 engineer tools in order to repair successfully. The purpose of the gunner is to shoot; gunners have access to 4 ammunition types in order to shoot successfully. Both of these classes possess the ability to perform secondary roles: The gunner is able to repair; gunners have access to 1 repair tool allowing them to repair suboptimally. The engineer is able to shoot; engineers have access to 2 ammunition types in order for them to shoot adequately.
The second and largest contributing factor is the role of the buff-hammer; buff hammers are an engineer tool that also increases damage output when shooting, and therefore to shoot more successfully. The equivalent ammunition type could be considered the damage increase of charged rounds. If we were to compare the buff hammer to charged rounds, charged rounds have a clear negative dps and clip size de-buff, the buff-hammer has no negatives. The buff-hammer is also able to be used simultaneously with an ammunition type while also being applicable to balloon, engines, and hull where charged rounds are not.
The gunners ‘buff-hammer’ equivalent could be considered heat-sink clip. Heat-sink clip can be compared to the engineer’s chem-spray; heat-sink clip allows gunners to repair more successfully by extinguishing and preventing fires. However, heat-sink clip does not ensure 100% fire protection (while chem-spray can) as it does not protect from fires while the gun is reloading, heat-sink clip cannot be used in conjunction with the equivalent engineer tool in order repair more effectively (the gunners only viable engineer tool is the pipewrench, engineers have access to two ammo types their choice + neutral ammo). Heat-sink also is unable to be applied to fires of more than eight stacks as the gunner is no longer able to mount the gun, where chem-spray can still be applied to the burning weapon. Chemical-spray is also capable of being applied to the balloon, engines, and hull, where heat-sink is not.
tl;dr
In short, the engineers ‘gunner tool’ is far better at gunning than the gunners ‘engineer tool’ is at repairing. Gunners also have access to 1 engineer tool, where engineers have access to 2 types of ammunition. Engineers can both repair and shoot more effectively than gunners.
Why the addition of more ammunition choices will not be an effective solution.
Any additional ammo you add to the game can still be taken by engineers, and adding more variety will not change that fact. Engineers can still perform the other Repair/Buff tasks that gunners cannot do effectively, while the gunners advantage is far more niche. An engineer can use 50% of the 'gunner' benefit (2 ammo types out of a possible 4), while a gunner can only use only 33.3% of the 'engineer' benefit (1 repair tool out of a possible 3). It is also worth noting that every single engineer tool can be used to benefit each component on the ship (except for using a buff hammer on a flame-thrower, which is arguably neutral), where currently different ammunition choices have the possibility of being detrimental to particular weapons. Every single gun can be operated effectively with 2 types of ammunition; no component can be maintained by only 1 repair tool.
The solution to the ‘problem’.
The first posed solution was to provide gunners with passive effects, however this would require a relatively large amount of game development and causes problems that awkm expressed concerning paradigm, the reload mechanic, and user interface.
My suggestion (inspired by Captain Smollet) is that instead of having literal 'passives' that are activated while mounted on a gun, to incorporate the effects into tools that would work in a similar manner to chem-spray and the buff hammer, being pre-applied before mounting the gun and requiring continuous re-application. This would not require a large developmental effort from muse (effects such as buff and fire resistance could be recycled and recolored along with tool animations) and would not cause problems with existing gameplay mechanics. It would also provide the gunner with more tasks to complete and by extension make gameplay as a gunner more interesting and dynamic. Another possibility (or beginning) would be to divide the existing engineer’s buff-hammer to be only effective on non-gun components and add a gunners buff-hammer that would only be effective on guns.
“Instead of making the engineers worse, make gunners more diverse.
Gunnery tools that stack effects would make gunners superior in so many instances.
A tool to make reloading go faster.
A tool to make the gun turn quicker and farther.
A tool to give longer zoom and range.
A tool to give an increase in rate of fire.
…
Giving a gunner the ability to stack effects would make them outclass engineers on guns. While engineers could still stack their buff to a gun, gunners could stack multiple tools. In very high team work related moments, perhaps the gunner could apply their tools to an engineers gun in the same way and engineer applies their tools to a gunners gun.”
~ Captain Smollet
Concerns about Paradigm.
So far the only counter to the addition of gunner tools is that of paradigm. By design, Muse considers that each class has a selection of specific tools that function consistently with each other. The gunner has a choice of ammunition, each type of ammunition can be loaded into a gun to shoot more effectively. The engineer has a choice of tools, each tool is applied to components on the ship externally to repair them. The pilot has a choice of tools that are used when on the helm of the ship, (with the exception of the spyglass, and range-finder) to allow them to manoeuvre more effectively.
awkm suggests that gunner tools, other than ammunition, should not be added to the game because they break this design paradigm, expressing a desire to not add any more exceptions such as the spyglass and range-finder.
I observe that this game does not actually follow this design paradigm intended by Muse in its current state. Including the previously mentioned pilot tool exceptions, please consider that:
The engineer has access to the buff hammer; the buff hammer is capable of altering the damage output of guns allowing them to shoot more effectively, the buff hammer is also capable of altering the force applied from the engines and balloon allowing the ship to manoeuvre more effectively. Two things that expand beyond the scope of the engineers polarised role and should be exclusive to gunners and pilots respectively.
The Pilot has access to impact bumpers and drogue chute, two tools that are intended to negate damage, negation of damage being the quintessential basis of the engineer’s role.
The Gunner has access to heat-sink clip which is capable of both fire prevention and extinguish, neither of these properties directly apply to the gunners role but they do to the engineer.
The captain of the ship decides on the guns, not the gunner, and the ship itself not necessarily the pilot or engineer and never both.
I believe that by extending the gunner class to include externally applicable gunnery tools you do not create exception to the existing paradigm, only redefine a more clear and obvious one while simultaneously balancing and improving gameplay.
-
I agree.
I feel like it is a mistake to look at gunners more like pilots then like engineers..
Pilots stuff is helm focused, that makes sense because.. the pilot is flying in or out of combat... But a gunner is like an engineer in that, he has downtime.. that's currently not used for anything.
-
These round and round debates about gunners being worth it or not got old months ago :-\
-
These round and round debates about gunners being worth it or not got old months ago :-\
That's not what this thread is for. It's about how to solve the problem, and not about whether it exists.
-
I belive a gunner holding himself on a gun much like a pilot on a helm proves for a good design.
The gunner just needs tools he can play with that makes him being on a gun dangerous in comparesment to one gunner slot gunner.
I really want awkm and the rest to implement some new type of tool for the gunner to use while on a gun.
Ammo simply limits the choice as 1 every reload. But i can see the ammo being overhauled and changed to the point of having a gunner for a gun is very important.
Right now the ammo is balanced enough to be in prefrence (Which is detrimental to the gunner class), rather than a must.
-
These round and round debates about gunners being worth it or not got old months ago :-\
That's not what this thread is for. It's about how to solve the problem, and not about whether it exists.
Which assumes there's a problem in the first place.
-
These round and round debates about gunners being worth it or not got old months ago :-\
That's not what this thread is for. It's about how to solve the problem, and not about whether it exists.
Which assumes there's a problem in the first place.
Read the first post of the thread that my post is in response to, link is in the first paragraph. (so from an official stance, yes there is a problem)
Edit: This thread is not about the problem, its about how if muse considers it to be a problem adding new ammo types will not resolve it.
-
Ah, geo, but one problem that would come from the solution would be the duration that these tools last, and how to incorporate it into the GUI when gunning. would it be a bar on the left side, that goes down, would there be a barometer-style gauge for duration, or what? Possible (very crude, would be stylized) Example:
(http://i.imgur.com/9z2KXPY.png)
(Ignore the achievements shown there, along with the snark.)
-
Ah, geo, but one problem that would come from the solution would be the duration that these tools last, and how to incorporate it into the GUI when gunning. would it be a bar on the left side, that goes down, would there be a barometer-style gauge for duration, or what? Possible (very crude, would be stylized) Example:
(http://i.imgur.com/9z2KXPY.png)
(Ignore the achievements shown there, along with the snark.)
I imagined they would look and work the same way as the buff hammer or chem-spray does currently. More UI would probably be better though, personally I'm more into clean UI.
-
I think a solution to the problem would be to change the effect of the buff hammer on guns to increasing rotation speed and HP (like the armor) by quite a bit, and perhaps a small buff to recoil or range rather than damage. You are buffing the gun, not the ammo, so the effects should only be on the gun's mechanical abilities.
