Guns Of Icarus Online
Info => Feedback and Suggestions => Topic started by: Daft Loon on July 05, 2015, 10:53:27 pm
-
A frequent objection to gunner buffs is that it would encourage - particularly among new players - taking double gunner. But what if we made this a feature not a bug?
In part this is inspired by a (somewhat) recent match i played on a double gunner flak-fish (using stamina to get bifecta with the Gatling), I was the engineer and strangely enough it was great fun, more so than being engineer on a standard goldfish. Of course it would have been a different story if we had tried that vs more ruthless opponents but: what if the balance was changed to avoid that situation of hopeless futility. I think that done right a double gunner meta could make both gunner and engineer more fun.
How it might happen:
Buff gunner stamina, reload rate (to 30/40% maybe) and regeneration.
Buff engineer stamina, activation delay (reducing the time between key-press and the effect starting), regeneration and maybe ladder climbing speed.
Add a gun/engine rebuild bonus to engineer stamina.
Add pipe-wrench as default, free tool for all classes.
Nerf buff-kit in any one of several ways. (when used on guns)
Flat buff/nerf to damage/repairs/specific damage types if needed to restore balance. ex if it makes everything die too fast nerf damage 5% across the board.
I can see this causing a few new problems:
How to crew the mobula?
New players taking a while to learn how often/much gunners need to assist in repairs.
People flying 2 gunner fish and failing to attempt the bifecta.
Making everything a glass cannon (requiring the widespread buffs/nerfs above)
And some interesting secondary effects:
The load-out choices for both classes would become a big question that would need answers.
Triple gunner might be viable in some cases.
New weapon combinations in some places with the extra stamina arcs. (forward facing 3x Hades mobula anyone?)
Thoughts, additions, scathing criticism?
-
How it might happen:
Buff gunner stamina, reload rate (to 30/40% maybe) and regeneration.
Buff engineer stamina, activation delay (reducing the time between key-press and the effect starting), regeneration and maybe ladder climbing speed.
Add a gun/engine rebuild bonus to engineer stamina.
Add pipe-wrench as default, free tool for all classes.
Nerf buff-kit in any one of several ways. (when used on guns)
Flat buff/nerf to damage/repairs/specific damage types if needed to restore balance. ex if it makes everything die too fast nerf damage 5% across the board.
Edit timed out
Less specifically:
Buff gunner
Buff engineer in a way tailored to solo engineering a ship
so we don't get too carried away with that bit
-
Loon, I've always liked your train of thought.
This idea, though, I don't think.is required...
What you're asking for is basically the developers to modify the game to give the role of gungineer (buff hammer engineer) to a gunner and to buff the engineer be able to run around like a headless chicken non-stop.
Either that or repairs would become so broken engineers.would infact be more powerful and double engineer would still hold trumps...
But yeah I like the thinking, but why should more work be put on a small dev team.to cater for the mentality of the newer player base, which very often is not the long term platerbase, as the ones who do force themselves as "gunners only bruh cos.fuck you!" (which is where the problem lies) are the ones who often leave after a short time.
Which leads me to, the issue is not in the game, but in the games marketing and point of sale.
It still sells to FPS gamers, and uses YouTubers who have FPS followings...
-
But yeah I like the thinking, but why should more work be put on a small dev team.to cater for the mentality of the newer player base, which very often is not the long term platerbase, as the ones who do force themselves as "gunners only bruh cos.fuck you!" (which is where the problem lies) are the ones who often leave after a short time.
Which leads me to, the issue is not in the game, but in the games marketing and point of sale.
It still sells to FPS gamers, and uses YouTubers who have FPS followings...
It's not that he's trying to cater the new players, it's that engineers are stupidly important to a ship to the point where you cant keep up with other ships unless you have ATLEAST two engineers ,and even then some teams take THREE.
The scenario he's trying to strive for is that all classes should be viable enough with just one of their counterparts on a ship.
Pilot is perfectly safe from this due to the nature of his captaining position and class' unique gameplay aspects that generally do not interrupt rest of the crew's performance.
Engineers are good on their own, you could say they're powerful for maintaining a ship but that is really what they were designed to do.
Whilst gunners, if you're playing competitively, are mostly redundant except for a few niche guns and can easily be bypassed by the buff counterpart of engineer.
