Guns Of Icarus Online
Info => Feedback and Suggestions => Topic started by: Dolphirus on January 17, 2014, 12:40:16 am
-
I had an idea for a new medium weapon as I feel mediums could use a little more variety to set them apart. While the name is less important than it's function, the name plays right into the lore of the game and the function of the weapon. The Icarus Cannon would rely on a series of mirrors and lenses to focus a beam of light on a target. The longer the beam is on the target the more damage is done. This weapon could work as an infinite ammo'd weapon that took a long time to reach full damage potential. There are similar examples of this mechanic working in tower defense games of all variety as well as Starcraft II. (Voidray)
Limiting this weapon to the medium slot would further diversify potential load outs and hopefully give larger ships a little more "oomph" on the field. What are your thoughts?
-
http://gunsoficarus.com/wp-content/gallery/gun-concepts/concept___searchlight_by_musegames-d4l9zdn.png
Something like this?
-
(https://scontent-a-sjc.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc1/319658_131329296967608_1692446004_n.jpg)
Or this?
-
Light... Infinite ammo... Full damage...
The sniping is strong with this one.
-
If it operates like other beam weapons it might be too easy to use. A good way to balance it out would be to make it a support weapon and have it dish out fire and shatter damage.
-
Make it a heavy medium-range fire weapon and I'm buying it. It may resurrect the Goldfish.
-
And the gun itself takes fire. Making heatsink sort of required. OR engineer chemspray.
Not only that, this beam SHOWS like, it should be easy to see where it is coming from.
I like the idea. I just dont know how it can balance out.
-
Spud Nick and Thomas, something exactly like that. Just seems a fitting weapon.
-
Maybe the weapon could lose some of it's damage if you are in a cloud away from direct sun light. Tho I can imagine that would be hard to implement.
-
Also useful if Superman needs his power recharged...
-
In this case, a small portion of realism could make it an interesting weapon. The basis for this kind of weapon is focusing light to a single point. Picture a magnifying glass and an ant. When the magnifying glass is too far or too close, it does nothing but mildly warm the ant. You have to be at -just- the right distance to cook it. That's how lenses and focused light works.
So for this kind of weapon, just toss in an 'arming' time and a rapid bullet decay. For it to be useful, you'd still need a decent range of effectiveness; like 50-100 meters. If it only worked at a very specific distance (only lasted for say 1 meter after arming) it'd be impossible to use effectively. Then like all other weapons, using the different ammo is essentially changing the lens for things like having it work closer or further away.
-
I think this weapon would do flame damage.
So how do you make it special since we already have a flamethrower?
good known solution:
Make it do more damage when its being aimed at targets that are far away, and make it do significantly less damage when the enemy is really close. the same mechanic is being used for the lumberjack and the hades.
To make sure all the ammo types work on the gun you dont need to overpower the amount of flamestacks overtime.
further then its minimum range I think it's right to apply 4 flamestacks each 2 seconds, inside the minimum range.
greased rounds would reduce the maximum range otherwise it would get overpowered.
lochnagar would hurt the gun but apply 2 times more flamestack each 2 seconds.
incindiary rounds would add +1 on the flamestack making the gun do 5 flamestack each 2 seconds.
heavy clip makes the beam more concentrated.
lesmok would extend the max range but also extend the minimum range.
hopefully you guys can use this information.
-
Coldcurse brings up some good points, especially about there already being some flame weapons. Specifically the flamethrower which is a close range weapon, and the hades which is mid to long range. (We'll ignore the flare gun which is delightfully fun, but not a direct damage role)
I don't see an issue with another fire weapon, as we already have weapons that overlap in roles.
The flamethrower is fire/fire damage within 200 meters
The Hades is fire/piercing damage up to 1400 meters (no aoe under 150 meters)
The weapon could easily go fire/fire for simplicity, or mix in another damage type. Such as flechette for balloon popping.
Likely a mid range weapon, probably difficult to turn to compensate for the accuracy of the weapon. Of course it would need some kind of ammo limitation, I don't think an infinite ammo beam weapon would be balanced.
Would it react in a certain way with clouds and dust storms? Light would refract off the water in the clouds and be blocked by dust, making it relatively ineffective (in reality). Would it light up the clouds like a flare gun while it's being fired at them?
-
In this case, a small portion of realism could make it an interesting weapon. The basis for this kind of weapon is focusing light to a single point. Picture a magnifying glass and an ant. When the magnifying glass is too far or too close, it does nothing but mildly warm the ant. You have to be at -just- the right distance to cook it. That's how lenses and focused light works.
So for this kind of weapon, just toss in an 'arming' time and a rapid bullet decay. For it to be useful, you'd still need a decent range of effectiveness; like 50-100 meters. If it only worked at a very specific distance (only lasted for say 1 meter after arming) it'd be impossible to use effectively. Then like all other weapons, using the different ammo is essentially changing the lens for things like having it work closer or further away.
That's something that would make it quite balanced, totally with you on that. (Arming time + ray range limited?)
Specific range, medium or close range weapon, shatter and piercing damage? Pretty obvious ray (pretty easy to trace even if inside clouds http://fc09.deviantart.net/fs13/i/2007/007/b/3/Light_Beam_by_coolthang.jpg (http://fc09.deviantart.net/fs13/i/2007/007/b/3/Light_Beam_by_coolthang.jpg) ) as crafeksterty said?