Buffgineer damage benefit gone. Still greatly useful for improving a ship's performance, including guns.
In addition, since the pipe wrench is middle of the road on repair and rebuild, how about adding a small buff ability to it as well? 25% the buff hammer ability, or some such.
-
I think a solution to the problem would be to change the effect of the buff hammer on guns to increasing rotation speed and HP (like the armor) by quite a bit, and perhaps a small buff to recoil or range rather than damage. You are buffing the gun, not the ammo, so the effects should only be on the gun's mechanical abilities.
Buffgineer damage benefit gone. Still greatly useful for improving a ship's performance, including guns.
In addition, since the pipe wrench is middle of the road on repair and rebuild, how about adding a small buff ability to it as well? 25% the buff hammer ability, or some such.
hmmm..... This inspires me. *opens GoIO to get stats for Pipe Wrench so he can do this right*
Okay, here's some ideas listed below.
Pipe Wrench 1: 100 HP (down from 120), 5 sec cd, 4 rebuild, gains 10 HP per second for 5 seconds, total healed: 150 (up from 120)
Pros: Slightly more healing than current Pipe Wrench in the long run, potentially could help while on the gun since you will be healing while you can be firing.
Cons: Still not really very impressive, and slightly lower burst healing than production.
Gunner vs Engineer: An engineer will always be able to do better than this with Mallet/Spanner, so they have no reason to take this. The regen is "nice", but not nice enough to warrant taking it.
Pipe Wrench 2: 80 HP (down from 120), 4 sec cd (down from 5), 4 rebuild, gains 5 HP per second for 10 seconds (Can stack up to twice for 10 per second, refreshes duration when used), total healed: 130-180 (up from 120)
Pros: Slightly better cd means the burst can happen a bit more often, but with the reduction in burst, it's not as useful. The heal itself is slightly better than option 1, and noticeably better than production. Other Pros are similar to Option 1.
Cons: This version requires using the Pipe Wrench twice within 10 seconds to maximize the healing potential. Not hard, but it's still better if you're more dedicated to one or two guns instead of just any gun. Other Cons are similar to Option 1.
Gunner vs Engineer: In this case, the reason to not take it as an Engineer is even stronger. You probably won't be by the same gun twice in 10 seconds when you're busy chem spraying and repairing everything else. As a gunner usually stays by one or two guns ANYWAY, this is perfect for them.
Pipe Wrench 3: 70 HP (down from 120), 4 sec cd (down from 5), 4 rebuild, gains 5 HP per second for 10 seconds (can stack up to four times for 20 per second, refreshes duration when used), total healed: 120-170-220-270
Pros: This heals significantly more the normal Pipe Wrench - if you fully stack it. Other pros are similar to the other options.
Cons: You obviously need to fully stack it to really get the maximum benefit. Until you get at least 2 stacks, this option is clearly inferior to production Pipe Wrench. At 4 stacks, it's comparable to a Mallet, but with how long it takes for that heal to happen, it will be more like just keeping the gun alive, and you have to remember to occasionally hop off to keep the buff up. If you miss the timing, you'll have to start over with a significantly weaker HP per 5.
Gunner vs Engineer: See option 2.
-
...You know what this means... Time for me to make a chart... To show the imbalance between Buffgineer/gungineer and Gunners...
-
Gunner Vs. Gungineer.
(http://i.imgur.com/j7NlGew.png)
-
Gunner Vs. Gungineer.
(http://i.imgur.com/j7NlGew.png)
Give the gunner a second engineering slot.
-
Give the gunner a second engineering slot.
(https://i.imgur.com/YAGpXPd.png)
Wait. Hold up.
Wrench. Average.
Normal ammo. Average.
Second engineering slot? Or do you mean extra default engineering tool for everyone?
Take a moment and think about it.
(Remove wrenches as a selectable engineering tool, and everyone gets a wrench free, similar to normal ammo in guns)
-
Give the gunner a second engineering slot.
Second engineering slot? Or do you mean extra default engineering tool for everyone?
(Remove wrenches as a selectable engineering tool, and everyone gets a wrench free, similar to normal ammo in guns)
I actually meant an extra slot, but your idea sounds enticing too.
Non-gunners have 2 ammo types, non-engis have 2 engineering tools.
Problem is only that there are so few engineering tools so I don't know how good that actually will be. While a gunner can actually make use of default ammo, I don't know how much use a pipe wrench is for a (e.g.) mallet/spanner engineer.
-
Some interesting ideas here. I want to make everyone aware that these ideas are very difficult to implement without substantial changes to UI, database structures, and general code implementation. We love making games and you know that we always want to make this one better (seriously, we've had so many patches) but we also run a business... we need to look at the path of least resistance and try to test there first. We're a team of 13 people so we need to make sure that we don't waste any effort.
I encourage everyone to focus their energy to help us discuss New Ammo and tweaks to Old Ammo in the following thread:
https://gunsoficarus.com/community/forum/index.php/topic,4079.90.html
Furthermore, if you have access to Dev App then there are 4 new ammo types to be tested. They are quite unbalanced, some even a little broken, but they all give us an idea of what we can do to encourage users to take advantage of the 3 ammo slots that only Gunners have. That's what we can take action on immediately without drastically changing any part of the game. And if you want access to Dev App and to Dev App Forums, email keyvias@musegames.com
This is not saying 'no' to these ideas but rather that we can use your efforts right now somewhere else. When we have tested all solutions that can be tested, in the order of their difficulty of implement, we will move on to the next idea and these are still on the list. While you may not agree with our current tests, we'd love to see your feedback on them and feel like you can still make a big contribution to the game.
Again, thank you for everyone's suggestions. I just want to make it clear what the pipeline looks like and how we approach problems like these.
-
I actually wonder how much "bad" feedback is needed to make MUSE go for another solution.
-
Well if it's completely unbalanced or ultimately prevents people from playing the game then we'll fix it.
In the case of the Engineer vs. Gunner, it's been around for a very long time. Is it game breaking and prevents people from playing? Not really. It's one of the reasons it took this long to evaluate. At this point it's closer to being polish than fix. We don't mind boats with 4 engineers, we allow you to do it. But the issue is that a lot of people don't see the point of bringing a gunner. It's a finer issue than the server is broken or Field Gun is OP. There are ships that do have gunners, though, and see the advantages of having one due to the ammo types on top of a well-timed buff. I want to expand that decision space further.
Gunner vs. Engineer isn't broken, not by a long shot. It can be improved, though. There are other things that are actually broken and that's where the attention needs to be put.... e.g. servers exploding this week.
-
Just to clarify, adding new ammo is AWESOME!!!
But please DON'T PRETEND that its going to solve your gunner engineer 'problem', at-least accept that the gunner will remain a niche class unless/untill SUBSTANTIAL changes are made.
Some interesting ideas here. I want to make everyone aware that these ideas are very difficult to implement without substantial changes to UI, database structures, and general code implementation.
I thought your current stance on my solution is that it in fact wouldn't be difficult to implement at all, but that you don't want to implement it based solely on design paradigm.
"...it'll be little to very little coding..." ~ awkm
-
It highly depends on exactly what you're trying to do and must be evaluated on a case by case basis for each tool. Some will be easy. Some will be hard. But overall the ideas skew towards the hard.
The quote taken is an answer to a specific case.
Also we don't know if ammo will solve it. We also don't know if "substantial" changes will solve it. Each solution will bring ups and downs and they all need to be evaluated objectively. We can't go in with any assumption regarding any solution, only a goal and timeline of when the tests can happen.
-
Random idea:
Make Medium Guns - like Hellhund - possible to operate only by gunners.
-
Random idea:
Make Medium Guns - like Hellhund - possible to operate only by gunners.
.... Hellhund? Assuming you're talking about Heavy guns, the answer would still be hell no. I don't like the idea at all.
-
Wiki says these are medium guns.
Anyway - It's good cause it encourages mixed crews and reassures gunners got their own role where they are irreplaceable. Bad thing obviously is that it creates first kind of items that cannot be used by other classes, but in general IMHO it makes sense.
-
Wiki says these are medium guns.
Anyway - It's good cause it encourages mixed crews and reassures gunners got their own role where they are irreplaceable. Bad thing obviously is that it creates first kind of items that cannot be used by other classes, but in general IMHO it makes sense.
