Guns Of Icarus Online
Info => Feedback and Suggestions => Topic started by: Byron Cavendish on May 13, 2014, 05:40:13 pm
-
The primary feature a captain looks for in his ship is optimizing the
efficiency of his crew. The junker, pyramidion, and even the galleon
are popular choices for this reason. They are designed in a way that a
main engineer can solely run an efficient cycle between the essential
parts in a very small time frame. If it takes longer than 20 seconds
for a main engineer to cycle the main components than a second crew is
needed, and that is not ideal.
A captain wants to maximize his offensive capabilities. The moment the
ship takes more damage than a main engineer can manage, most notably
on the hull or balloon, is the moment when his chances of surviving
shrink drastically. It is much harder to regain positive aggressive
momentum once a ship goes into tank mode. Ideally under fire, a ship
must maintain the same amount of fire it is sustaining. This is the
defining issue that the mobula has, it is unable to do this.
The strength of the mobula lies in it's ability to begin an engagement
with an extra attacking weapon/crew. This is also (theoretically) it's
defense. A mobula simply cannot tank any sustained damage. It's only
means of survival is overwhelming firepower; generating more damage
than it takes. Theoretically this is how it should work, and should be
it's appeal, nut realistically the tale is different.
Because of how close the hull is to the balloon, it is incredibly
likely that any sustained damage will hit both the hull and balloon. A
main engineer will need to start repairing the hull if the ship
receives any amount of fire, immediately reducing it's damage and
removing one of the ship's main advantages. Now the ship is at an
acute disadvantage to stronger ships, who have the amount of attacking
weapons, but tank-ier ships.
While this is happening, the ship is also most likely taking balloon
damage. The balloon on the mobula is the pilot's only means of evading
damage. The ship cannot turn, or run away, it must rely on vertical
evasion. Therefore it is imperative that the balloon is always
maintained. That means that the mobula has very quickly lost two of
it's attacking crew, and is nothing more than a flying target- which
will inevitably get ground down and destroyed.
So, we have addressed the issues, now how to fix them? There are two
necessary steps. First, the inner center of the mobula needs to be
re-designed into a central room containing the hull and balloon. They
can even keep their existing positions, but the dividing wall needs to
be removed.
This wall allow a main engineer to do what main engineers do on every
other ship: maintain the two most important parts of the ship
efficiently. This will lead to the mobula being able to increase it's
sustained firepower longer, and fill the role of gunboat that it wants
to be. The ship will also be able to benefit from two engineers on the
hull should it need to tank, a critical missing component.
Next, the mobula needs a stronger niche strength. Theoretically the
balloon should be that niche. Because of it's size and vulnerability,
it ends up being it's weakness. This can be fixed by buffing the
balloon with 15-25% more health/durability. The captain would be able
to more readily employ the ship's only evasive option. Much like the
galleon is the king of armor and health, and relies on that to
survive, so too should the mobula rely on it's balloon. By having more
balloon health, the captain has a unique strength in choosing this
ship. And most importantly, he would be able to keep that second
engineer attacking longer before being needed to attend to the
balloon.
-
I second this, big time.
I am personally not a big fan of immobile, fragile ships, that includes both a Spire and Mobula. As far as it goes, I actually consider mobula being a flat Spire. Thing is, it is possible (more or less) to keep the Spire somehow maintained by one engineer from only but a slight engagement, and it still has potential of getting two engineers repairing the ship with Gunner staying on a heavy gun with alot of firepower, and even possible pilot taking the front light gun. Mobula is a completely different case, though. First of all, helm must be operated practically at all times to keep most of the guns in a good angle(depends on the guns, of course, but it seems like stabilizing mobula so your front hades will stay in arc proves to be more of a challenge than to let you use it yourself and let the gunner mount a side gun). Even then, the slightest damage dealt to the core components of the ship may turn out deadly if unattended and dealt with, and with balloon and hull practically covering one another it greatly reduces maximum damage potential Mobula has, thus leaving it heavily exposed, for it poses no threat anymore that could keep enemies at bay.