Sounds promising.
-
Of course it would need some kind of ammo limitation, I don't think an infinite ammo beam weapon would be balanced.
Continuing the theme of using lenses to focus the light, and knowing how, when you use lenses that maybe aren't the best quality to focus light it makes a burn mark on the lens, I would suggest that the ammo be sort of a lifetime per lens deal, and when you break, or burn up, a lens, it signifies you running out of ammo. The animation would involve mechanisms pulling a black smoking lens out of the machinery and replacing it with a shiny new one.
This would be a very interesting heavy weapon. I like the idea of it having flechette logically. Lasers are often used to pop balloons, so having fire and balloon popping would work well together logically.
Would be interesting, though not necessarily feasible, to let gunners use scenery to help them shoot. I don't know what the arcs would be, but if you could shoot down at water in one of the water maps and have the beam reflect back up towards the enemy it would add in some interesting tactics. It could be a heavy gun with better downward arcs, unlike the lumberjack which has good upwards arcs.
-
I think this gun would have similar gun arcs to the Lumberjack. Poor horizontal arcs but good vertical arcs. It would have a large ammo count like the flamethrower and would operate in the same fashion but as a beam instead of a spray.
-
Heavy clip would probably create a much larger "effective range" going with the idea of having it be only effective for a certain focused distance.
-
Like heavy clip and lesmok in the carronades right? I could see that working out very well.
-
I dont think heavy clip would do anything to the range, considering it'd be a ray gun. It would only concentrate the ray more to where you want it to hit at.
Making it hard to turn like old merc would be quite nice too, Thomas. Although I'm not in favour of fire, much more of a hull strip and gun shattering kinda weapon.
-
Heavy clip would probably create a much larger "effective range" going with the idea of having it be only effective for a certain focused distance.
as i said already heavy clip would only make the beam smaller and more pinpointing.
-
I believe Mythbusters did a bit on the "Archimedes Death Ray" which is essentially what we're discussing here. While I don't believe that weapon functioned I do think it makes the basis of good naval combat lore. I stand by my initial thoughts on the weapon. It's a medium/heavy loadout, so it'll only fit on the Spire Galleon or Goldfish. It would be a medium to long range weapon that had a large ammo capacity. The mechanic that would balance the damage of this weapon is it's obviously slow turning rate and long build up time to do effective damage. The numbers are irrelevant, but imagine the weapon started by doing .1 damage. Then .2, .4. .8 1.6 etc etc. That .2 damage counts for very little. The half minute it would take to reach full potential would count for a lot more. Fire damage is implied but I could imagine the weapon working without it.
-Heavy weapon.
-Medium/Long Range
-Large ammo cap.
-Long build up time to reach full damage potential.
-Slow moving turret.
-
I would rather it shoot in quick bursts rather than a constant beam. Perhaps it could be a one shot weapon the burns out the lens after each shot.
-
Fire just makes the most sense, since it's a light based weapon.
Personally I don't see it needing a 'buildup' time, since it's just reflecting and focusing light. If it was fire damage, the stacks would naturally build up and deal more damage over time, just like the flamethrower. Essentially it's heating with focused light instead of combustion.
That's not to say it couldn't have a buildup, but I don't think we have a mechanic for that in the game currently. Right now we could easily use the arming time and shell life to limit it's effective range from being too far or too close.
Of course the damage types, the effective range, the arcs, and the size of the gun (although I think we're more or less in agreement that heavy would be best?), clip size, fire rate, reload, and projectile speed are all easily debatable.
I think we all have a vision of what kind of gun we'd like to see, but we also have to consider where it would fit in the array of weapons. Would it be redundant? Too difficult to use? Would it be overpowered when combined with another weapon? (ie: if it's piercing, what about combining it with a flak or hwacha?) Would it replace other weapons that area already in the game?
-
I'm not sure how well it would balance but...
We know that at the exact right point a focused beam of light will ignite/heat up something absurdly fast. We also know that prior to that point it will heat, but not destroy. Beyond that point, we could say it has traveled too far and decayed to normal light density.
There are no heavy weapons for setting fires or taking out armor.
It could be a multi-effect weapon, where inside of the arming time (close range) it would act as a low power flame thrower, heating up your target and setting mild fires. Outside of the arming time there is a very small effective window before decay sets in, like 10-20 meters small, making this effective range very difficult to use. But it would be heavy armor piercing + component damage for components hit directly, in effect just a lance of light that drags through where it hits and shreds.
Close range you get fire. Longer very precise range gives armor piercing. You now absolutely need a gunner and probably a range finder. The gunner to have ammo for multiple distances, and a range finder to know when you are in that sweet spot where you deal the real damage.
-
It could be like a magnifying glass. Maybe stack a large number of fire charges AFTER a set period of time on target. I'm kinda stuck on the beam idea though.
-
If you had a magnifying glass/mirror, would the weapon not simply be active at all times projecting a beam of light away from the ship at all times? Or it could be covered while not in use.
-
Fire just makes the most sense, since it's a light based weapon.
Personally I don't see it needing a 'buildup' time, since it's just reflecting and focusing light. If it was fire damage, the stacks would naturally build up and deal more damage over time, just like the flamethrower. Essentially it's heating with focused light instead of combustion.
That's not to say it couldn't have a buildup, but I don't think we have a mechanic for that in the game currently. Right now we could easily use the arming time and shell life to limit it's effective range from being too far or too close.