Basically, "no more than one pilot because only one person on the ship can take the helm and their playstyle generally doesnt interrupt the crew's performance"
"no more than one gunner -IF, IF- you have guns that have several different viable ammo types with their own niches, because it does more harm than good"
and "HAVE ALL THE ENGINEERS"
Seriously, a ship with a Hades, Lumberjack, Mine and formerly Hwacha (rip heavy clip) would function well with three engineers, whilst a gunner on any of these guns in the same ship would do better but still become inferior when the ship is being shot at
-
Gunner is underdutied and engineer is overdutied, especially main engineer. Let's admit, running in circles, cheming and repairing with no shooting isn't 'that' fun.
I like suggestions for improving / adding new mechanics to stamina, I also made some similar suggestions.
I don't like pipe wrench as a "default" tool for everyone. Rather give 2nd engineer slot to gunner and see how most of your problems are fixed. Either that or make ammo actually useful.
-
The problem is not in the idea proposed, but in the problems a more balanced gunner would cause.
Also remember, triple engineer is very effective and preferred by more advanced players, but despite the advanced players being the most vocal on the forums, the advanced players are the vast minority of the actual player base.
Triple engineer is not over-used to the point gunners are redundant because the majority of the player base do not understand the mechanics.
Also there is the frame of mind to consider...
Many players take a gunner because they assume its needed for meta play, which is actually not the case.
But these are things that are very often overlooked when people discuss balance...
Player mentality believes every ship should have a gunner.
Intelligent thinking outside the box by competitive pilots is what gave birth to triple engineer. Yet despite BlackenedPies preaching triple gunner daily the word of its efficiency, the volume of players who read, understand and put into effect is much smaller than those who think they know the meta...
My opinion is not about Game balance as much as it is about Player balance...
If gunner becomes balanced in the way people ask for it, it'll sell the wrong idea to the mentality of the majority....
And lets face it...
The masses are asses.
-
Also remember, triple engineer is very effective and preferred by more advanced players, but despite the advanced players being the most vocal on the forums, the advanced players are the vast minority of the actual player base.
And why does that matter? Advanced players are valued by the very simple fact that they explore the game to find what works best. It has been proved time and time again that triple engineers are the meta unless there's a gun that the gunner can utilize. The only reason I still run one gunner most of the time in pubs myself is because pubs tend to have as much gunners queue'd as engineers so I want to make sure they're playing the class they want if possible. This is balanced out by the fact that everyone else does this, so noone reigns supreme wih triple engis. In competitive matchups against other clans with good crew however, I'll most likely waste no time to give in to the engi meta.
Thing is, gunner exists as a class in this game in the end. So instead of forcing everyone to run triple engineer, the community tries to respect their presence. But why keep on following this false pub stigma that even one gunner is usually good on every ship, rather than make the class actually balanced?
Intelligent thinking outside the box by competitive pilots is what gave birth to triple engineer.
Yes, intelligent thinking. Who needs it anyway? Let's bow down to muse's terrible design choices instead of actually making the balance something worth the time this game's survived for so far.
I think the fact that gunners tend to be somewhat redundant and that engineer is the all around best class IS the wrong idea that muse's giving to the community right now thanks to their design choices. Earlier last month, I saw a guy who kept captaining as engineer simply because he believed that "Engineer is the best class because it can do literally anything." Is this the impression we want to give? I wouldnt know about you, but I would definitely make sure gunner as a class gathered some balls and stood up to it's engineer counterpart in terms of usefulness.
-
Still you're looking at balancing the game and not the player base...
I like you keep a gunner on my ship in pub matches, most competitive builds I use benefit from gunners too, though sometimes I'll triple engi (mostly only with Gatling gun) to allow friends to level up their guns and help empty the gunners in the queue.
But like you said yourself there are as many gunners in the queue as there are engineers, this often causes double gunner ships and players "trolling" pilots to the points of pilots or a gunner leaving a lobby...
Now lets assume the gunner was changed to allow the above proposal...
Double gunner would not be the issue, triple gunner would be a major problem...
Getting a single engineer on any ship would be near impossible in pub matches, this would change the game mechanics, to what I think would lead to a much worse environment...
It would be like going "Hey cod 360 no scoper kids, you can now legitimately scream and shout at the pilots and have them called noobs for wanting an engineer!"
And that's bad because they're the bulk of the short term playerbase...
My views are very anti-gunner simply because of how many arsehole "gunner only" players I've had the displeasure to meet.... I see no benefits in "fixing" a game to fit their needs because of a style of playing advanced players use.
-
Yea, but think about it. Majority of the guns do better with buff engineer, so to an extent it would still be the better choice. Not much would change apart from the possibility for teams to explore double gunner builds and have them eventually integrate a bit into pub meta.