I thought about conjoining both component rooms with an additional corridor in the middle. This would let one engineer take care of both components easier, thus leaving the other one on the gun, still providing fire on the enemy to make them less likely to attack poor Mobula crew.
I also repeatedly asked Muse Devs on their Fireside Chat about possible changes to the balloon health depending on the ships, and as much as I personally would love some buff for Mobula's balloon health, for Mobula was the very reason I asked such question in the first place, I can already tell you this is most likely not going to happen, for awkm stated multiple times that there are no plans for changing balloon's health. He also added that this may cause too much unnecessary imbalance, so there's always a chance that he would take it into consideration if put in the light of actually making this game more balanced. One can hope.
-
Being part Mobula pilot, i have to say. This is not exactly what the mobula needs.
It doesnt need much at all.
The thing is, not only does the captain have to know the formation of his crew to better his ship.
But you also have to consider how well it pays off. How much survivability do you have, if there is only one engineer on the hull.
How much time does that give you, and... how easy is it to pull it off.
The easiest formation ive tought of is having 2 main engineers as the SIDE ENGINEERS. They are in their part of the mobula. One is at the baloon deck, while the other on the hull deck. While the third engineer doesnt have to handle a gun and rather runs around and helps out the other 2 with buffs and rebuilds.
This third engineer will keep your baloon buffed, which greatly makes the mobula evasive, along with having atleast 2 engineers on baloon or hull when the time is ripe. So this third engineer with buff and wrench is my main engineer who does the actual engineering while the other 2 simply have strong engineering tools because once they leave their offencive position, i want them to hold strong in a defencive situation.
This to me, is not hard to do and makes it much easier for engineers to grasp.
The mobula is in a way made in purpose to loose its fire power the weaker it gets. This purpose is made visible thru the wide design of the ship, along with the fire power it can deliver. If mobula is the only ship in the game that can kill a galleon before it rebuilds atleast once, then i do not want its defence be stronger for its offencive. It is pretty strong allready.
But lets look at your suggestions.
Having something that links the two components (baloon and hull) is not only taking up resources and time for the devs. It also buffs it to the point of being equal to manage ship as the pyramideon. The engineer has a mallet that repairs both the baloon and the hull. Along with the side engines. With this, you can have 2 guns, or 3 guns pointing at an enemy ship constantly (The third gun being the pilot). This makes the mobula a stronger pyramideon. Because the mobula allready has alot of the same stats as it, just a bit slower horizontaly. But super fast verticaly.
That suggestion, gives the mobula the power to stay on their guns. This is too strong. The pyra, and the junker is then outmatched and would be better than the spire on its effectiveness because suddenly the mobula has no weakness.
Your second suggestion is durability or health increase to the baloon or hull or armor. The armor and hull health are standard. They are the same as a pyra, or better. And it is close to being more durable than a junker stat wise (partly the junkers durability comes from his hull size). I could agree to Armor bonus, but too much could be too easy to add. Baloon health increase will not happen as it will be unbalanced and annoying to repair on each ships baloons.
One of the things i suggest you start is bringing drogue chute as mobula is the lightest ship and thus recieves most from it. You will have more than enough time to gve your engineers on rebuilding your baloon with drogue chute than most other ships.
I just want to end this with a grump side of me. If you guys want to say if something is underpowered, please make it work first. If you dont try what is underpowered, and you then dont use it, dont say it is underpowered and you therefore want it to be stronger so then you can use it. Use it now as you think it is underpowerd, make it powered (Make it work) and you will see exactly what it needs or does not need.
Before the spire buff, i mostly argued that it needed a huge boost in acceleration. This would make the ship very tricky to hit because of its form. And skilled pilots could make for some very tricky mind game bullshit at close range. But instead we get a more fun buff that makes it more glass cannon like. I could still go for the acceleration buff, but im happy beingable to perform these awesome combos. But people still do not fly the spire, and some people say it is still underpowered.
Please make what you want to work, WORK. Do not say it is weak, because you dont use it. (Not assuming everybody)
If the game only had one really good ship, and the rest are fun but suck balls versus that best ship, then why fly that best ship?