Of course the damage types, the effective range, the arcs, and the size of the gun (although I think we're more or less in agreement that heavy would be best?), clip size, fire rate, reload, and projectile speed are all easily debatable.
I think we all have a vision of what kind of gun we'd like to see, but we also have to consider where it would fit in the array of weapons. Would it be redundant? Too difficult to use? Would it be overpowered when combined with another weapon? (ie: if it's piercing, what about combining it with a flak or hwacha?) Would it replace other weapons that area already in the game?
According to the Archemedes Death Ray episode of Mythbusters, it took a while for a similar device to this concept to actually generate the heat to create fire. That said, it's probably the sort of weapon where rather than scaling the base damage, the damage from the WEAPON is low, but the chance of Fire Stacks starts low and scales over time of being focused on the same target. Say 5% per second or something. So at 20 seconds on the same target, it's generating fire stacks every second at 100%, though it's generating them effectively by 5-10 seconds, if not as easily. This, combined with an arming time and relatively short range (compared with the end of the arming time that is) makes this a high skill weapon that would devastate weapons, balloons, and hulls at mid range, but have very little effect at close range (it shouldn't generate stacks at that range of course), with no effect at the longer ranges where the other long-range anti-hull medium weapons are generally used. Currently, Medium weapons have long range and short range covered, this would fall right in between the ranges, probably beyond the effective range of Manticore and Carronade, but maybe only 50-100 beyond the minimum arming time of weapons like the Lumberjack and Heavy Flak Cannon.
In short, I want this now.
-
Well the one issue we would run into is turning this into a feature request. Those are fine and dandy, but require a lot more work and time; so it would need a lot of support. (This is for the mechanic to scale damage/fire chance up over time)
As for the weapon taking a while to reach full damage potential, that's the same for any heat based weapon. The flamethrower for instance doesn't instantly incinerate anything it touches. Overtime the object reaches higher and higher temperatures before it finally combusts. Kind of like baking a cake or making toast. The device usually is at maximum output right at the start, and the object takes time to heat/cook.
If the rate of fire stacks increases over time, that's similar to saying that the weapon is outputting more heat as time goes on, which isn't really true (of course being a game, we do have to walk a not-so-fine line between reality and awesome). Having it produce a constant chance of fire and damage makes it match up with all the other weapons, and is a bit more realistic. As the fire stacks increase (at a constant rate) the object is being heated and damaged by the weapon.
----
All that being said, the main reason I bring it up is what I mentioned in the first place. Having a new game mechanic, however simple or awesome, takes a lot more time to be implemented, and of course they have to weigh the pro's and cons of doing so. Is it really worth the effort for a single weapon? Which is why I'm pushing to have the function of the weapon line up with mechanics we already have in the game.
-
Well the one issue we would run into is turning this into a feature request. Those are fine and dandy, but require a lot more work and time; so it would need a lot of support. (This is for the mechanic to scale damage/fire chance up over time)
As for the weapon taking a while to reach full damage potential, that's the same for any heat based weapon. The flamethrower for instance doesn't instantly incinerate anything it touches. Overtime the object reaches higher and higher temperatures before it finally combusts. Kind of like baking a cake or making toast. The device usually is at maximum output right at the start, and the object takes time to heat/cook.
If the rate of fire stacks increases over time, that's similar to saying that the weapon is outputting more heat as time goes on, which isn't really true (of course being a game, we do have to walk a not-so-fine line between reality and awesome). Having it produce a constant chance of fire and damage makes it match up with all the other weapons, and is a bit more realistic. As the fire stacks increase (at a constant rate) the object is being heated and damaged by the weapon.
----
All that being said, the main reason I bring it up is what I mentioned in the first place. Having a new game mechanic, however simple or awesome, takes a lot more time to be implemented, and of course they have to weigh the pro's and cons of doing so. Is it really worth the effort for a single weapon? Which is why I'm pushing to have the function of the weapon line up with mechanics we already have in the game.
I hadn't considered the time it might take to do what I was thinking of. I would think a progressive chance to add fire stacks would be fairly simple, but you do make a good point. I suppose keeping it simple is better in the long run.
-
Ammo and reload explanation idea with some "realism" explanation.
Harnessing and then magnifying the sun's energy into a weapon has been a frustrating design process. Whenever the energy reaches the point of weaponization, the build up heat makes it nearly impossible for the final glass lens to stay in its frame for a prolonged period of time. While many attempts were made to more firmly attach the lens, the heat build up was simply too much. The solution, a changeable wheel with many lens attached that is then cranked when the weapon is turned on. This flicker allow the gun to move through each lens before it breaks down. There is still a heat build up problem on the entire wheel. After the "clip" is fired, the wheel is taken out to vent or a replacement can be put into place.
Upside to this, strobe lights could now accompany the flares.
-
Airship Flame party? I'm interested... and, would the gun cut through clouds in a linear manner, to be, at range, a searchlight/if on a goldfish (assuming it's a medium gun) a fish with a flashlight on the front? A kinda powerful flashlight that flashes enough light that it sets fire?
-
Airship Flame party? I'm interested... and, would the gun cut through clouds in a linear manner, to be, at range, a searchlight/if on a goldfish (assuming it's a medium gun) a fish with a flashlight on the front? A kinda powerful flashlight that flashes enough light that it sets fire?