The wiki is so out of date it's not even funny. Everything on the wiki is OLD. Don't use it for anything. Regardless of your opinion though, the devs have outright stated they will not do these kinds of things. Also, heavy guns are only on 3 ships in the game, so your idea will not help enough to matter, and could instead lead to 3 ships never being used. Also, one of those ships REQUIRES an engineer on a gun for it to work, or the ship suffers from having 2 gunners (which is always going to be BAD no matter what).
-
You can trust the wiki on that one though. Heavy guns are actually Medium guns on the others are light guns. I don't remember where, but I somewhere read that Heavy guns are too big for the ships we have in GoIO...
Regardless, I too disagree with the idea of having the gunner being the only class that can use the Medium guns. It would only count for 3 ships, since only 3 out of 7 have at least 1 medium gun and the Galleon would suffer from this, so it would only be a reasonable answer for 2 out of 7 ships...
-
It highly depends on exactly what you're trying to do and must be evaluated on a case by case basis for each tool. Some will be easy. Some will be hard. But overall the ideas skew towards the hard.
The quote taken is an answer to a specific case.
Also we don't know if ammo will solve it. We also don't know if "substantial" changes will solve it. Each solution will bring ups and downs and they all need to be evaluated objectively. We can't go in with any assumption regarding any solution, only a goal and timeline of when the tests can happen.
I've already given more than my fair share of cents in the Ammo discussion, even a couple ideas, I still stand behind my idea for a reloading tool for the gunners (if you want to read into the details go to the ammo discussion pages 3, 4, and 5 have comments form me about it). Its simple does not affect too many mechanics and no touches to the UI so it should not be much harder to implement than any new form of ammo.
I unfortunately cant think of any tools that could work similarly with the gunner just sitting on the and selecting it except maybe increasing the weapons armour and health which could also be achieved from ammo if it were programmed to, or perhaps a weapon that locks the aim in place for a few seconds when activated but reduces all recoil to 0 like heavy clip but can be used with any ammo type.
The game is by no means broken in my opinion, I love the fact that 3 engineers, or 2 engineers and a buffer can be a completely viable build, and i hope the game still allows that in the future. However I would also like to see 1 engineer and 2 gunners being a viable build on sniper ships or something which is not the case currently.
More ammo types seems like a good idea to me, especially if they are highly powerful but specialized, but i would also like to see a tool or two for the gunner to differentiate them more from the engineers when behind the gun. Just having ammo can usually be used by the engineers and ammo types that damage the gun do kinda support engineers more as they can repair faster (as others have already mentioned).
-
I want to respect the choice to have all engineers. That's fine. But like how something becomes meta... I don't really want that because it means the decision space is collapsing. On the other side, it's advisable not to run a boat with mostly gunners or at least I've never seen or heard of a ship run extremely successfully with this build (I'd love to hear from these people who think it's awesome). To solve this, maybe there also needs to be really really really extreme repair tools lol. Instant rebuild tool, instant repair tool. Wonder what would happen ahahahhaah.
Oh gosh. Can of worms.
-
I want to respect the choice to have all engineers. That's fine. But like how something becomes meta... I don't really want that because it means the decision space is collapsing. On the other side, it's advisable not to run a boat with mostly gunners or at least I've never seen or heard of a ship run extremely successfully with this build (I'd love to hear from these people who think it's awesome). To solve this, maybe there also needs to be really really really extreme repair tools lol. Instant rebuild tool, instant repair tool. Wonder what would happen ahahahhaah.
Oh gosh. Can of worms.
Desert Scrap Pyramidion with 2 front Phobos works better with 2 gunners and 1 engineer.
-
Twin Lumber Galleon works best with two gunners. Really, almost any long range ship works better with two gunners, as long as you can kill them before they get close. The exception to short range is a mine ship. Works best with two gunners.
-
currently the gunner is rarely used because of 3 major reasons:
1.) many guns only need one ammunition type to operate properly. Others run fine with normal rounds + x.
2.) gunners de-facto don't have access to the buff hammer. this grants engineers a major advantage over gunners.
3.) gunners suck ass when it comes to maintenance. They always need an engineer to babysit them in case shit hits the fan (fire/strong disable fire)
The first problem can probably be addressed by ammunition changes (and maybe by adding normal rounds to the ammo pool rather than granting it everyone by default). If there's a reason for almost every weapon to bring two different ammo types, gunners will be more attractive. messing around with weapons might help as well here. E.g. if you increased the gate range and spread gunners with heavy/greased clips would become more attractive for gats.
regarding the 2nd and third problem:
[blasphemy]gunners with two engineering tools?![/blasphemy]
gunners would be able to either bring a buff hammer or take care of fires themselves. They could finally do something useful during reload times.
On some ships dual-gunner builds might be a viable option (e.g. long range galleon).
-
quick thoughts...
1) Guns should always have more than 1 ammo choice. Tell me of the guns that don't have more 1 and I will fix it.
2) Fix buff hammer, we have an idea already but may take some time to put in
3) Make engineers even better at maintenance? We have a new engineer tool that is coming... something that helps mitigate damage. Think of it as a more protective version of buff.
-
I'd rather have engineers not be allowed to carry an ammo type at all than gunners carry two engineer tools, just throwing that out. I'm not suggesting it, but if it is that crucial to enforce a gunner on every ship this feels better than a lot of the suggestions I've so far read.
-
| Class | Ammo | Pilot tools | Engineer tools | Spotting tools |
| Pilot | 2 | 3 | 1 | 1 |
| Gunner | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Engineer | 2 | 1 | 3 | 1 |
* almost never used
It is easy to see what the issue is here. All other classes are 50% as efficient as gunner at gunning. However, gunners are only 33% as efficient as all other classes at doing what they do. With careful consideration, I am forced to agree that Normal has to be an ammo choice and change the equip-able to:
| Class | Ammo | Pilot tools | Engineer tools | Spotting tools |
| Pilot | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 |
| Gunner | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Engineer | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 |
OR, increase all the other skills in all classes to have the same ratio, and give each a default tool. Normal ammo, Pipe Wrench, Spotting Scope. That would make each class about 50% as well equipped as the other classes. A second gunner would not be instant loss, a second pilot would not be (as) rage inducing, and a pipe wrench added to engies just makes fine-tuned timing repairs more of a skill. Everyone would have three items to select from while running around, and four to select from while plying their trade. Technically, engies would have five with the spyglass, but if you are spotting things, you are not fixing, so I don't really count it. Or it could be replaced with some new fluff pilot tool that can only be used on the helm. Like ship coms, or something, where only the person on the helm can talk to the other ship.
| Class | Ammo | Pilot tools | Engineer tools |
| Pilot | 2 | 4 | 2 |
| Gunner | 4 | 2 | 2 |
| Engineer | 2 | 2 | 4 |
-
I'm not comfortable with using the quantity of equipment to compare the quality of roles. A ammunition choice doesn't equal the value of an engineering tool choice. It's almost impossible not to put all 3 engineering tools to good use, while often don't or only marginally benefit from their 3rd ammo choice.
1) Guns should always have more than 1 ammo choice. Tell me of the guns that don't have more 1 and I will fix it.
merc - charged
all pure explosive weapons (with the exception of the heavy flak) perform better with one ammo choice + buff. This grants the highest damage output in the brief time frame when the hull is down.
-
Removing gun damage buffs would still make dual engies more useful. With more ammo choices and change in buff behavior (I don't think it should increase damage), I don't think we would need to change the quantity of items. Though I am pondering just how it would pan out if they went to 422 on all classes. However, if one engineer is suddenly even more effective at fixing and buffing, or complete flame suppression at the cost of repair or rebuild, and a gunner is moderately more so, would that make twin gunner settups more viable and common?
Re: merc - Heatsink is the only other good option on a merc, and makes it a little more useful close up. Most of the time I bring a merc, though, I have the gunner bring another ammo type or two for another gun. I like to move my gunners around a lot on my ships, though, and keep the engies in one spot.
-
The merc has more options with the new ammo in Dev App.
-
1) Guns should always have more than 1 ammo choice. Tell me of the guns that don't have more 1 and I will fix it.
almost all of them... look sure you can do fun little niche nuance things with a spectrum of ammos but in general a pilot is able to create and maintain the contexts that are most useful for each gun and the selected single ammo type...
-
Wait. Hold up. (Remove wrenches as a selectable engineering tool, and everyone gets a wrench free, similar to normal ammo in guns)
Yep. And I'd also say give everyone a free slot with either the Rangefinder or the Spyglass in it.