-
If the game only had one really good ship, and the rest are fun but suck balls versus that best ship, then why fly that best ship?
To win tournaments ::)
-
Do you really think these changes would make the game better? Or do you want them because it's better for your play style?
-
The real problem is that the topmost gun is too isolated from the rest of the ship, so the top gunner can't repair much of anything. The junker would also have this problem (and consequently be less op) if it weren't for the hull-repair sweet spot.
I would personally keep the hull and balloon separate, but add a pair of holes in the deck of the ship that the top gunner could jump through to quickly help repair the hull or balloon, while sacrificing firepower because it takes a while to run back.
An extra spanner at a critical moment makes a huge difference, and these hatches would provide one at the cost of a long climb back to the gun deck.
-
This thread is really interesting to me because a while back I was spending a lot of time pondering why the mobula, which statistically should be one of the best ships in the game, in practice was one of the least used effectively in both competitive and casual.
My conclusion was that the mobula lacked what the popular ships have; redundancy in repairs.
On a pyra, galleon, junker, goldfish and to a degree squids and spires, every component can at any critical moment, get at least 2 crew members on the hull or balloon and often guns and engines. The Mobula is the only ship lacking this and therefore has very long hull, balloon engine and gun rebuilds as well as long repair circuits.
My conclusions mirrored exactly what was discussed in this thread. A hallway between the hull and balloons and hatches on the deck to the hull and balloon areas for the top crew member to jump into.
This way, in critical situations, the mobula could tank or team rebuild. This would be balanced by the very long times it takes to return to guns.
In my opinion, it's worth the coding. The mobula retains all its uniqueness and balance while gaining the same team building capability every other ship in the game has.
-
What about if the tunnel connecting the hull and balloon was added but the ability for the pilot to man the middle gun was taken away?
Would that be the balance the mobula needs? it increases the chances of survival and decreases some of the potentional firepower. thoughts?
-
As an almost exclusive Mobula pilot, I'm with Craf, Spud and Omni here.
The problem with the Mobula isn't the ship itself, it's the people crewing it and the playstyles being imposed on it. I personally think it's one of the more satisfying and easier ships to manage if you're playing with it rather than against it. It draws the most criticism because it's highly compartmentalised but, newsflash: that's by design. If you're trying to have one main engie run around like an ultra runner (and failing) when the ship is so utterly non-conducive to that, then... well, sorry, you're doing it wrong.
You've got the central gun all the way up there with a ladder near the back, two side guns some distance away from each other. The balloon and hull on opposite ends of the ship below the deck in isolated chambers, hell, even the pilot has to do some parkour to dismount the helm with any sort of efficiency. The Mobula demands a crew that can engineer and gun individually, just like the positions of all its components. That's why I think it's such a fun ship: everyone gets to -- has to -- do a bit of everything. When I'm playing with newer players or strangers, assuming everyone brings the right equipment, my orders are usually: "stick to your side of the ship, and look after your own components. DON'T leave your station." And that's it. If I let people run around loose, too much time is wasted travelling.
As for the 'fixes'. I'd rather not see a corridor linking the two sides of the ship because the component isolation is what makes the Mobula the Mobula, what forces crews to think differently about how they approach this unusual ship, and arguably what keeps it balanced. I don't object to the hatches though, that's a long way back for anyone wanting to fall below deck, a good emergency trade-off and possibly opens the ship up to some other unusual playstyles. Besides, a bit of sunlight down there might be nice ;-)
If the corridor was implemented, I think it would have to be near the front of the ship, pushing the hull chamber in line with the balloon's towards the back. That way repairs would still involve commitment and the rear ladders would still be necessary. It would also allow crew to relay between the two guns below deck.
In the right hands though, the Mob is devastating as is and as far as I'm concerned that's exactly how it should be. I think it's in a great place personally.
-
What about if the tunnel connecting the hull and balloon was added but the ability for the pilot to man the middle gun was taken away?