Acting as a searchlight through clouds would make a lot of sense.
-
Always up for more variety, and those concepts look pretty cool
-
I believe Mythbusters did a bit on the "Archimedes Death Ray" which is essentially what we're discussing here. While I don't believe that weapon functioned I do think it makes the basis of good naval combat lore. I stand by my initial thoughts on the weapon. It's a medium/heavy loadout, so it'll only fit on the Spire Galleon or Goldfish. It would be a medium to long range weapon that had a large ammo capacity. The mechanic that would balance the damage of this weapon is it's obviously slow turning rate and long build up time to do effective damage. The numbers are irrelevant, but imagine the weapon started by doing .1 damage. Then .2, .4. .8 1.6 etc etc. That .2 damage counts for very little. The half minute it would take to reach full potential would count for a lot more. Fire damage is implied but I could imagine the weapon working without it.
-Heavy weapon.
-Medium/Long Range
-Large ammo cap.
-Long build up time to reach full damage potential.
-Slow moving turret.
I would go against this because it shouldn't be treated as a heavy weapon if we have a mercury fieldgun that does physical damage over a long distance. In my opinion this would be the most useless heavy weapon since its countered by a single chemspray or exstinguisher. Keeping this as a light gun would make more sense overall.
the turret shouldnt be moving slowly, when the turret moves you lose some damage potential that you have to build up again. make the turret move at a medium speed but not slow.
dont make the build up time too damn long, 5 to 7 seconds for full damage potential is good enough if the damage you are dealing is 7 flamestacks max per 2 seconds.
dont make it a flashlight because we have the flaregun for that, if you give it the same aspects of a flaregun then you just make the flaregun not needed anymore. If you could make the mechanics to only light up a small portion of the cloud then it will be ok since it then becomes a less usefull flaregun and flareguns still hold their value.
For the animation of reloading I would suggest that the gun would change the magnifying glass due to the ammo type. The speed of the turret would be the as a mercury field gun since that is also a mid to longrange weapon (mercury fieldguns are also used up close but since it's mostly used for sniping i think they both need to have the same turning value). For gaining more damage potential the gun must not move faster then 7% - 10% of its turning speed. If the gun does move faster then 10% - 15% of its turning speed then the overall damage of the gun will be reduced with 25% each 0.5 second. The full damage potential should be discussed but I think that for a light gun at long distance should do 3.5 flamestack per second or something in that direction. This is based on fair play since it's a longrange flame weapon, this would be les powerfull then a flamethrower but still usefull to place in a sniping build to make a more variated damage on enemy ships. Making this gun a second flaregun would not make sense since we already have a flaregun, as discussed before the light of this gun would be blocked by clouds and means that it cannot be used as a flaregun. The range of this gun should be similair to a mercury fieldgun but needs a minimum range a bit less then a lumberjack. The ray itself should visible on darker maps such as: Partian Rumble, fight over firnfield. But invisible on brighter maps such as: Dunes, Fjords. If the gun takes damage then you should make it look like the glass has cracks in it and when the gun is detroyed you should make the glass look really damaged. to indicate that you are reaching full damage potential I would suggest to add an indicator meter on the right sight that looks like a meter of a boiler, like this one:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9c/Ampere-o-meter-vintage-HDR-0h.jpg)
numbers and words on the meter can be changed or removed.
-
I believe Mythbusters did a bit on the "Archimedes Death Ray" which is essentially what we're discussing here. While I don't believe that weapon functioned I do think it makes the basis of good naval combat lore. I stand by my initial thoughts on the weapon. It's a medium/heavy loadout, so it'll only fit on the Spire Galleon or Goldfish. It would be a medium to long range weapon that had a large ammo capacity. The mechanic that would balance the damage of this weapon is it's obviously slow turning rate and long build up time to do effective damage. The numbers are irrelevant, but imagine the weapon started by doing .1 damage. Then .2, .4. .8 1.6 etc etc. That .2 damage counts for very little. The half minute it would take to reach full potential would count for a lot more. Fire damage is implied but I could imagine the weapon working without it.
-Heavy weapon.
-Medium/Long Range
-Large ammo cap.
-Long build up time to reach full damage potential.
-Slow moving turret.
I would go against this because it shouldn't be treated as a heavy weapon if we have a mercury fieldgun that does physical damage over a long distance. In my opinion this would be the most useless heavy weapon since its countered by a single chemspray or exstinguisher. Keeping this as a light gun would make more sense overall.
the turret shouldnt be moving slowly, when the turret moves you lose some damage potential that you have to build up again. make the turret move at a medium speed but not slow.
dont make the build up time too damn long, 5 to 7 seconds for full damage potential is good enough if the damage you are dealing is 7 flamestacks max per 2 seconds.
dont make it a flashlight because we have the flaregun for that, if you give it the same aspects of a flaregun then you just make the flaregun not needed anymore. If you could make the mechanics to only light up a small portion of the cloud then it will be ok since it then becomes a less usefull flaregun and flareguns still hold their value.