Suddenly there's more options for gunners (Wrench/Buff? Wrench/Extinguisher? Wrench/Chem Spray?), more for Pilots (Wrench/Spanner for emergency repairs? Wrench/Mallet to keep the Junker's Balloon alive? Wrench/Chem or Wrench/Buff for a Pyra's hull?)...and you also open up the ability to have teammates using Rangefinders more often (as you won't lose the Spyglass), pilots able to spot for their team themselves and, perhaps most interestingly, crewmembers able to take less commonly used piloting tools (Tar, Impact Bumpers, Drogue Chute) and running to the helm to use the needed tools.
You could run your Gunner with Moonshine or Kerosene when running a close-range attack ship, have him close the distance, and switch to a Hydrogen/Chute Vent/Phoenix Claw pilot for close-range evasive maneuvering, for example.
I think that would be really damn cool.
-
I used to have my galleon engie take moonshine for that, until I always used moonshine myself.
If you look at my tables and such, that is exactly what I was saying with the 422 ratio. 4 of your class tools, 2 of each of the others, 1 in each class is default and unselectable.
-
I used to have my galleon engie take moonshine for that, until I always used moonshine myself.
If you look at my tables and such, that is exactly what I was saying with the 422 ratio. 4 of your class tools, 2 of each of the others, 1 in each class is default and unselectable.
Thanks Richard, that table is much clearer than my 3 waffling paragraphs! :D
-
This starts with a faulty premise, though it is understandable to have. The idea that gunner means categorically better at shooting vs engineer being categorically better at repairing, is missing the nuance of the game. Having more tools makes a crew member more equipped to deal with a diversity of situations. However, many if not most guns in this game don't need a diversity of situations. A gatling gun is trying to strip armor very quickly at close range. An Artemis is trying to take out as many components as possible at any range. A mortar is trying to destroy perma hull as quickly as possible during the armor break window. These roles can generally be done with one ammo.
Now consider the weapons that you benefit from gunners. these are generally weapons that need to engage at different lengths or different roles. Hwachas switching between heavy and burst, Lumberjacks going from Lesmok to Lochnagar, even the short ranged H Carronade does well having heavy for long range or disable and charged for the damage. The gunner isn't making the gun better per se in as much as they are making the gun more diverse.
You want the gunner to get play time, then there needs to be more rewards for diversification. More weapons with extreme arcs, more ammos that dramatically chance how a gun works.
At the end of the day, it makes sense for there to not be a lot of ammo diversification across the ship. A rifleman doesn't have a plethora of different ammos for his gun whereas a mortar crew will have plenty. Naval ships will always have more people crewing and keeping the ship alive than gunners manning the weapons. Even the air force will have teams of people on the ground supporting the pilots. Most of any military is support. It makes sense that these wooden things, suspended from hot air balloons, being shot at weapons that are clearly more advanced than the armor of the ship, has more guys on board to keep the ship alive than guys on board to kill the enemy.
-
Just bringing one extra ammo type and flying to accommodate that ammo type is really boring and predictable. You can't do too many unexpected things.
Just to clarify, I don't play to win. I play to have fun and do crazy things with strange ship builds. Doing that, I more often win, without worrying over the best current meta.
-
I'd rather have engineers not be allowed to carry an ammo type at all than gunners carry two engineer tools, just throwing that out. I'm not suggesting it, but if it is that crucial to enforce a gunner on every ship this feels better than a lot of the suggestions I've so far read.
This sounds like a good idea to me, seconded.
-
There have been some pretty nice ammo suggestions that make you want to have a gunner. Instead of balance, they straight up buff the gunners slots.
Basically, the engineers slot for ammo should be a bad thing. The current selection of ammo does not do it. The gunner choosing this selection of ammo has more freedom but nothing that makes those extra slots worth while to have.
The pilots tools dont count as no one else can jump on the helm.
While every one can jump out and do a bit of repairing.
And everyone can shoot a gun.
The problem that, we obviously see is that we can do enough and in a desirable ammount with just one ammo type.
What if there are some vastly different ammo that make up for gunners? Some vast diffrences that make you want atleast 1 gunner.
1 Gunner on each ship is enough to be necessary for the fix.
Nerfing pilots and engineers, is actualy not the answer. Sure it helps the gunner but it doesnt make the gunner more of what he is.
And thats the reliefe of having more options for the situation, or more options to better control what is happening.
Ammo like charged, greased, heatsink, incindiary, burst are way too mundane, in a good or bad way. The only ammo that really kicks things up differently are the heavy clip, Lesmok, Lochnagar.
You will want more of THOSE types of ammo. The mundane ammo are close to being default. And that is the issue, how these default like ammunition can be easily used without wanting to switch out. Instead of removing Default ammo, you will want to enhance the use of default because the ammo choice is way too situational. Right now it isnt. Only few hit it spot on.
-
I think you pretty well nailed it Crafeksterty.
I can think of two changes that could be made to give Gunners more utility on a ship:
#1) drop / limit the Engineer's ammo slot
#2) when a gun is loaded with an ammo type it should stay loaded with that type until changed by someone else.
Thoughts?
-
Every class needs to have a choice of ammo type - gunner just needs to have more. - Just add default ammo as a choice. And ONLY if this is done the ammo could stay with the ammo type it had last.
-
I dont know, when jumping on a thing, you have a default option to not mess up with you.
How the helm has a helm option, and how the guns have a default option.
Making Default an option can be for confusing new players to how the gun actually works.
Default as an option does fix it so that the gunner is more usefull, but thats because you make engineers and pilots less usefull on it.
This is a viable option but not a fun or healthy one.
Doing an overhaul to the ammo type where ammo will be wanted for different situation will force a captain to always get atleast 1 gunner. And people will feel equaly useless/usefull amongst gunners/engineers/pilots.
-
Crafek, I use Normal ammo as an ammunition type in of itself, when gunning. This gives me the option of four ammunitions, which is especially useful when using mines, as then I have 4 different ranges.
Lesmok: If an enemy is high above, or out of normal ranges of the mine launcher.
Normal: Self-explanitory.
Incendiary (Heatsink does a similar job): when an enemy is far below, and closer than lesmok.
Lochnagar: Enemy is so damned close you could metaphorically be close enough to touch, or is used as a last-ditch getaway diversion.
This allows the greater variety of mine ranges, albeit with a bit less damage than If you replaced lochnagar with charged.
You handicap practically every mine build if you forgo the normal ammo. Especially engineers who need to mine things.
This can also be seen on a hades. If you bring greased as an engineer, and the enemy is out of range, you cannot use the gun to its full potential that it would be able to if you had normal ammunition alongside the brought ammunition. Don't forgo the normal ammo as a second type, as if we get three gunner tools, then a gunner could bring them and suffer no detrimental effects, but gain no bonuses from the ammo itself, but would be still more able to deal with a situation than an engineer would, as the engineer would have the possibility to only bring one gunner tool, and thus would also not be able to shoot a gun without someone with actual ammo to load it in for them. Therefore, Crafeksterty, your regular ammunition as a selected ammunition type would be incompatible when you add in gunner tools into the equation, thus rendering it impractical.
-
Crafek, I use Normal ammo as an ammunition type in of itself, when gunning. This gives me the option of four ammunitions, which is especially useful when using mines, as then I have 4 different ranges.
Lesmok: If an enemy is high above, or out of normal ranges of the mine launcher.
Normal: Self-explanitory.
Incendiary (Heatsink does a similar job): when an enemy is far below, and closer than lesmok.
Lochnagar: Enemy is so damned close you could metaphorically be close enough to touch, or is used as a last-ditch getaway diversion.
This allows the greater variety of mine ranges, albeit with a bit less damage than If you replaced lochnagar with charged.
You handicap practically every mine build if you forgo the normal ammo. Especially engineers who need to mine things.
This can also be seen on a hades. If you bring greased as an engineer, and the enemy is out of range, you cannot use the gun to its full potential that it would be able to if you had normal ammunition alongside the brought ammunition. Don't forgo the normal ammo as a second type, as if we get three gunner tools, then a gunner could bring them and suffer no detrimental effects, but gain no bonuses from the ammo itself, but would be still more able to deal with a situation than an engineer would, as the engineer would have the possibility to only bring one gunner tool, and thus would also not be able to shoot a gun without someone with actual ammo to load it in for them. Therefore, Crafeksterty, your regular ammunition as a selected ammunition type would be incompatible when you add in gunner tools into the equation, thus rendering it impractical.
