Guns Of Icarus Online
Info => Feedback and Suggestions => Topic started by: Dawson the Wizard on February 15, 2016, 07:16:01 pm
-
Hello all, again, another Wizard proposal:
We all know that having 2 Engineers is better than having 2 Gunners, with few exceptions. And often it's as practical (if not more practical) to run 3 Engineers and no Gunners, especially on boats like the Pyramidion and Squid. I can't imagine that Muse actually wants gunners to be inferior in principle. Gunner Stamina was a great way to add inherent value to the class, but the introduction of Engineer's sprinting through Stamina added a whole new layer of usefulness to Engineers. I don't think giving Gunners an extra repair tool is a good idea, because Wrench + Buff hammer would be everywhere and cause a whole new set of problems. Without making Gunners "better" at guns (i.e. moar damage), I think there's a good way to make Gunners more relevant, to the point that 2 Gunners + 1 Engineer wouldn't be crazy. So let's introduce the Gunner "class skill":
Gunners rebuild and repair guns 40% faster
This "class skill" would keep Gunners doing their job (shooting guns), and let a Captain who's stuck with two stubborn Gunners be confident that the ship can stay competitive. Fire would still be an issue for Engineers to solve, but increased gun repair would make the Gunners less helpless when Arties and Mercs and Manticores wipe out components. All ships (and I imagine especially the Gally and Junker) could therefore endorse 1-2 Gunners as a serious option.
-
I play engineer a lot, I find myself shooting a lot and having to jump off to repair the hull and/or Chem the balloon in between shooting. This is something I can get behind as two gunners is extremely risky as I have see in my short play time.
-
Gunners rebuild and repair guns 40% faster
While I'm interested in this in principle, two questions:
1. Why 40% Why not 50%? Why not 25%? Just seems... arbitrary.
2. What do you mean "faster?" They swing their tools faster? They rebuild/repair 40% more damage? Don't forget about cool-down time.
-
Ballpark number. Something that puts a Gunner on par/ahead of Engineers for rebuild/repair time on guns. "Faster" like "getting more for your swings and therefore require less time" faster, not increased animation speed faster.
Since hwachas and artemises are the meta these days, I figure two birds can be slain with one bullet by making Gunners competent gun-handymen. And again, to make the Gunner an actual choice, instead of an exception.
-
40% is a lot. Wrench rebuilds 17% slower than spanner and repairs 16% slower than mallet. 40% means a gunner gets a 2.5 multiplied boost in tool power
Wrench has a faster swing speed than spanner. Wrench repairs 24 HP/second and mallet 27.8
-
40% is a lot. Wrench rebuilds 17% slower than spanner and repairs 16% slower than mallet. 40% means a gunner gets a 2.5 multiplied boost in tool power
Wrench has a faster swing speed than spanner. Wrench repairs 24 HP/second and mallet 27.8
That's kind of the point. As it is, the Gunner is usually an inferior choice, and there's only a couple ships I can think of (Munker, long-range Galleon) that can benefit from having more than 1 Gunner. Again―as it is, the Engineer is often as safe or better a choice than Gunner for all ships. I don't like having a whole class that is generally inferior to another, and (in a perfect world) there would be enough balance between the two that going 2&1 either way is safe. I also have no conceptual problem if Gunners were better than the best Engineer at rebuilding/repairing guns. It's in their name, for heaven's sake, and whether 20% or 40% or 60% or arbitrary percentile occurred in this mythical imaginationland, it would still be a good fit for Gunners and help reduce the contextual benefit of Shatter weapons without nerfing those weapons directly.
-
There aren't ships that benefit from more than one pilot. Does that mean pilot is an inferior class?
Gunner is more specialized than engineer. Two engineers is necessary. You simply cannot keep most ships together without two engineers.
-
There aren't ships that benefit from more than one pilot. Does that mean pilot is an inferior class?
Gunner is more specialized than engineer. Two engineers is necessary. You simply cannot keep most ships together without two engineers.
That's a mighty big false equivalency. There's only 1 helm. There's at least 3 guns.
And the whole reason I've posted this in the suggestions is as you said, 2 engineers is necessary, and 2 gunners can't keep up. It doesn't have to be that way.