How would you do that Grey? I rarely use the top gun as a pilot because it takes too long to get up there and usually my gunner is doing a damn fine job himself :-) I tend to grind along the railings on the front and drop to a lower deck gun, or stretch further to a side gun. This is usually when extra firepower is absolutely needed.
-
You can allready jump and look back to grab the middle gun.
Tbh, all of the times i do that it swings my ship to places i dont want it to. So it requiers steadiness first. So its always better to have the third engineer manning the middle gun, you are just the extra who can jump on it early. Problem is, you are taking a risk of overshooting it :E
-
All I think the Mobula needs *from an engi point of view* is the bottom rear deck to extend across the back of the ship, so to get from one side to the other you do not need to use the ladders. The ladders are horrible..
Otherwise I am fine with the layout as is.. one engi either side + engi/gunner middle works fine... Just because it can't win every engagement doesn't mean its underpowered.. I've been in plenty of games where the Mobula felt very overpowered.. and games where the Mobula looked like free kills - but.. we could say that about all ships.. as that is caused by many factors..
As for the pilot using the middle gun, it should be removed and not used - it is obviously a glitch/bug. Going through the floor to mount a gun doesn't sound like working as intended to me.. I really don't think it should factor into if the Mobula's layout is balanced or not..
-
I've heard that suggestion before Caprontos with regards to the walkway spanning the rear of the ship. I can imagine that working quite well, and yeah, those ladders are a bit sticky at times.
Even though I know about that pilot-jump-gun-mount exploit, I've no desire to use it because it's so ridiculous. (I'm not sure how I feel about the Junker under-hull-repair quirk either for that matter.) I agree though, that glitch should be fixed. To be honest, I thought it already had.
-
I use the front gun exploit all the time and teach it to new mobula pilots whenever I can. As far as I am concerned that gun is the Captain's gun, and the mobula is designed to shoot 4 guns at once. The joined hull balloon compartment would make the mobula a two gun ship with a dedicated engineer that can chase or kite. We already have a ship that does that, we call it a Pyramidion. I think the game needs a light weapon spire more than it needs a slower pyramidion with more unused guns.
-
To be honest, I almost feel like the Mobula is a tad too powerful.
How often does it happen to you that you lose both hull and balloon? The mobula can evade most stuff with up and downs and sometimes even requires a bit of hydrogen/chute vent to help out. Once one of these tools is used your engineers have enough time to hit hull/balloon with a Mallet until you turn back to full combat mode.
Actually, I don't know what my engineers are doing. I can't count how often I have been under constant fire. May it be gat/mortar (use hydro to dodge finishing mortar and possible ram), carronade (drouge chute really is useful there) or even the thrower of death fire. No matter what happened, I always seem to have a balloon ready to survive at least 1 hydro, an armor ready to survive even the hardest of rams and all 3 engines fully functional even though there is constant kerosene and enemy gunfire on those.
I don't know if it's luck, crew skills or ally help. For most of the time I seem to get the upper hand in the end.
Many have probably noticed that mobulas are usually long range ships. It is because of mobula's ability to uterly frustrate it's own engineers that need to keep the ship alive during combat. The longer the range, people tend to believe, the easier it is to keep a ship alive.
However, the Mobula does have 5 guns, which enables it to switch between short, medium and long range guns rather easy.
Most of the time I have a gunner with me on the mobula, just because the gunner can take the "optimal" ammunition for all guns of the ship and thus can use all of them effiecently in the time of need, while the engineers are away repairing stuff. Usually 1 gun should be enough to throw most enemies so much off that all 3 crewmembers can go back to their intented position for a short period of time and do an immense amount of damage that can barely be replicated, which keeps me alive longer or wins me the engagement right away.
What else has been mentioned? The pilot jumping to the front gun? That thing is close to useless. Either I make it part of a trifecta of SOMEthing or I might as well put a beacon flare on it, having the gunner running around the deck to make use of every other gun. The gunner himself can use this trick to his own advantage though. I, as the pilot, am way too busy to fly the ship. If not then my enemy is doing something wrong.