For the animation of reloading I would suggest that the gun would change the magnifying glass due to the ammo type. The speed of the turret would be the as a mercury field gun since that is also a mid to longrange weapon (mercury fieldguns are also used up close but since it's mostly used for sniping i think they both need to have the same turning value). For gaining more damage potential the gun must not move faster then 7% - 10% of its turning speed. If the gun does move faster then 10% - 15% of its turning speed then the overall damage of the gun will be reduced with 25% each 0.5 second. The full damage potential should be discussed but I think that for a light gun at long distance should do 3.5 flamestack per second or something in that direction. This is based on fair play since it's a longrange flame weapon, this would be les powerfull then a flamethrower but still usefull to place in a sniping build to make a more variated damage on enemy ships. Making this gun a second flaregun would not make sense since we already have a flaregun, as discussed before the light of this gun would be blocked by clouds and means that it cannot be used as a flaregun. The range of this gun should be similair to a mercury fieldgun but needs a minimum range a bit less then a lumberjack. The ray itself should visible on darker maps such as: Partian Rumble, fight over firnfield. But invisible on brighter maps such as: Dunes, Fjords. If the gun takes damage then you should make it look like the glass has cracks in it and when the gun is detroyed you should make the glass look really damaged. to indicate that you are reaching full damage potential I would suggest to add an indicator meter on the right sight that looks like a meter of a boiler, like this one:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9c/Ampere-o-meter-vintage-HDR-0h.jpg)
numbers and words on the meter can be changed or removed.
Some of what you've mentioned has already been discussed. Making it a Medium gun (and it's Medium, not Heavy, I asked several people who all agreed on this) is actually a better idea. Medium guns are very limited in what they can do right now, while Light guns are all over the place with a wide range of options. What we DON'T need is another Light gun that's just an alternative to the Flamethrower, which is what this would become. Combining the Flare effect as a beam with the weapon actually makes sense too. The Flare kind of sucks right now anyway. If done properly, Flares would reveal large areas, while this would be a narrow beam that has to be aimed. It would burn through ammo constantly while you're using it as a searchlight, leaving less ammo for damage/fire purposes. That said, it's been generally agreed it shouldn't be a sniper weapon, but a medium range weapon. That's not to say it couldn't be otherwise, but I personally agree with this view. It's also been suggested to not have the damage scale, as that would add unnecessary complication and be more of a feature, requiring more work than the gun would otherwise.
-
I just made this up out of nowhere, assuming the gun was supposed to be a sniper kind of gun. as for saying as light gun I would say that i only see 2 sorts of guns, guns that heavy guns and guns that you cant place on heavy gun spots. I was just mentioning that this gun shouldnt be used as a heavy weapon due to its lack of power compared to a hwacha, heavy flak or shotgun (I forgot it's name). This was just an suggestion. This idea is not based as a flamethrower its based on doing flame damage rather then physical impact damage, as an opposit of what a mercury field gun does. Instantly doing full damage over such a long range would be overpowered in my opinion so thats why I do suport the damage scale if it would be used as a sniper. But for medium range with ammo I would suggest that the ammo itself is one of the glasses.
I also have the idea of making the rangefinder play a great role for this gun and give it +5% damage since its based on the archimedes project where you have to aim for the target.
medium range medium weapon suggestion:
Having this particular gun as an mix-up of a artemis flamethrower flaregun I came up with the following.
By firing the gun you create a beam of light that does a good overal damage on medium range but less damage on short range. While using the gun you place alot of pressure onto one of the lens and make it crack overtime, this lens has to be replaced with a new lense and this would be called reloading. maybe muse could make different lenses for different ammo types to make it more fancy. one lens should be having a 7 รก 8 second lifetime, you don't have to use it all at once. The gun should be doing creating a narrow beam of light that can't go through clouds or damage ships inside clouds. Using this gun on clouds would partially reveal the content, this will not reveal the whole cloud. The damage done by this gun would be around 5 flamestacks each 1 or 2 seconds, maybe 2 flamestacks each 1.5 seconds from a little outside the medium range. damaging this gun would apply the little spark animations you find on a damaged artemis. For rotation I would say it would be similair to an artemis since you can't pick up sunlight when pointing upwards. Moving the turret while firing would not affect the damage since the damage would be fixed to a standard value. This gun should have a crosshair on the top where you can look through better when using the right mouse button. To notify that this is not a flamethrower, the icarus cannon would make a narrow beam of light for accurate flame damage dealing rather then a big firecloud that damges all with flames on short range. For lochnagar round I would like to see a lense with a heart scratched on being loaded in the gun, because who doesn't love lochnagar.
I hope you like this idea better Milevan.
-
The basis for this kind of weapon is focusing light to a single point. Picture a magnifying glass and an ant. When the magnifying glass is too far or too close, it does nothing but mildly warm the ant. You have to be at -just- the right distance to cook it.
This... with the Rangefinder... Hmmm...
-
The basis for this kind of weapon is focusing light to a single point. Picture a magnifying glass and an ant. When the magnifying glass is too far or too close, it does nothing but mildly warm the ant. You have to be at -just- the right distance to cook it.
This... with the Rangefinder... Hmmm...
this will encourage players more to grab a rangefinder rather then just all spyglass
-
for this project it might be a nice experiment to see how particular tools could have a positive effect while using them. because most people do not use a rangefinder because everyone knows how to shoot a gun, why not give it a try and add a little damage bonus on the icarus gun while the enemy ship is being targeted by the range finder. this will make one crew member or pilot pick a rangefinder rather then a spyglass or other helmtool.
For the icarus gun I would say that this might be a nice thing to implement because it makes sense. Ofcourse there won't be a massive damage boost but at least it's some extra damage that you could use in a fight. unlike a buffhammer where you have to run around like a monkey and buff things that take ages and get destroyed the second you buff things, the use of the of the rangefinder can be stimulated by adding a little extra buff on particular guns as you use the rangefinder.