I will keep on attesting to the fact that the Captain/Pilot still has control of the ship both in loadout choice and in combat, and if they have any idea what they're doing then they'll know it better than their crew, and thus should be respected and obeyed whether if double gunner isnt their preference or if the engineer loadout is stronger. If you're doing your job right but lose anyway, it's the captain's fault. Noone else to blame. And if you dont like it you can always look for a captain who tolerates your powder monkey business.
Yes, there indeed is a potential for getting triple gunners in your crew but you can manage them simply by following the above philosophy. The only way you would be unable to is if the players youre getting are toxic, which in my experience tend to be 1/3 of the crew most of the time. Maaaaaybe 2/3. And even then, only those who know about the buff will start going gunner 24/7 to try it out. Remember the pyramidion nerf? Yea. Noone cared except the vets who actively view the forums.
The only ship I can reaaaallly justify triple gunners is on a Spire. But you would need gunner-compatible guns like H carro, hwacha, hades, mines etc for it to be able to outclass triple engis/double gunner one engi in the slightest.
We're not fixing the game to fit their "needs" Kamoba. We're fixing it because it really does suck. Advanced players dont just use triple engis for their viability, but also because the gunner's redundancy. If the competitive enviroment is full of balanced classes, ships and weapons, then pubs are too. If you balance something around pubs, advanced players will quickly find a way around it and make it less-than-viable. The problem with this is that newer players may find it hard to function with a GOI balanced around comp, and so they may have to "git gud" to start being effective. Which is PRECISELY what we want to represent. We want to make sure these players take the time and effort to learn the game from us or by playing, only then will they dedicate time and keep it alive. And if they can't? Well, then you can tell that they're part of the crowd that leaves after a week and leaves this game in the dusty corners of their libraries. So we have them filtered out from the start.
-
Yet despite BlackenedPies preaching triple gunner daily the word of its efficiency, the volume of players who read, understand and put into effect is much smaller than those who think they know the meta...
Like I've always said, if you only need one tool then engineers are just a liability.
The only way to make double gunner work is if gunners have multiple tools. It won't be comparable to triple engi without other buffs that would skew balance. Having two tools would make double gunner "work" on on some builds.
-
By way of clarification the novice double gunner thing was mostly just a point of reference, the main inspiration being that I think I (and hopefully 1 or 2 other people) would have more fun with these changes.
What im aiming for:
Make most gunning roles use the gunner class. I think it's more fun to gun as a gunner.
Make a second gunning role viable in more cases/on more ships.
Have the main engineer run around like a madman.
Yes that is more or less the intended effect because i think headlesschickengineer would be more fun then the current main engineer. Simply by virtue of not having time to get bored.
From all my experience (even excluding complete novices) the popularity of engineer for its effects is far greater than the popularity of engineer to actually play as and this is a problem. If we can change this while making the game more fun for the remaining engineer (which i think is possible), rather than making no one want to be the engineer, I think it would be worth doing. If you think not enough people would want to be gunner or that solo engineer would inevitably be terrible to the point no-one wanted to do it that is very much what needs discussion here.
Pipe wrench vs extra slot:
Thinking about it this seems to reduce to "should gunner have access to spanner-mallet", which i dont think they should, it would make them too good at repairs.
The effect on engineer would be minimal - free spanner/extinguisher for buffkit, free (mostly useless) wrench for main.
The effect on pilot probably doesn't matter.
It could be just for gunner but the point is to try sell it to muse as the equivalent of normal ammo.
I think the option of wrench + probably anything but mallet for gunner would:
A- Make for very interesting loadout choices.
B- Give us something to bash the "cod 360 no scoper kids" with. Gunners who know when to pile on to repairs and rebuilds (or at least keep thier own gun up) would become a huge advantage.
C- Take a little bit of the pressure off the headlesschickengineer without reverting the game straight back to triple engineer with 2 of them happening to be called gunner.
-
Game balance wise, yes I do like the idea, and can think of builds that would benefit from it..
My problem is not with the suggestion, but with the frame of mind of many players...
But Daft you're right, there is a a train if thought where people don't like to take engineer because they assume they have to repair, thus they like to play gunner as they feel the role allows them to shoot more..
Gunners need a little more love but honestly I have had so many bad experiences, regardless of how nicely and how genuinely I explain to the players, it still ends up the same. So that's why I'm not backing down on the fact, its a great idea, but the majority of arseholes would make it so damn painful that too big a mechanic change would only make it worse...