Seriously, that ship is a beast. It has almost the exact same hull/armor stats as the pyra (50 less armor I believe), being just as good as ramming. It's speed is high enough to keep distance and yet not high enough to keep up with a pyra when it comes down to it. Best vertical evasion ability you could ask for. Turning speed is decent, acceleration is horrible though and might need some time to get going (think ahead!). And damn 5 guns pointed into the same direction!
-> Ram a junker and 2 to 3 guns are useless on that ship. Ram a mobula and you have at worst 4 guns obliterating you on the spot.
Destroy the mobulas balloon. Wait 5 hours until it reaches the ground with drouge chute. Ramming takes a while too and if you mess up, there should be the mobula's guns giving you a beating. It's hard not to mess up against good pilots and a competent crew in general at some point in battle (and there are allies and stuff).
People thing wrong about that ship. Buff it in any way and it's too powerful. Nerf it and it gets just as much use time as now, only from a safer distance and more complaints about the nerf.
And most of all: It's NOT the balloon that stands as the weakness of the mobula. It's the engines guys, the ENGINES! Break them all and the entire crew is busy. Especially if you manage to get some hull OR balloon pressure going. However, being able to get to that part is hard, which makes the mobula so powerful in my eyes. Most of the time the engines are just fine, leaving either balloon or hull needing up to 2 engineers and leaving 1 gunner to give you a hard time with the right guns.
Surviving on a mobula is easy. You dodge vertically pretty much every 2nd class pyramidion as well as many long range shots (lumber, hades, hwacha...) and for everything else you have around 2 guns shooting the enemy at the same time which should make him think twice about getting close to you.
Also let's be honest: How many times does it happen that the balloon and the armor are down at the same time? Flamers don't count since they apply for all ships. And everything is rather easy to dodge/counter with the possibilities this ships enables.
Also, allies. If you both fuck up so much that you can't help each other or deal with your own enemy, then you fucked up. No buff can and should be able to help you there.
Even when an enemy sneaks up on you, can you easily gain the upper hand with simple piloting on this ship.
"Hard" engineering is not the cause of death for this ship. It is either a superior enemy or superior enemy teamwork that kills it. 1 ship, any ship has a hard time against a mobula, it only gives you so many chances to let you kill it, else you die instead.
I heard the ladders suck.
-
I won't pretend to have answers since I never fly it but I will say I find them easy to kill and I never see them used in competition successfully
-
I won't pretend to have answers since I never fly it but I will say I find them easy to kill and I never see them used in competition successfully
.... I'm not sure what you're watching, they were doing quite well the last few months.
-
I dunno I guess the same thing Byron smollet and others are watching...
-
I don't think we saw it too much in the Sky League (though there were... a lot of teams bringing a lot of various ships so I can't quite recall off the top of my head right now), but they were quite prevalent in a lot of Rumbles and some of the Socials. I think most people consider them to be on the weak side still, but they have been used rather effectively on long range maps.
-
Sunday Rumble 15 says 'Hi!' Cpt Janeway (formerly Mad Maverick, right?) ;-)
http://youtu.be/lGAiA9t6sFk
We gave you Wolves a good run for your money all things considered; we were a mixed team (some of whom I'd never played with before), that was my first (and only) proper Sunday Rumble as a pilot so I was a bag of nerves for those three games (resulting in some awful panicked manoeuvres), and looking back my Mob loadout wasn't exactly ideal. A lot has changed since then but I had to bring this up! :-)
It was a shame AK dissolved and Valiant are more casual, but I'd love to play some more competitive games.
-
I had a mixed crew also no offense to daft but he is no goose and I had never flown with him competitively before... with that being said you guys would have won with a second pyra...
-
let's remember I did have the caveat of "successfully" on my statement
-
I kinda prefer the idea of the holes.
As a engineer mainly i can sign what byron says about the weaknesses of the mobula but a tunnel would make it to easy and to fast.
Yes the inability of the mobula to tank damage is its biggest thread. Besides fire which will most likely hit every part of the ship (atleast hull and balloon). But giving those 2 a tunnel would make it to fast as others described. The idea with the holes however would allow the topdeck enginer/player to quickly jump down and help tank damage. It would be the same the topright gunner/gungineer can do on a pyra. Quickly jump down -> tank the damage -> have a slow walk back to your gun
And mobula not used effective in competetive?