I didnt say anything about forgoing Normal Ammo for the better. Nor did i clearly suggest here that it is the answer.
My suggestion is more torwards having ammo that are different enough for gunners to be wanted.
Ammo like charged, greased, heatsink, incindiary, burst are way too mundane, in a good or bad way. The only ammo that really kicks things up differently are the heavy clip, Lesmok, Lochnagar.
And
You will want more of THOSE types of ammo. The mundane ammo are close to being default. And that is the issue, how these default like ammunition can be easily used without wanting to switch out. Instead of removing Default ammo, you will want to enhance the use of default because the ammo choice is way too situational. Right now it isnt. Only few hit it spot on.
-
Meh, you hinted towards that earlier discussion you made a few months back regarding forgoing normal ammo as a default.
-
I did, but since i saw what muse can do with the ammo i changed my mind.
That has been a thing lately i feel.
When the Spire was getting a Buff i was against turning the side guns forward. Because i saw so many potential builds that break ships to smitherines.
Well... I break ships to smitherines but i still see people having trouble with the ship. And my suggestion was something very Mild in comparison.
The spire buff was very fun and changes the Spires intended playstyle for the better (Im Admiting). While my suggestion was something that wasnt fun but could make the spire healthier. In comparison im happy with the gun arc changes more than my suggestion.
For this, things kinda happen the same way. Taking away the default ammo i realised is a very boring choice. An EASY choice but boring. It doesnt change the gunner but simply nerfs the engineer and pilot. So why not have the ammo be interresting? Make gunners be powerfull. Not because of one ammo type, but how several limit the gun for specific situations so one MUST change ammo. That way engineers will only have one choice and must revert to default while gunners can in every situation make the gun usefull.
On the Call for Ammo discussion, im really liking the more utility type ammo that increases the gun health, or makes its shots invisible, or blind the enemy ship. These are types of ammo you dont really want to use ALL the time because they have detrimental effects also. As a gunner its no biggie cus you can change to something more fitting.
-
I honestly think people are greatly over valuing normal ammo..
All ships have 4 spots.. a pilot spot - two engineer spots - a gunner spot.. That's the basic "should be default" crew..
Some people use engineer for pilot, and many use third engineer for gunner. Which should be fine and workable. (the more crew combinations that can work, the more play styles they can let exist in the game..)
In the current game, third engineer is by far used more then gunner, not because normal ammo exists.. but because gunners do not have any advantage over engineer on many light guns.. and engineer with buff hammer is out right stronger.. Its all benefit to bring a engineer over a gunner..
Normal ammo isn't used on many of these guns regularly, where you would want the gunner.. (gat, mortar, light caro, flamer, etc)... because it has no value over the guns "best ammo"..
The only places normal ammo removal effects are... Artemis lesmok combo - which is an engi gun most of the time (mobula/junker/spire).. and second medium gunner on galleons, where sometimes the engi will opt for lesmok/normal to use the longer range guns at lest a little effectively.. From what I see, most people still prefer gunner on medium guns over third engineer so no need to nerf it really... because multiple ammo has value their, so there is some trade off on which to pick..
So I think normal ammo removal is just a lesmok nerf.. and a specific tactic nerf.. not a gunner buff really.
Gunners already have a combat advantage over engineer on medium guns and on hades/mine launcher.. If they change the buff hammer, then even more so.
Also its kinda silly to compare everyone having a pipe wrench vs everyone having normal ammo.. Pipe-wrench is useful on any ship with any load out .. Normal ammo as said above is only useful to engineers in certain situations.
Removing the buff hammers dmg bonus, balances gunner and engineer raw dmg.. But doesn't remove the lack of situational value on the light guns we need him to be valuable on.. So is likewise not necessarily the only answer..
There have been some pretty nice ammo suggestions that make you want to have a gunner. Instead of balance, they straight up buff the gunners slots.
Basically, the engineers slot for ammo should be a bad thing. The current selection of ammo does not do it. The gunner choosing this selection of ammo has more freedom but nothing that makes those extra slots worth while to have.
The pilots tools dont count as no one else can jump on the helm.
While every one can jump out and do a bit of repairing.
And everyone can shoot a gun.
The problem that, we obviously see is that we can do enough and in a desirable ammount with just one ammo type.
What if there are some vastly different ammo that make up for gunners? Some vast diffrences that make you want atleast 1 gunner.
1 Gunner on each ship is enough to be necessary for the fix.
Nerfing pilots and engineers, is actualy not the answer. Sure it helps the gunner but it doesnt make the gunner more of what he is.
And thats the reliefe of having more options for the situation, or more options to better control what is happening.
Ammo like charged, greased, heatsink, incindiary, burst are way too mundane, in a good or bad way. The only ammo that really kicks things up differently are the heavy clip, Lesmok, Lochnagar.
You will want more of THOSE types of ammo. The mundane ammo are close to being default. And that is the issue, how these default like ammunition can be easily used without wanting to switch out. Instead of removing Default ammo, you will want to enhance the use of default because the ammo choice is way too situational. Right now it isnt. Only few hit it spot on.
This is a far more logical idea, remove the ammo that currently are the "normal ammo++" for the light guns, and replace them with not one (as suggested) but several ammo that are useful on a gun - if possible - in several different situations that can all happen in any given match..
Basically buff the "situational" value of ammos, and debuff the I'm the best normal ammo++ for the gun.. Since based on ammo alone (if they don't add tools and such), gunner strength is his situational value.. vs engineer who is only useful if he has an ammo that can do everything needed in one ammo.
-
I honestly think people are greatly over valuing normal ammo..
All ships have 4 spots.. a pilot spot - two engineer spots - a gunner spot.. That's the basic "should be default" crew..
Some people use engineer for pilot, and many use third engineer for gunner. Which should be fine and workable. (the more crew combinations that can work, the more play styles they can let exist in the game..)
In the current game, third engineer is by far used more then gunner, not because normal ammo exists.. but because gunners do not have any advantage over engineer on many light guns.. and engineer with buff hammer is out right stronger.. Its all benefit to bring a engineer over a gunner..
Normal ammo isn't used on many of these guns regularly, where you would want the gunner.. (gat, mortar, light caro, flamer, etc)... because it has no value over the guns "best ammo"..
The only places normal ammo removal effects are... Artemis lesmok combo - which is an engi gun most of the time (mobula/junker/spire).. and second medium gunner on galleons, where sometimes the engi will opt for lesmok/normal to use the longer range guns at lest a little effectively.. From what I see, most people still prefer gunner on medium guns over third engineer so no need to nerf it really... because multiple ammo has value their, so there is some trade off on which to pick..
So I think normal ammo removal is just a lesmok nerf.. and a specific tactic nerf.. not a gunner buff really.
Gunners already have a combat advantage over engineer on medium guns and on hades/mine launcher.. If they change the buff hammer, then even more so.
Also its kinda silly to compare everyone having a pipe wrench vs everyone having normal ammo.. Pipe-wrench is useful on any ship with any load out .. Normal ammo as said above is only useful to engineers in certain situations.
Removing the buff hammers dmg bonus, balances gunner and engineer raw dmg.. But doesn't remove the lack of situational value on the light guns we need him to be valuable on.. So is likewise not necessarily the only answer..
There have been some pretty nice ammo suggestions that make you want to have a gunner. Instead of balance, they straight up buff the gunners slots.
Basically, the engineers slot for ammo should be a bad thing. The current selection of ammo does not do it. The gunner choosing this selection of ammo has more freedom but nothing that makes those extra slots worth while to have.
The pilots tools dont count as no one else can jump on the helm.
While every one can jump out and do a bit of repairing.
And everyone can shoot a gun.
The problem that, we obviously see is that we can do enough and in a desirable ammount with just one ammo type.
What if there are some vastly different ammo that make up for gunners? Some vast diffrences that make you want atleast 1 gunner.
1 Gunner on each ship is enough to be necessary for the fix.
Nerfing pilots and engineers, is actualy not the answer. Sure it helps the gunner but it doesnt make the gunner more of what he is.
And thats the reliefe of having more options for the situation, or more options to better control what is happening.
Ammo like charged, greased, heatsink, incindiary, burst are way too mundane, in a good or bad way. The only ammo that really kicks things up differently are the heavy clip, Lesmok, Lochnagar.
You will want more of THOSE types of ammo. The mundane ammo are close to being default. And that is the issue, how these default like ammunition can be easily used without wanting to switch out. Instead of removing Default ammo, you will want to enhance the use of default because the ammo choice is way too situational. Right now it isnt. Only few hit it spot on.