-
While the suggestion is interesting, I think stamina has already made the Gunner much more versatile in its defined role. An engineer is designed to be more efficient in repairs than gunners (in all cases), and your suggestion contradicts that. Even if it is implemented, 2 gunners will not help the ship in staying alive. Whereas, a second engineer with another spanner mallet or buff kit would.
Rubber Mallet
Repair: 250hp
Cooldown: 9s
Repair rate: 27.8 per second
Rebuild: 2
Shifting Spanner
Repair: 40hp
Cooldown: 2s
Repair rate: 20
Rebuild: 5
Pipe Wrench
Repair: 120hp
Cooldown: 5s
Repair rate: 24 per second
Rebuild: 4
Pipe Wrench (+40% to guns)
Repair: 168hp
Cooldown: 5s
Repair rate: 33.6 per second
Rebuild: 5.6
-
I'm not intending to be a rude git when I say this but...
I've said my opinions on this on more than enough threads...
Stamina has made gunners a more viable choice in a fair few situations, that enough for me.
Also I've met very few people who play mostly as gunner who I would say are worth the salty shit they spew into lobbies, especially with double gunner trolls, giving them a buff would just increase the toxicity which those specific trolls generate and I doubt I'd bother to put up with it.
Call me pessimistic, call me rude, it does not matter but because of the sheer volume of arseholes who have trolled me just because of the class they've been requested to play. I have no want to see those types of idiots encouraged
-
Gunners are relevant choice already. Almost everyone is using gunner today on a goldfish or spire. Stamina reload and arc increase makes them viable even in competitive today and I don't see reason to have 2 gunner ships any point. If you have heavy gun then sure, but no good pilot will sentence his ship to burn down because of one stupid flamethrower. Gunners are already viable and frustrating with their sick hwacha arcs.
-
Last time they tried to buff the gunner we got stamina which utterly destroyed the game.
What now?
-
Last time they tried to buff the gunner we got stamina which utterly destroyed the game.
What now?
Changed*
I don't care for or have many problems with stamina. It's just there. It's a mechanic. It hasn't really upset the balance more than shifted it. Although a rebuild buff on guns? Yeah, I'd not want to see that. It'd make hwacha slapfights doubly as tedious.
-
I like it, it would need a lot of fine tuning in the dev app - also it would require Muse to stop working on Alliance.. which we all know won't happen ;)
-
The ridiculous angles and the slight reload boost brought by stamina is more than enough to put a gunner above a third engineer
If it ain't broke don't fix it
-
Double gunner won't be viable without two engi tools each. There shouldn't be an attempt to buff gunners to the point that two is viable because it will unbalance engineers and encourage players to mistakingly bring double gunner ships
Boosting gunner tool power by a factor of 2.5 wouldn't make them better than a buff engi on positions where you only need one ammo for simple guns like merc or gat, but it would buff positions where gunner is already used like heavy guns and the mine launcher. Lochnagar mines don't need a buff
-
Also I've met very few people who play mostly as gunner who I would say are worth the salty shit they spew into lobbies, especially with double gunner trolls, giving them a buff would just increase the toxicity which those specific trolls generate and I doubt I'd bother to put up with it.
Call me pessimistic, call me rude, it does not matter but because of the sheer volume of arseholes who have trolled me just because of the class they've been requested to play. I have no want to see those types of idiots encouraged
:'(
-
Why not increasing the Efficiency of every class by making their Tools stronger. Just say if you Play Gunners, then your loaded bullets are 10% more effective. If you play engineer, Engineer repair tools are 10% more effective. And the same with the Pilot. With this simple Change, using a class more carefully becomes more necessary. I also would like to see a perk system for every class. Lets say every class gets 10 perks, which increases various stats of their Job. And everybody can bring two perks in the battle. For an example (engineer): Chemical Spray Cooldown reduced by 0,5 Seconds and Walking Speed (without Stamina) increased by 15%. This would increase the tactical depth greatly, but it also means a lot of balancing work. But for balancing reasons, i simply would make a little test Server and let the community do the work. This works really well in other games too.
-
Also I've met very few people who play mostly as gunner who I would say are worth the salty shit they spew into lobbies, especially with double gunner trolls, giving them a buff would just increase the toxicity which those specific trolls generate and I doubt I'd bother to put up with it.