Im not sure what you guys watched but i saw several good mobulas in competetive.
Thralls started it with their pyra mobula pairs. Mad Hatters continued it and gents copied it.
There were mobulas in competetive. Not as many as junkers or pyras but more than squids and spires ...
The mobula isnt the least used ship. Its just in a awkward but manageable position.
-
let's remember I did have the caveat of "successfully" on my statement
CsRy have used mobulas successfully in competitive, in fact the first time we ever used a double sniper mobula team in the final of a box social we gained a perfect score: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGGQhhQT-N8
begins at 32:33
probably best to start at 45:26 unless you enjoy commentary and little action.
DISCLAIMER: Don't forget Janeway, the counter to sniping - is more sniping!
-
let's remember I did have the caveat of "successfully" on my statement
CsRy have used mobulas successfully in competitive, in fact the first time we ever used a double sniper mobula team in the final of a box social we gained a perfect score: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGGQhhQT-N8
begins at 32:33
probably best to start at 45:26 unless you enjoy commentary and little action.
DISCLAIMER: Don't forget Janeway, the counter to sniping - is more sniping!
lol don't I know it!
-
I thought the counter to sniping was the Glow Water Thralls.
-
I had a mixed crew also no offense to daft but he is no goose and I had never flown with him competitively before... with that being said you guys would have won with a second pyra...
I suppose Pyras fly themselves to glory eh? We might have won if I hadn't made so many mistakes with my manoeuvring and a couple of guns had been switched out. Those things cost us, and they're piloting/loadout issues irrespective of ship (mostly) -- nothing a bit of time and experience can't sort out.
I am (and was) fully aware of your caveat but my point was that even as a noob pilot (relatively speaking) with a sub-optimal Mobula build, I/we weren't 'easy to kill' and had some success in a competitive best of three. I'm sure we're not the only ones either. And besides, if a stock response is to just 'go Pyra' then is there any wonder we don't see so many Mobs and Spires in the skies? They're ships that require different mentalities and I think that's the real hurdle for most people, hence why they're considered 'Hard' ships to pilot and master, and hence why you don't see much success with them. I don't think that's a reason to go Pyra (or whatever) myself, it's a challenge with its risks and rewards. And I do love the rewards of the Mob.
-
I feel like you misunderstand me; see I went goldfish that whole match because I wanted to try and make a ship that is not used often in competition viable. I want to see more variety in ships at the competitive level. why does it seem a junker or a pyra must always be involved? the reality is mobs are rarely successful and when they are it is marked and remembered because of how uncommon it is. but again I don't fly mobs because I like to win so what do I know...
-
Guys the topic raised here was not if the mobula has ever been used competitively, it is about making it more viable.
-
Byron their showing that it is being used in competition is an attempt to show that it already viable
-
Byron their showing that it is being used in competition is an attempt to show that it already viable
This. Mobula is viable.
-
Byron their showing that it is being used in competition is an attempt to show that it already viable
This. Mobula is viable.
I second that. Also, if it's up to me I would rather choose a mobula over a pyramidion, in order to win, Jane.
-
Byron their showing that it is being used in competition is an attempt to show that it already viable
This. Mobula is viable.
I second that. Also, if it's up to me I would rather choose a mobula over a pyramidion, in order to win, Jane.
that's madness
-
I fly Mobula rarely, but when I do - I use a rare but interesting Quad Engie format. I have one engie dedicated to the hull side, one to balloon, and one engie set as "The Wanderer" as I call them. My Wanderer gives my side engies a helping hand when things get tough, and can man a gun when things aren't. They all take standard repair tools and sometimes chem.
I myself take buffs and chem along with a single important pilot tool (usually drogue or impact) and use the jump up to the middle gun to fire it myself. Typically that gun is something relatively long-range as I don't want to be using it when the enemy are close. Usually this means bringing a Hades with greased rounds for emergencies.