This is a far more logical idea, remove the ammo that currently are the "normal ammo++" for the light guns, and replace them with not one (as suggested) but several ammo that are useful on a gun - if possible - in several different situations that can all happen in any given match..
Basically buff the "situational" value of ammos, and debuff the I'm the best normal ammo++ for the gun.. Since based on ammo alone (if they don't add tools and such), gunner strength is his situational value.. vs engineer who is only useful if he has an ammo that can do everything needed in one ammo.
Thank you for stating exactly what is already being done on the dev app. You're all so behind on the times XD
-
What about making more powerful/specialized ammo take up two gunner slots? Give everyone two ammo slots, but normal is unchangeable. The other slot can be used for the more 'mundane' ammo choices. So, as we have now, Pilot and Engineer can take take a normal and special ammo. Choosing a more powerful, specialized ammo would take up two slots. If a Pilot or Engie took one of these, it would take up both slots, giving them only one choice in combat. Since a Gunner has four slots, they could take either Normal and three special ammos, OR two special ammo and one Specialized ammos, or two Specialized ammos. I would consider Lochnagar a Specialized ammo type, along with some of the new ones.
(http://i.imgur.com/Sdr8Ygk.jpg)
-
What about making more powerful/specialized ammo take up two gunner slots? Give everyone two ammo slots, but normal is unchangeable. The other slot can be used for the more 'mundane' ammo choices. So, as we have now, Pilot and Engineer can take take a normal and special ammo. Choosing a more powerful, specialized ammo would take up two slots. If a Pilot or Engie took one of these, it would take up both slots, giving them only one choice in combat. Since a Gunner has four slots, they could take either Normal and three special ammos, OR two special ammo and one Specialized ammos, or two Specialized ammos. I would consider Lochnagar a Specialized ammo type, along with some of the new ones.
(http://i.imgur.com/Sdr8Ygk.jpg)
I wouldn't want Lochnagar to take up 2 slots, but the idea sounds interesting enough.
A major problem would be the balance though. How much worth is the more powerful lesmok round? What makes it so powerful? Would specialized greased shoot too fast (e.g. greased gatling on armor)?
If balanced though, it sure can give the gunner pure damage (or whatever) superiority compared to engineers/pilots, if said two classes want to keep their default ammo.
A major disadvantage would be to sacrifice more versatility when it comes to using the gun in different situations or using more guns with different "optimal" ammo, which might be good if the "specialized" thing works.
A more UI related problem would be how to visually bring the default ammo in there and which one of the two ammo types in gunner option 2 (related to picture in quote) would be replaced? Do you have a choice wheter to sacrifice a whole slot or just default ammo?
BUT I doubt that this alone can make gunners more popular, even though I want this.
-
Richard, that's a really cool idea that could easily be applied to other tools (I want the spyglass to take up two slots)
However, I'm worried people would still use mostly buff gungineers because on a lot of popular guns (like gat/mortar) you only want one ammo type.
-
I know passive skills aren't the desired idea, and this may have been suggested elsewhere, but what if gunners repaired weapons automatically when using them. I'm not suggesting that it works continually, but only when the gun is being reloaded. Obviously some weapons have higher hit points than others and finding a good balance on the amount repaired would require testing.
Just for example purpose, say gunner autoheals... 20 hp per .5 seconds while the gun is reloading. This means on Gatlin guns, you would heal very little, but on say, the Hwachi Rockey launcher (about 8 seconds reload) you could heal a respectable amount (and those things take a long time to fix because of their high hit points when you have to hop off.)
As I said, the numbers would need tweaking and it would have to be determined if it's on ongoing effect, meaning it occurs each time unit you are on the gun while it's reloading or if you could actually start reloading and jump off to boost the repair with tools as long as you can hop back on before the reload is complete (similar to how loading special ammo works now, just as long as you're in place before that last click). With this method, the game would just determine the total reload time and if the gunner was in place just assign the repair points.
The second methods a bit abusable since an engineer or anyone could just set a gun to reload and as long as a gunner hopped in the seat in time it would be a free boost of repair. Better in my opinion to have it cycle during the reload process only when a gunner is manning it.
I think this would be a fair buff without stepping on engineers' toes or overshadowing their talents. Certainly if flying around without enemies nearby you could start reloading and thus repair the weapon but unlike a constant auto repair, there are actually times when you get caught with your pants down while reloading when an enemy comes out of nowhere and your pilot is yelling, 'Take the shot!' and you just have to sit and wait out the 6 seconds.
Also, it won't stop the need for helpful engineers since it has no effect on fixing destroyed weapons or being knocked off a gun with more than 8 fire charges.
-
I didn't manage to read the whole thread but as a fairly new player I wanted to comment. My suggestion would be two improvements to the way a gunner reloads:
- If he reloads, whatever ammo he has selected is loaded even if he jumps off the gun unless someone else jumps on it.
- If he's on a gun with a full clip he can very quickly switch the ammo type instead of waiting for the full reload time
My intention is for a gunner to actually make use of the different ammo types effectively and with new ammo types being introduced it should help to make the gunners versatility better than the gungineers narrow focus. More passive ammo effects would also make it interesting to have a gunner run around the ship reloading all guns when there is no immediate target to shoot at. The big problem then would only be the carrying capacity, more ammo types means to utilize them a gunner should probably get more gunner slots as well.
There would still need to be other changes, I liked the idea of the buffhammer increasing non-damage stats on the gun. Having better ammo that takes up more slots could be good as well but again, the gunner would need more slots.
-
For the idea of a tool taking 2 spots away, i want that applied on Pheonix claw, buff hammer and Greased. :P
-
Er, isn't the easiest solution to just give gunners buff hammer, always, as a free second slot? This will really focus on the skill of the gunner in prioritizing reload (gotta know your gun to hop in and ammo change at last second), midfight buffs/repairs, etc.
Alternatively the suggestion in the first page where wrench was a free tool to everyone.
You don't have to do all this adding new stuff or rebalancing old.
-
+1 panda
Or a limited hammer that can't buff other components, only guns.
-
The easiest thing regarding Engineers and Buff Hammer is to tweaks what Buff Hammer does to guns.
Adding stuff like slots and whatnot is not easy.
-
then do not adjust the buff hammer without creating a gunner exclusive variant
-
Yes please, have buff hammer apply no effect to guns. People will still use gungineers on gat/mortar and probably on artemis, but otherwise it would be a good step towards making gunners more relevant on light guns :)
-
I already suggested making the buff hammer increase gun rotation speed and max HP rather than increase damage. Still very useful on the rest of the ship and guns, but not enough to replace all gunners with buff engineers. Simple and effective.
The adding slots/dual slot thing was really a "whateva'" idea while I practiced my image skills. Not really serious, but helpful for brainstorming.
-
Sorry to go off on a tangent but I stumbled apon this relevant little gem on the internet right after reading through this thread and could not stop laughing.
http://9gag.com/gag/aRQdMGy
hehe poor poor Muse.
-
The adding slots/dual slot thing was really a "whateva'" idea while I practiced my image skills. Not really serious, but helpful for brainstorming.
I feel insulted.
This idea would have allowed to even have 2 gunners if not all 3 of them on 1 ship, maximizing the power of different ammo types compared to 3 engineers maximizing repair/buff/anti fire power.
A little tuning for the implemention of the idea and you would have your 4 ammo types and 2 engineering tools for gunner and 2 ammo types and 4 engineering tools for engineers, as answer to "the engineer has actually more than 1 ammo type" and as an opposite to removing the default ammo from every class, which many were so fond of.
I do believe that putting thought into that one is worth the time (if putting thought into a game is worth at all), but whateva
-
So, while pondering something, another something occurred to me that might make gunners a bit more desirable. What if simply being on a gun made it reload faster? Not a class specific passive. Just if anyone is on a gun, it reloads faster. Pilots and engineers have other things to do while guns are loading. Gunners, not so much. Even a buff gungineer gets off the gun to keep it buffed. This would be more of a hotseat buff. If your ship is doing well with no repairs to be made, all guns would load a bit faster just by keeping someone in the seat.
-
@Richard LeMoon
Very interesting...
-
That is an interesting idea Richard. Ive mentioned the idea for adding a gunner tool that increases the reload some way or another (its in the ammo discussion page 3, 4, and 5 if you want to look it up I hate to repeat myself) but giving that ability to everyone is definitely interesting. As you mentioned engineers and buffers have better things to do than sit on the guns so it would help out the gunners the most and it sticks with Muse's idea of having all classes equal.