The "Icarus gun" should have a little ammo capacity boost normal damage boost when it is buffed. This would make sense because you buffed the gun and the lens inside of it.
-
As far as I remember from concept standpoint the Godlamp was a gun that focused sun's light, and was dependant on sunlight, witch would make useless in clouds and dark maps like paritan, anglean and fjords.
-
As far as I remember from concept standpoint the Godlamp was a gun that focused sun's light, and was dependant on sunlight, witch would make useless in clouds and dark maps like paritan, anglean and fjords.
That's the kind of thing you really can't do in this game, as it would pretty much make this gun never used, ever, because the opponent's just have to pick maps that it can't work on. So, no matter what, this gun will have to always work. It can be assumed it's not actually focusing sunlight, but rather some internal light source.
-
Make the light source a carbon arc lamp. To change focal ranges, switch lamps and lenses with a cool animation.
-
I LOVE the idea of swapping out lenses by the way :)
I like this idea, however, I also think that the gun should be fun to shoot, and be fun to play against.
Because of this, I support the idea of the "sweet spot" to of the light beam at some certain range--not too close, and not too far.
This would make the gun a joy to shoot, as, depending on the range, the way the gunner shoots at enemies will differ. In the "sweet spot" the gunner will want to drag the beam across the enemy ship to stack lots of fire damage on as many components as possible.
Outside or inside of that effective range, the gunner will want to hold his aim on one component at a time in order to apply fire stacks effectively.
I'd also like to add that there should be a visual indicator on the light beam indicating the gun's "sweet spot" (maybe the beam is brighter, or a slightly different hue). This would help captains keep them within effective range, and gunners to be able to identify how the gun works in an intuitive manner. Furthermore, it will help enemy captains know what is going on, and help them realize where that gun is most deadly, and hopefully maneuver in/out of range.
-
Make it so the scale for adjusting the sweet spot gets more coarse with distance, so the gun gets harder to adjust at longer ranges, requiring you to both adjust the beam and micro-control maneuvers to maintain optimal range. It's actually kind of similar to gilder's torpedo with the varied arming ranges.
Again, the role is spreading insane fire stacks on specific components, or enveloping the ship with low-grade (less than 5) fire stacks on EVERYTHING outside of the focal point.
I'm starting to really like this gun.
-
So, here's a radical idea. Normally right-clicking is just a zoom (boring most of the time, and generally not too terribly useful except on certain guns IMO). What if, instead, right-clicking cycled through a series of lenses that had different "focal points", thus changing the sweet spot? The RANGE of the gun doesn't change, just where it's most effective. Swap time would be relatively fast, but not so fast as to make it easy to keep stuff in the sweet spot. Also, having things in the not-sweet spot of the various lenses could change the shape of the area hit. Just a random idea, but something I figured I'd toss out there at least.
-
I think the sweet spot should not be implemented. I rather like to see this weapon having a non effective minimal range and an ok maximum range.
To think of this guna as an medium weapon that has multiple purposes I would say that the damage it causes won't be that big. Firestacks already are annoying enough since there would only be around 2 people on your ship with fire exstinguishers/chemspray.
If your gonna add a full set of lenses to each cover a range of sweetspots then you are making this gun maybe a bit too difficult to use and less atractive.
-
I think the sweet spot should not be implemented. I rather like to see this weapon having a non effective minimal range and an ok maximum range.
To think of this guna as an medium weapon that has multiple purposes I would say that the damage it causes won't be that big. Firestacks already are annoying enough since there would only be around 2 people on your ship with fire exstinguishers/chemspray.
If your gonna add a full set of lenses to each cover a range of sweetspots then you are making this gun maybe a bit too difficult to use and less atractive.
I suppose. I did say it was a radical idea. If this is a Medium Weapon though, the damage has to be worth using it. Right now all the fire weapons are less than impressive damage-wise, and it's actually not too uncommon for the fire stacks to be at best a distraction, and at worst a non-factor. At least that's my experience when my team knows how to actually counter them. As a Medium Weapon, it's gotta be worth that Medium slot at least.
-
I think the sweet spot should not be implemented. I rather like to see this weapon having a non effective minimal range and an ok maximum range.
To think of this guna as an medium weapon that has multiple purposes I would say that the damage it causes won't be that big. Firestacks already are annoying enough since there would only be around 2 people on your ship with fire exstinguishers/chemspray.
If your gonna add a full set of lenses to each cover a range of sweetspots then you are making this gun maybe a bit too difficult to use and less atractive.
I suppose. I did say it was a radical idea. If this is a Medium Weapon though, the damage has to be worth using it. Right now all the fire weapons are less than impressive damage-wise, and it's actually not too uncommon for the fire stacks to be at best a distraction, and at worst a non-factor. At least that's my experience when my team knows how to actually counter them. As a Medium Weapon, it's gotta be worth that Medium slot at least.
when you speak of medium, do you mean like a heavy weapon?
because I see this gun more like a light weapon hence the multifunctional purpose.
-
I think the sweet spot should not be implemented. I rather like to see this weapon having a non effective minimal range and an ok maximum range.
To think of this guna as an medium weapon that has multiple purposes I would say that the damage it causes won't be that big. Firestacks already are annoying enough since there would only be around 2 people on your ship with fire exstinguishers/chemspray.