With longer range guns upstairs and short-range fire weapons downstairs, I fly conservatively and try not to get too involved in terms of distance. As soon as they close up, my engies man the short-range guns and my wanderer gets into a position to tank. Usually the firepower across long and then short range is enough to disable or kill our enemies before they can close up and do sufficient damage.
This works against mid-to-short-range ships, but is practically useless against long-range builds. Sniper Mobulas are definitely powerful, but I have not yet experimented with them properly.
-
I said more viable. If you don't agree- great, if you do- great, I saw lots of interesting arguments from both sides, continue with that. I did not ask if you once that one sunday rumble once with that one build. I did not ask if it is viable at all, or was it ever used competitively at all, read the fine lines please :)
The last actual constructive thing related to the point of this thread was Alistair's post.
-
I would love to test the open hatches on the top deck for quicker access to the hull and balloon from top deck guns. This would lead to more diverse, fun and interesting weapon loadouts (since you could use close range wing guns) as well as the ability for the middle gunner to help rebuild in case of emergency.
I may be crazy but I actually remember the ship having them when it was being tested in dev app. Can anyone else confirm or deny this?
-
The more viable parts of the mobula is mostly in terms of its firepower and utility regarding its weapon slots.
One of the more easier ones is symetrical builds like double gat and mort, merc double artemis + gat mort.
But the more interresting builds and could be more fun is builds that use the sides.
For example. 2xhades/Mercury - Lflak - 2xGattling
That way you have a ultra long range side, and an ultra short range side. Mostly good for your teamate.
There is also stuff like, Hades - Light flak - Light flak - Artemis/carronade - Carronade. A hades with 2 light flaks for the kill. carronade for short range escaping/Disabling.
And then there is the Flare - Gat - Mortar - Mortar - Gat. Ultra close range build, narrow aiming point but kills.
Just giving some heads up. I rarely see well made and used asymetrical mobula builds, the last one i used that needs a bit of pilot practice but is very nice is the 2xhades/Mercury - Lflak - 2xGattling which is very fun.
-
Just gonna throw it out a random though on this.. Not sure how I feel about it even haha but..
What if, there was a ladder, that is at the opposite end of the hull the captain is in, that goes down to a third middle hull from which in here you could fix the hull and balloon easily.. but not get to any other part of the ship quickly.
This could be enough to add ways to mix up the Mobula play style, with out just removing its current play style all together.. It'd be both potentially risky or beneficial to use depending on the situation.. It'd need testing though to see for sure its usefulness/gamechangyness..
What if.. instead of a ladder it was a hole down, and once in this hall the only way back to the top is.. to jump out the bottom of the ship?... Well that would be ridiculous but just a second random thought....
-
I think it's balanced as it is. At first i thought it to be imbalanced. Having been at the receiving end of a very skilled crew in a Mobula, i was decimated in a matter of seconds. No chance of repairing, no chance of running away. I get the feeling it's designed for that specific purpose. To catch the out of position ships and remove them from the match in a quick fashion. A glass cannon so to say. If the ship would be able to take hits as well, or be faster, it would outperform most ships. Because the Mobula only has to turn it's front towards the enemy and unload.
Currently I'm still clueless how to deal with the Mobula other then catching it with it's pants down.
-
The Spire is more glass cannonn than the mobula is:
- 4 guns that all can potentionally shoot the same guy plus one of those is a heavy gun that deals an immense amount of damage (sometimes, maybe).
- Has a MUCH bigger hitbox than the mobula.
- Has less armor and perma hull than most other ships.
I would rather buff the spire some more instead of having an even more powerful mobula.
-
Yes please
buff the spires longtidunal acceleration by 50%-100%
please...
-
My professional suggestions:
- Dye the Mobula dark red
- Call it "The Bloody Maxi Pad"
That is all.
-
Would the mobula be more viable, if the guns were turned in to the center more, and remove middle gun, replace it with a component like hull and open up the middle for the balloon comparment,
You lose Middle weapon,
you can get the remaining 4 in arc easier.
hull moves to top deck replacing middle weapon position, so pilot can also repair with a jump hit,
Balloon goes center underneath accessible from both sides opening up underneath, maybe connect the engines at the back with a corridor and in the center connect balloon.