The only issue I see with it is it supports the gungineers just as much as gunners so it doesn't really shift the balance very much other than increasing the dps of all ship builds.
-
How about, 2 versions of buff hammers,
1, For gunners that does the extra 20% damage on weapons, only usable by gunners,
2, works on components only usable by engineers,
Think it might be hard to code in because i think weapons are classed as components but it might solve a lot of issues, if you want the extra damage you sacrifice the repair ability, sounds like a fair trade off, and your 2 engineers can still run with main and buff,
-
Gunners don't have gunner tools. They have gunner ammo.
That's the rule for now until ammo testing is determined to be finished.
-
Yeah, but Guns have a certain role (damage type) in a certain situatione (range) where they shine and everyone can bring the ammo that is the best fit.
Many ships field more guns then gunners(and gungineers) so its often more easy to jump to an unmanned gun more suitable for the new situation
them tweeking your current gun to work out of its usuall comfort zone.
at least easier then deciding between a buffhammer OR a repairtool for your gun.
I have to agree that something that encourages a dedicated gunner to stay at his gun instead of leaving it in order to buff it or or use another gun would makes 3 ammo types more desirable.
Not a well thought out Idea,
but how about some kind of accustoming stacks with a max cap?
The longer you stay at this gun the more you get used to it, improving accuracy and reload speed.
It leaves the Gunner with the Question:
Shall I leave the gun and loose those buff stacks?
With a pilot that keeps me in arc + range & and an engeneer that keeps me buffed + repaired I ,would rather stay to min/max its potential and bring different ammo types to be able to shoot efficient in many situations.
TimeToKill might shring with increased reload speed, but would this be a bad thing since it gives gun-disabling weapons more power (broken weapons loose all stacks) without making the disabled ship's crew feel more helpless/frustrated.
-
Gunners don't have gunner tools. They have gunner ammo.
That's the rule for now until ammo testing is determined to be finished.
Yes Yes you have said that plenty of times before, even tools that work like ammo will not be accepted. Doesn't mean I am going to stop suggesting it, just that I won't expect it to be implemented.
-
Just want to paint a clear picture of how things will shake down since not everyone has been up to date with this thread since the beginning.
-
So, while pondering something, another something occurred to me that might make gunners a bit more desirable. What if simply being on a gun made it reload faster? Not a class specific passive. Just if anyone is on a gun, it reloads faster. Pilots and engineers have other things to do while guns are loading. Gunners, not so much. Even a buff gungineer gets off the gun to keep it buffed. This would be more of a hotseat buff. If your ship is doing well with no repairs to be made, all guns would load a bit faster just by keeping someone in the seat.
Firstly this.
Secondly - Messing with the slot numbers / equipment will not do unfortunately. Even if we give gunner some buff-item it's always availible for the engineer. As awkm said the deal is to give the gunner better and more situational ammo since it's the easiest to implement and probably the best solution considering ballance of the whole game.
The turret ammo seems like a really good idea - well used in specific situations can be extremely useful. I have two another ideas:
Flash Ammo/Mark Ammo - I don't remember the real name - the ammo that leaves quite visible marks in the air when flying and therefore helping both sides to see where they are. The idea is that on hit this ammo makes both ships marked for each other. Sometimes, especially on Battle of the Dunes we see more or less where the ship is but the dust cloud makes it impossible to mark it. Also very useful when enemy uses tar (meaning they are running away and our ship being marked don't do much of a difference).
Tar Ammo / Smoke Ammo - The ammo that instead of doing damage makes small clouds of tar or tar-alike smoke where they hit, lessening the enemy crew's visibility. This would make the squids more usable for harass and encourage the "default" 1 pilot 2 engineers 1 gunner build on them.
-
How about removing normal ammo or allow people to have 2 active at the same time ?
There is only one helmet, and its a good thing to bring a dedicated pilot with pilotingtools.
With just one of them you are screwed in many situations where you need one of the others.
There is only one baloon/hull that is damaged/broken/burning and its a good thing to bring a dedicated engineer.
With just one repair tool you are screwed in many situations where you need one of the others.
There are 3-6 Guns on your ship and a fat chance that the right gun for every range/damagetype is ready to fire.
They do perfectly fine with normal ammo.And the other ammo's purpose is to squeeze out up to 10% more damage or
make them opperate out of their comfort zone (reduced arming distance,reduced weapons spread,less projectile drop )
because the proper gun for that situation was broken (+1 engi) or on fire (+1 engi) or already taken by another player.
With just one ammo type you ..... will have to use the normal ammo for half the guns on the ship? or run between guns to be flexible? ::)
Add the fakt that chem spray (+1 engi) and the buffhammer (+1 engi) stack with ammo buffs ,
but different ammotypes that fill a similar role don't stack with each other;
and it gets hard to see a justification for a dedicated Gunner.
Half the things his addidional ammo does can be done better by additional engineer tools, and the rest has marginal or very situational impact.
But with 2 ammotypes stacking I can see them on eye level with the engineer tools and a whole new level of flexibility/more ship loadouts that need an gunner.
It will require some fine tuning , but each ammo already comes with a drawback that works as a adjusting screw to give them the edge without making them overpowered.
-
I had an idea today and i know its very weird and it may not work coding wise but i think it would make the gunner WAY more valuable.
First, we make the buff hammer a gunner tool (i know i know you dont like it AWKM but hear me out...) making the buff a gunner tool does not remove it from the list of options before an engineer because obviously he can take the buff hammer as his 1 gunner tool
Second, we remove normal ammo as default, i.e. if you select no ammo type at all (taking standard ammo is one of those ammo types to choose from) you can not load a gun. If a gun is already loaded, fire away but with no ammo on your person you are unable to reload
doing this will allow a gunner to (if he chooses) select two different ammo types, a buff hammer AND a repair tool. this will make the gunner instantly viable. this change will also make for a much more interesting "engineer game" for dedicated engineers who does no plan on firing any weapons. because now they have a full repair kit AND components to buff!
with most ships now being able to buff engines they will fly faster and more nimbly creating bit more fun for the pilots, the gunner class will be viable on many more builds, and you will barely have to do any re-coding (hopefully)!
-
I had an idea today and i know its very weird and it may not work coding wise but i think it would make the gunner WAY more valuable.
First, we make the buff hammer a gunner tool (i know i know you dont like it AWKM but hear me out...) making the buff a gunner tool does not remove it from the list of options before an engineer because obviously he can take the buff hammer as his 1 gunner tool
Second, we remove normal ammo as default, i.e. if you select no ammo type at all (taking standard ammo is one of those ammo types to choose from) you can not load a gun. If a gun is already loaded, fire away but with no ammo on your person you are unable to reload
doing this will allow a gunner to (if he chooses) select two different ammo types, a buff hammer AND a repair tool. this will make the gunner instantly viable. this change will also make for a much more interesting "engineer game" for dedicated engineers who does no plan on firing any weapons. because now they have a full repair kit AND components to buff!
with most ships now being able to buff engines they will fly faster and more nimbly creating bit more fun for the pilots, the gunner class will be viable on many more builds, and you will barely have to do any re-coding (hopefully)!
All these ideas have been suggested before and rejected for one reason or another.
-
oh, I hadn't seen the "not being able to shoot at all" idea before. I personally have suggested the buff hammer change myself in the past.
and I certainly hadn't seen these ideas combined into one before.
-
Not being able to shoot at all hasn't been specifically suggested, but would be rejected on the basis of that being worse than any other option you could pick. I would rather have someone with lochnagar firing my flamer than someone who can't shoot at all. That kind of suggestion would just make me say "dont take buff ever". But removing normal ammo and giving gunners other tools (including the specific suggestion to move buff to the gunner) have both been suggested multiple times so far, and neither looks likely to happen.
-
my main engis rarely if ever fire weapons on both my Goldie and pyra. I would exchange the rare moments that they do shoot for having everything constantly buffed.
also you are describing a way that having a gunner on board would actually be better than having 3 engis: mission accomplished.
-
At some point we need a wiki or some other database of dev responses to suggestions, like rempving normal ammo.
-
my main engis rarely if ever fire weapons on both my Goldie and pyra. I would exchange the rare moments that they do shoot for having everything constantly buffed.
also you are describing a way that having a gunner on board would actually be better than having 3 engis: mission accomplished.