Call me pessimistic, call me rude, it does not matter but because of the sheer volume of arseholes who have trolled me just because of the class they've been requested to play. I have no want to see those types of idiots encouraged
:'(
Yeah but Geo, you're a special case, not one of the trolls, I know you can at least shoot whatever gun I give you, with the right ammo too.
Why not increasing the Efficiency of every class by making their Tools stronger. Just say if you Play Gunners, then your loaded bullets are 10% more effective. If you play engineer, Engineer repair tools are 10% more effective. And the same with the Pilot. With this simple Change, using a class more carefully becomes more necessary. I also would like to see a perk system for every class. Lets say every class gets 10 perks, which increases various stats of their Job. And everybody can bring two perks in the battle. For an example (engineer): Chemical Spray Cooldown reduced by 0,5 Seconds and Walking Speed (without Stamina) increased by 15%. This would increase the tactical depth greatly, but it also means a lot of balancing work. But for balancing reasons, i simply would make a little test Server and let the community do the work. This works really well in other games too.
Still not sold it to me. Engineers are needed for ship repairs, double gunner will always hold a disadvantage.
For example: pyramidion, lets assume you have two gunners, I will simply take a banshee and laugh manically knowing that the balloon will burn till dead and the main engineer will not be able to do a thing about it because of armour breaks, the two gunners will be unable to shoot as they'll be desperately struggling to repair the balloon.
A gunner buff will only result in double gunner trolls becoming a bigger issue than they already are, and a general buff to all classes would simply mean the standard two Engineers one gunner (not min max play of triple engineer) will stay the same.
-
There will be upgradeable skills in the upcoming Alliance mode. Perks will not be in Skirmish mode
-
Why not increasing the Efficiency of every class by making their Tools stronger. (...)
It's against Muse's policy of "everyone is equal in what they are doing", which was perhaps tackled with stamina, but still alive in them.
Also, the examples for 2 gunner supremacy are false. Munker and Galleon usually work better with 2 engineers.
I think the problem is much bigger than this 10-20-orwhatever% of repair bonus. This is something that the whole game is based upon.
-
Still not sold it to me. Engineers are needed for ship repairs, double gunner will always hold a disadvantage.
For example: pyramidion, lets assume you have two gunners, I will simply take a banshee and laugh manically knowing that the balloon will burn till dead and the main engineer will not be able to do a thing about it because of armour breaks, the two gunners will be unable to shoot as they'll be desperately struggling to repair the balloon.
A gunner buff will only result in double gunner trolls becoming a bigger issue than they already are, and a general buff to all classes would simply mean the standard two Engineers one gunner (not min max play of triple engineer) will stay the same.
Well, more fire power means disabling guns faster. So, the enemy is unable to attack if you attack correctly, even with 2 engineers.
It's against Muse's policy of "everyone is equal in what they are doing", which was perhaps tackled with stamina, but still alive in them.
Also, the examples for 2 gunner supremacy are false. Munker and Galleon usually work better with 2 engineers.
I think the problem is much bigger than this 10-20-orwhatever% of repair bonus. This is something that the whole game is based upon.
I never said that. Engineer only becomes stronger with engineer tools, gunenrwith bullets and so on. This makes more difference between classes. So and tehre comes in my idea of perks, which makes even more differences between the classes.
There will be upgradeable skills in the upcoming Alliance mode. Perks will not be in Skirmish mode
Ok, but that is PvE. So upgradeable skills arent a problem. Perks really would increase the differences of the classes. Still, it needs some time to balacne. The developers could begin with 3 for every class and increase it time after time.