Thoughts?
DISCLAIMER* My thoughts and opinions no way reflect possible or future changes within the game just wanted to throw some ideas into the mix and keep the thread on track.
-
I don't think this would help much.
As I mentioned before, my main problem with Mobula is its lack of maintaining both repairs and firepower together at the acceptable level, especially considering that both its hull and balloon can be easily damaged simultaneously with the Hades, which is good against one and decent against the other, to make matters worse. Apart from Hades being popular, dealing damage to both main components on the mobula actually goes for every gun in the game other than Merc.
If you want to have good firepower, you have to let the balloon and hull go (and we all know that never ends well for a ship).
If you go for repairs, you end up losing one gun per damaged component, leaving you with either 2 guns shooting (if pilot is the one to mount the top gun) or 1 gun and ship's maneuverability.
If we go for giving up the top gun, you already cripple mobula maximum damage potential of 4 guns shooting at once, it does get a little bit more survivability with pilot being able to hit it with a wrench/mallet once in a while (where he gives up maneuverability for a second), but one tool is not enough to keep it maintained. That means one guy from the side guns needs to go and keep it maintained properly, which cripples the maximum damage potential again, but I would even say for longer time than it is the case now. And god help you if balloon needs repairs too, you end up with only one gun shooting, back to square one basically.
In case of most of the ships, you have either one engineer highly devoted to keep the repairs going for the ship(Galleon's Main Engineer), or you have an engineer that has a way to keep the main component healthy fast enough after shooting a gun(Junker's Front Engineer, Goldfish's Starboard Engineer). In some cases you have both on one ship (Pyramidion's Main Engineer and Balloon Engineer), in others a pilot has ways to help with the repairs of the component in a critical situation (Galleon, Junker, Spire), but the problem is, you have none of it on the Mobula. Mobula can be damaged too easily to stay on guns and not worry about the components, but components are too far compared to what you have on the other ships, and they can't be maintained as well. They are too far from eachother to have one engineer fully devoted to the repairs, and pilot cannot help with the repairs either.
Funny thing is, I don't exactly feel that it's as bad of a case for the Spire (TFW you call Spire more tanky than Mobula). Spire's guns are much easier to maintain in arc (for it doesn't turn as much as Mob), giving the pilot more freedom to either mount the light gun next to him, or to help with hull repairs. Maximum hull armor is lower on Spire, but as in the Squid's case, it rebuilds so quickly that you can actually stay alive for quite some time, whereas Mob engie has to spend quite some time to rebuild the hull armor. The most important thing though is the fact that the Spire has a heavy weapon. Mob's guns can be easily ignored, for two light guns (or one, depending on how you play mob) can't cause a damage as devastating as merc/hades and h.flak/LJ, and there's no problem ignoring mobula's fire if you harass it hard enough to give the engineers some work. Spire, on the other hand, can give you a hard time even with only two people mounting the guns. Not to mention that, from my experience, enemy's shots don't go for the balloon as often as they do for the hull, already giving the Spire an advantage over Mob, where you always deal damage to both main components.
-
Well, that's the risk for taking a mobula. In exchange for having the engineer behaving like they have to on the mobula, you can have 2 different loadouts on the same side. Switching from long range to close range/disable or anything pretty easily.
No matter what the numbers say, a mobula can get pretty tanky.
When hull and balloon drop, it's no different from most other ships. If either of those drop, you still have 2 guns shooting. A Hades and a Flamer and the occasional mine are the only problems.
An advantage of the ships current layout is that both engineers have the potential to repair their own gun and have them both shoot when they have the time. On a pyra, there would be only the balloon engineer that could shoot at all.
The downside of this is of course that each engi has to repair his/her own engine, but the occasional engineer running through all of them by himself happens from time to time.
Why do you insist on repairing everything on your own?
On this ship either the left wing or the right wing shoots, or both (I am not even including the 3rd crewmember). A spire can't have that, neither can a pyra or a goldfish.