Yes, mission accomplished, in a very negative way. That way basically punishes engineers rather than encourages gunners, which isn't what the devs (and probably anyone who mains engies) wants. There are better options than doing this that haven't failed just yet (the on-going ammo experiments for example).
-
maybe, not saying my idea is the best ever just wondering if it might be an effective and simple one. I'm just not convinced that most main engis would mind not shooting a gun if it meant an overhaul to the "engi game"
-
The way I see it, the primary problem is that anything a Gunner gets, an Engineer will get as well.
At this point, I don't think it's completely incorrect to say that the Buff Hammer is, perhaps, a bit too good compared to any COMBINATION of ammo types. Especially given how many seem to have downsides that are rendered either irrelevant or completely negated by the buff. And far too many guns are capable of functioning perfectly well with only one type of ammo. Yeah, the Hwacha, and the flamer and Gatling sometimes can function with multiple types... but that's not much.
So, stupid solution: Only gunners get ammo. Every gun has a default ammo that it reloads into but only gunners can bring special kinds of ammo.
Less stupid solution: Every shot also decreases the buff timer in addition to however much it decreases per second. Like, a flamer chews up the buff time as it melts an enemy ship and, say, a mine launcher stays buffed for a significant amount of time.
Or something. I never claim to have good ideas, only interesting ones.
-
Yes, mission accomplished, in a very negative way. That way basically punishes engineers rather than encourages gunners, which isn't what the devs (and probably anyone who mains engies) wants. There are better options than doing this that haven't failed just yet (the on-going ammo experiments for example).
but the whole problem stems from the fact that engineers are too versatile. I think some kind of engineer nerf is not only the best but probably the only decisive way of making the gunner more viable; it's also a really easy fix in comparison to the extensive testing required to balance the new ammo types that are Muse's currently favoured solution. that said I think removing free default ammo would be a big enough first step, I don't think it's necessary to make the buff hammer a gunner tool.
-
making the buff hammer a gunner tool acts as both a buff to gunners and a slight nerf to engis
-
making the buff hammer a gunner tool acts as both a buff to gunners and a slight nerf to engis
Do you mean to replace an ammo?
This will mean
1. No gunner will take it, since they need the ammo.
2. Even if it is a repair slot, no gunner will take it, since they need a wrench.
3. Gunners will cut into engie's role, by buffing engines hull balloon etc.
I think this solution will not work. You just end up with noone having buff hammer.
-
it would be in the gunner slot that both engis and gunners could choose. maybe I'm weird here but does every gunner need all 3 ammo types? I rarely need more than 1, let alone 3!
-
I rarely need more than 1, let alone 3!
And that, right there, is why Gunners as a class are considered Niche.
Because almost every gun works fine with just one ammo type, and far too often each person only needs to man one gun.
Make the ammo types more effective at changing the way the guns work, make it worthwhile to carry more than one ammo type, and it will be instantly fixed.
I still advocate some sort of nerf to the buff hammer, though.
-
or make the buff hammer a gunner tool and this make the gunner less niche
-
Let's break the game by giving everybody a default engineering tool, as everybody should have, considering helm and guns both have their defaults.
-
We can't fix this problem by giving the gunner more repairing possibilities, but by giving gunner such gunning possibilities that sometimes it's worth having two gunners instead of two engineers.
-
We can't fix this problem by giving the gunner more repairing possibilities, but by giving gunner such gunning possibilities that sometimes it's worth having two gunners instead of two engineers.
and then you fight against Cake and realize that this is not the best idea
-
or a hwacha fish or a trip art junker
-
If you are giving gunners any passive buffs, I request introducing dash for engineers. Cause someone has to be in 2 places simultaneosly since that lazy butt always sits on his guns.
Also, I kinda thought of builds where gunners entirely replaced by engineers, and came to interesting conclusion.
Heavy carronade on goldfish REALLY needs a gunner. Because charged actually has 20% more damage and 10-ish% more DPS than buffed vanilla. And on a distance of heavy clip you may afford baloon engineer buffing front gun.
I guess, if light guns had such difference from ammo, as heavy guns do, it will be nice having different types of them, the situation will be same with my example above. But game has only 3 ships with heavy guns (and one of them is claimed underpowered). So I see, that new ammo types and changing effects from current ammo types is the only possible way to make room for gunner and save the game balance.
I might totally look like slowpoke, but I came up with any opinion on this topic only now.
-
I still feel like the gunners need a tool that can be used on the gun.
Much like the addon idea where you can select a tool while on a gun and itl effect the gun like a pilot.
So for example, an addon tool that adds 10% more damage whenever it is selected on the gun.
So the gunner reloads to an ammo type,
When that is done
Selects the addon tool for the extra damage.
So in clarity, addons then neglect the negative effects of ammo.
So add in the +%dmg addon to greased, add in fire rate addon to burst, add in rotation speed addon to lochnagar.
The problem with this idea of what i heard is that it is a new mechanical behaviour to a gun.
What does it reload if an addon is selected during the reload?
Does it add on the + buffs with the ammo and a buff hammer buff?
Well not much else but thats the thing, its a new mechanical behaviour. The ammo being overhauled is cool but prooves for a very difficult to change tool the more you think about it.
Possible but the math is more difficult. The new tool type is easier to comprehend and make work for balance but is more difficult to make exist within the existing behaviour. (coding, programing, content making etc).
-
sorry my clever elegent ideas that would not be that difficult to implement coding wise wasn't up to par... ;-P
-
No one read my first post that started this thread lol.
-
I did I did!
-
No one read my first post that started this thread lol.
I did, and I totally disagree with your idea which will totally ruin the original balance system
-
Lol, changing one tool rather than DRASTICALLY CHANGING ALL AMMO IN THE GAME. sure.
-
Gunners don't have gunner tools. They have gunner ammo.
That's the rule for now until ammo testing is determined to be finished.
I'm fairly new to GOI, but I do feel like this may be an error that is preventing gunners from becoming more than a Niche class.
The main issue is, Gunners rarely need more than two ammo types for the weapons they use. Even good gunners, the ones that use downtime to load secondary guns with specialist ammunition while buff engineers are buffing engines/prebuffing mobility parts, rarely need to use more than two ammo types in addition to normal ammo. Heatsink ammo in particular seems heavily underused despite the utility (mostly due to the penalties of using it when not about to get lit on fire.)
Gunner "tools" might not be a bad thing to look into. I do not suggest any "tools" that could be used outside of a gun, but rather active abilities along similar lines of pilot tools might be helpful for bringing a gunner in-line with the buffing engineer. Ideally these abilities would be used alongside ammo types, and would be suboptimal for a non-gunner to take.
Example Tool 1: "Active Reload"
-This tool takes the same slot as an ammo type. When selected it immediately starts a reload on your weapon. This reload is notably faster than a standard reload (33-50%), but damages the weapon through the entire duration of the reload.
-Essentially a Kerosene for a gunner, this would give an aggressive gunner the ability to make certain long-reload weapons (Hwacha) capable of firing more often and ultimately drastically increasing their overall Damage per second without touching the weapon's burst. In addition, it would allow gunners to swap ammo significantly faster at the cost of having to repair their weapon more often.
Example Tool 2: "Heatsink"
-This tool would replace heatsink clip. This active ability would immediately extinguish a weapon and render it immune to fire until the end of a reload, at a significant cost of damage output (~25% or so)
-Heatsink clip is extremely useful for a gunner, but it can be exceedingly difficult or impossible to quickly change a weapon out in time to counter a flamer (Most heatsink clips I have seen used are on weapons with fast reloads, like gatlings or mortars). When compared to chemspray, heatsink clip is without a doubt significantly weaker and used much, much less. Currently, dual-gunner ships are extremely weak to flamers due to the lack of firefighting ability gunners possess, an active ability such as this would permit gunners to continue to fire even as their engines and balloon go down in flames (which should be your engineer's job anyway!)
Example Tool 3 - "Jerry-Rig"
-When activated applies a debuff to all aspects of a weapon for the current mag (-10/15% damage, rof, range, and no turning radius), but permits the weapon to be fired, even if destroyed,until the magazine is spent.
-This "tool" would give gunners an ability that no other class has, a final "Hail Mary" salvo when facing imminent weapon destruction. As an ammunition type this tool would virtually never see use due to penalties in virtually every category, but as an active ability it could allow a gunner to clutch victory from the jaws of defeat.