If your gonna add a full set of lenses to each cover a range of sweetspots then you are making this gun maybe a bit too difficult to use and less atractive.
I suppose. I did say it was a radical idea. If this is a Medium Weapon though, the damage has to be worth using it. Right now all the fire weapons are less than impressive damage-wise, and it's actually not too uncommon for the fire stacks to be at best a distraction, and at worst a non-factor. At least that's my experience when my team knows how to actually counter them. As a Medium Weapon, it's gotta be worth that Medium slot at least.
when you speak of medium, do you mean like a heavy weapon?
because I see this gun more like a light weapon hence the multifunctional purpose.
The original pitch of the concept was as a Medium weapon, so I tend to think of it as such. We don't need another flamer, which is what this would be as a light weapon (or so close to it, there really would be little difference aside from range and minor details). This game currently doesn't HAVE any Heavy weapons. The text has a typo that calls all the medium weapons heavy, but they're still Medium weapons. A Muse member said a heavy weapon would be large enough to take up a significant portion of a ship, or something along those lines. I don't remember all the details from that discussion.
-
I think the sweet spot should not be implemented. I rather like to see this weapon having a non effective minimal range and an ok maximum range.
To think of this guna as an medium weapon that has multiple purposes I would say that the damage it causes won't be that big. Firestacks already are annoying enough since there would only be around 2 people on your ship with fire exstinguishers/chemspray.
If your gonna add a full set of lenses to each cover a range of sweetspots then you are making this gun maybe a bit too difficult to use and less atractive.
I suppose. I did say it was a radical idea. If this is a Medium Weapon though, the damage has to be worth using it. Right now all the fire weapons are less than impressive damage-wise, and it's actually not too uncommon for the fire stacks to be at best a distraction, and at worst a non-factor. At least that's my experience when my team knows how to actually counter them. As a Medium Weapon, it's gotta be worth that Medium slot at least.
when you speak of medium, do you mean like a heavy weapon?
because I see this gun more like a light weapon hence the multifunctional purpose.
The original pitch of the concept was as a Medium weapon, so I tend to think of it as such. We don't need another flamer, which is what this would be as a light weapon (or so close to it, there really would be little difference aside from range and minor details). This game currently doesn't HAVE any Heavy weapons. The text has a typo that calls all the medium weapons heavy, but they're still Medium weapons. A Muse member said a heavy weapon would be large enough to take up a significant portion of a ship, or something along those lines. I don't remember all the details from that discussion.
To compare this to a flamethrower is just wrong since this is a beam weapon that hits on ffurther distance. the flamethrower is a short range weapon.
The beam itself is really narrow because the light needs to be concentrated, with this in mind i dont think you can make this a medium weapon, or the beam has to be generated by a set of shiny lights. as big as an artemis rocket. having a smaller version of this icarus gun makes more sense and is nothing near any weapon we currently have.
-
If the weapon was limited to one weight class, I do feel the medium slot is the better fit. It asks a lot so it should require a lot. Besides, the game could do with a wider variety of medium guns. (hint hint, medium harpoon gun that gives you the option to reel in ships)
-
If the weapon was limited to one weight class, I do feel the medium slot is the better fit. It asks a lot so it should require a lot. Besides, the game could do with a wider variety of medium guns. (hint hint, medium harpoon gun that gives you the option to reel in ships)
The harpoon is being reworked as it is, and may get the option to reel in ships in the rework. No need to make a separate gun for that.
-
Of course the Icarus Lens Array should be a medium weapon. I imagined it to fill a niche between the close-range multipurpose medium (carronade, hwacha) and the specialised long-range guns (lj, hflak) with both wide fire spread and focused beam disabling/burning.
-
Regarding the name, I think Helios would be more appropriate.
-
...I just now noticed the Greco-Roman naming scheme...
-
The carronade names stick out like sore thumbs, always bugged me.
-
I was more thinking of the name "Goliath" instead of "The icarus gun"
-
Guys. Combat Lens class Archimedes
-
Guys. Combat Lens class Archimedes
CLCA?
or just call it "Archimedes"
-
Archimedes sounds good. And for the record, I never called it a gun :)
-
How many pages does this thread need to get too before we get this gun in game?
-
42. Also, it has to be set at max page length (I show 50 posts per page).
-
Our cause is just. It shall be done.
-
That's what the poor fools in the torpedo thread thought.
-
This is very interesting. I would be hesitant about the increased damage at long range thing, though. If you are aiming for some realism, then this part should be inverted. Light emitted from a single point dissipates as it travels. It should theoretically do less damage the further away you are.
This would have to be a raycast weapon. The concepts of this gun mean that giving it projectile rounds could cause major lag.
Personally, I think I would do a light-ray weapon like this as a kind of experimental sniping gun. It has a very very quick reload, short of instantaneous, and it's damage gets larger the less ammo is in the clip. Each shot does fire damage without a chance to apply fire stacks, and it fires very fast.
I don't know how practical my idea is, though. I think you guys' suggestions fit the current meta better. I thought that the damage relevant to ammo remaining would be an interesting tactic to consider. I reasoned that the focusing lenses would adjust as the gun fired, increasing the intensity of the beam. The damage would have to be independent of clip adjustments made by ammo types though. Again, this is just an idea. To be honest I don't think that this could be implemented.