Last night for example against two Dagz ships with a low level pilot as my ally, I had two guys refusing to even consider engineer, one outright ignored me and the other insulted me, but I wanted to play with the Dagz lobby, so I loaded up a ship with guns that require gunners, an all mine mobula.
They didn't even shoot the guns when needed, the one engineer was the first to leave when he got sick to death of being the only one even trying to repair as the two idiots ignored repairs and one even claimed "I'm a gunner I don't fix stuff cos I'm better than that" my reply obviously to remind him that he was shooting like shit so he has no right to say he is better than anyone.. By the third death our ally rage quit after realising the reason I was explaining inability to help was that I had two trolls on my ship.
Five nill and one of the two gunners left with some comments about how my ship was crap and how I'm a whole lot of words.
The other gunner went engineer and stayed in the lobby with us, two matches later me and him have a gunner and a second gunner joins, the first thing he says "Oh god not double gunner again!"
So at least one of two trolls learnt from it..
But this is a daily thing for me if I don't play with friends, the sheer volume of idiots is immense. I want gunner to get more love, IF the player base were to be more aware.
Otherwise I'd stop playing with random crews, which in turn stops me, as a CA teaching newer players.
Not something I want to give up too soon, because despite the volume of trolls and idiots, the rare gems should be sought out and embraced.
Gunner needs more balance, but the internet and people on the internet need to be fixed first.
-
I can understand that pain and I'm wondering if i have to agree that this would make it worse.
On the one hand they would see say 1/4 or more of ships taking double gunners and be more likely to want to do so themselves, they wouldn't see that the gunners on those ships were fulfilling their small but important repairing roles as well as shooting and would likely not do so themselves.
They would also likely not make much use of the buffed gunner abilities.
On the other hand there is the question of whether its just the same sort of people who won't get any better/worse or more/less numerous whatever happens. Additionally it would make it marginally easier for the remaining engineer to cope and the second gunner tool might make it easier to persuade that gunner has some repairs to do (admittedly this somewhat contradicts the first point).
Its a question of whether "You are gunner, you can mostly shoot but you have to do some repairs or the engineer can't cope" will be harder or easier to sell than "Two of you are gunner, one of you needs to swap because one engineer alone can't cope, you can still shoot sometimes as engineer" ('shoot sometimes' can be 'mostly shoot' on some builds which can help a bit), admittedly the second has the advantage of being somewhat easier to do in the initial lobby while explaining repairs as gunner might have to be done in game which is harder. I'm not sure of the answer.
On a related note have muse definitively objected to giving the captains control of the classes their crew take? (the inclusion of the no button for load-out recommendations shows they wont give that much power but just class not load-out maybe?) It wouldn't help explain repairing if you wanted to take double gunner unfortunately. Ideally I'd want to see the current recommended load-out setup UI with options to lock slots to class and make recommendations visible (so people can see it before you have to send it), I'd probably want more saved load-out sets to go with that since i currently have mine as 1 load-out for 2 engineers and 2 options for the 1 gunner in several cases.
edit: A possible problem (or solution I don't know) with the idea is that the pyramidion would get all the benefit of the gunning buffs and almost none from the engineering buff and become rather more of a glass cannon.
-
Muse have said that recommended is as far as they'll go, giving captains the ability to force loadout could cause too many issues, especially if you think of the people who take offence at Rec-loadouts... :-\
Obviously if the gunner was changed, then potentially it could be less painful to have double gunners, but only as much as triple engineer proves more useful, to crews who know what they're doing...
So changing the mechanics to such a large extent i still think not good...
Because unfortunately there are people who think if they're gunner, they should not be subject to the "inferior" job of repairs, and these people are not rare...
-
I haven't been in this forums for a while, and lo and behold people are still whining about gunners....
Great.
-
Yup replaceable, it is still the same old :)
-
.... and pyramidion and matchmaker and now we have stamina and the new UI too :D
-
.... and pyramidion and matchmaker and now we have stamina and the new UI too :D
Ah but people complain the pyra is too weak now rather than OP. XD
-
mm fabulous, just great >:|
-
I suggested to muse that the new reload mechanic should be a gunner exclusive ability (while everyone must stay on the gun and wait for the ammo to fully load to load their own ammo).
It doesn't make double gunners viable (per se) but it definitely makes them alot more necessary.
Their main concern was that people have gotten too use to the new reload mechanic being universal that the roll back of the pilot and engie class would garner some buttmad complaints (not that such actions stopped muse before-hence this excuse is a bit lazy).