I like the whole concept though. I hope Muse considers all the things in this thread because they're very well thought-out and reasonable. Much moreso than what I thought up :p
-
This is very interesting. I would be hesitant about the increased damage at long range thing, though. If you are aiming for some realism, then this part should be inverted. Light emitted from a single point dissipates as it travels. It should theoretically do less damage the further away you are.
This would have to be a raycast weapon. The concepts of this gun mean that giving it projectile rounds could cause major lag.
Personally, I think I would do a light-ray weapon like this as a kind of experimental sniping gun. It has a very very quick reload, short of instantaneous, and it's damage gets larger the less ammo is in the clip. Each shot does fire damage without a chance to apply fire stacks, and it fires very fast.
I don't know how practical my idea is, though. I think you guys' suggestions fit the current meta better. I thought that the damage relevant to ammo remaining would be an interesting tactic to consider. I reasoned that the focusing lenses would adjust as the gun fired, increasing the intensity of the beam. The damage would have to be independent of clip adjustments made by ammo types though. Again, this is just an idea. To be honest I don't think that this could be implemented.
I like the whole concept though. I hope Muse considers all the things in this thread because they're very well thought-out and reasonable. Much moreso than what I thought up :p
You obviously never watched Mythbusters. The Archemedes Death Ray is the closest thing to this concept in real life. It's an array or mirrors that reflect the sun to light a target on fire. The target has to be a VERY precise distance from the array or it does not work. As such, this entire concept isn't so much a laser beam as it is a cone of light that generates heat at the focus point. THAT is why there is a "minimum" range in the concept. Ideally, the way it works is minimum range - sweet spot - maximum range, with the damage hitting it's peak in the sweet spot only. In this way, the weapon has a high skill requirement, but could be devastating when used right. While the gun does fire a "beam", it's not a cylindrical beam, but a reversed cone.
-
No I understand the concept. We did optics in high school physics. But the version you're talking about focuses light at a specific point. I wasn't talking so much about sunlight in my version but maybe a steampunk-laser of some kind that doesn't have the focal point issue. The whole sunlight thing has been talked about lots here, so I figured I'd at least try and bring something new to the discussion, but I guess I didn't explain it very well. My bad :/
-
No I understand the concept. We did optics in high school physics. But the version you're talking about focuses light at a specific point. I wasn't talking so much about sunlight in my version but maybe a steampunk-laser of some kind that doesn't have the focal point issue. The whole sunlight thing has been talked about lots here, so I figured I'd at least try and bring something new to the discussion, but I guess I didn't explain it very well. My bad :/
Ah, I see now. I had thought you didn't understand what had already been discussed. Personally I think the concept is interesting BECAUSE of the focal point design. It's different from anything currently in the game, and would introduce new gameplay, instead of just a new/alternate way to do something. A laser idea is neat, but I think that would have to be a separate concept.
-
Mmm, I was just wondering how they would implement the focusing feature into the game. I'm worried that if the idea is too complex mechanically then it may take them longer to produce it, or maybe they won't produce it at all.
The game doesn't currently support damage drop-off so it can't reverse the drop-off to do increased damage up to a sweet spot and then down again. The only thing I can think of off the top of my head is maybe have it do 0 damage until it "arms", which introduces a minimum range. But then I don't know about increasing damage beyond that up to a sweet spot and then down again. I hope the game engine allows for something that enables this.
-
Mmm, I was just wondering how they would implement the focusing feature into the game. I'm worried that if the idea is too complex mechanically then it may take them longer to produce it, or maybe they won't produce it at all.
The game doesn't currently support damage drop-off so it can't reverse the drop-off to do increased damage up to a sweet spot and then down again. The only thing I can think of off the top of my head is maybe have it do 0 damage until it "arms", which introduces a minimum range. But then I don't know about increasing damage beyond that up to a sweet spot and then down again. I hope the game engine allows for something that enables this.
"Arming" doesn't reduce damage to 0, it just doesn't do the burst damage. The easiest way is to simply make it so it only does burst damage in the sweet spot. Mechanically it's insanely simple, and really shouldn't take much work to code. It's simply taking the Arming mechanic and making it work both normally, and after X distance, whatever that may be, to create the sweet spot. In theory, it shouldn't be that much work. Certainly not as much as it could be.
-
I'm still a fan of the idea that damage builds up over time until it hits it's upper end potential. I can't imagine the mechanics behind such a thing would be difficult. The "sweet spot" is interesting, though I think it would make the weapon too limited. I'm currently picturing two of these things on a galleon...
-
Building up damage is a great idea. Pretty unique.
-
I'm for having both that and sweet spot- you have to pick a range, then maintain it if you want to do lots of damage.
-
I just keep going back to the Starcraft 2 Void ray. We've seen this mechanic time and time again in games. It's pretty easy to understand and it also makes for some interesting lore. As I'm not an avid SCII I won't claim to be the best to explain. Basically the unit starts by outputting a small amount of damage. The longer is attacks, the more damage it does. I guess the idea is to chain the attack in quick succession to bring down units much faster than should be possible. The downside being that if you don't keep it on target long enough it won't do enough damage to compete. It seems like a very high risk vs reward weapon and IMO Guns of Icarus could do with more of those (we''re looking at you Gat/Mortar)
-
A voidray type weapon would be awesome. +1
-
More medium weapons would be awesome really.