-
Perks would make experienced players more powerful. For each ship position there would be clear meta choices which perk to bring, and I bet there would be an overall meta perk. It'll give experienced players another advantage
The consensus is that gunners are balanced because they have their use. Sometimes engis are better than gunners because there's no reason for more ammos on simple guns that don't need extra arcs. Buffing gunners won't make them more viable without breaking balance on guns that gunners are used on. Double gunner cannot be viable without two engi tools. No matter how powerful they are a double gunner ship is easily countered by disable and fire. To make double gunner viable would break balance
-
Perks would make experienced players more powerful. For each ship position there would be clear meta choices which perk to bring, and I bet there would be an overall meta perk. It'll give experienced players another advantage
The consensus is that gunners are balanced because they have their use. Sometimes engis are better than gunners because there's no reason for more ammos on simple guns that don't need extra arcs. Buffing gunners won't make them more viable without breaking balance on guns that gunners are used on. Double gunner cannot be viable without two engi tools. No matter how powerful they are a double gunner ship is easily countered by disable and fire. To make double gunner viable would break balance
Or require every ship be redesigned to allow one engineer to fix everything...
So I'm happy with gunners as they are and have been looking for more uses for them, with some success.
-
A lot of interesting points in this discussion, but I think we're going about this the wrong way. The point of being a gunner is to keep the other guys' guns down so your engineers can fix the ship. With that in mind, they should be entirely focused on shooting. So instead of increasing gunner's repair speed on guns, simply increase rebuilt guns' starting health. Not back to full health, mind you, but enough so they can hop on right away to turn and shoot. The gunner would need to be the one to finish building the gun for this to apply. This wouldn't make gunner op as it doesn't apply in every combat scenario, but it makes them more viable under intense enemy fire.
-
I have been thinking about this for some time now, and it has always made more sense to me that a gunner would be able to fix guns faster than someone more used to fixing the rest of the ship. You don't take your guns to a mechanic.
Stamina is crap. I have always hated the way it was implemented. Wider arcs are the worst of the bunch.
No more buff gunners. Never should have been. This breaks game balance more than anything else. Anyone that tries to say "But buffgunners blah blah blah better than gunners." instantly loses massive amounts of my respect. No tool should change what an AMMO does, unless you are taking apart every single bullet and modifying them. Changing gun arcs, shortening loading times, increasing gun movement, and reducing recoil should have been the domain of the buff hammer. Stamina would never have been needed since an engineer would have been supplementing a gun's abilities but not its damage.
-
This is actually more or less perfect. switch functionality of buff hammer and gunner stamina.
-
I would not be opposed to gunner 'stamina' being used to very briefly increase damage like the buff does now. But change the name to 'Focus' instead, allowing the gunner to focus completely on the gun and the target. Give it a cool tunnel vision effect and a slight zoom. Mute or muffle all chat and other game sounds, remove all other UI, . Whatever. Have it reduce recoil a bit similar to holding breath in virtually all other games with a FP gun. Have it do more damage, like most other games that have a 'focus' mode. Remove buff damage increase. Give guns back to gunners. I have been yelling this exact thing since I first heard of stamina.
-
already suggested long ago that all other crews revert to the old ammo change mechanic of being trapped on the gun to load ammo.
While the gunner has the exclusive ability to quick reload.
-
already suggested long ago that all other crews revert to the old ammo change mechanic of being trapped on the gun to load ammo.
While the gunner has the exclusive ability to quick reload.
This idea, I like this idea.
-
already suggested long ago that all other crews revert to the old ammo change mechanic of being trapped on the gun to load ammo.
While the gunner has the exclusive ability to quick reload.
Being trapped on the gun or just needing to jump on the gun last second?
If the latter then I'm all in for this too.
-
already suggested long ago that all other crews revert to the old ammo change mechanic of being trapped on the gun to load ammo.
While the gunner has the exclusive ability to quick reload.
This idea, I like this idea.
This would be a good balance and I had mentioned this as soon as the auto reload ability was included, but it's too late now. People like the auto reload and it would be frustrating to have it stop working
Keep in mind that players use gunners in competitive. In the last SCS almost all ships had gunners and I only saw triple engi on squids and a brawl mobula
-
Weird thought...
What if Buffing just became a core part of the Gunner / Engineer class, and was pushed into a pre-combat role exclusively?
By that I mean remove the Buff Hammer entirely, and allow Gunners and Engineers to hit components repeatedly with the Spanner or Wrench when they're at 100% health to "over-build" them, which triggers the buff. Gunners are the only ones who can buff guns, and Engineers can buff other components (Engines, Armor, Balloons).
It might require the introduction of a new Engineer tool to make tool choice have some deeper choices again, but I think it might make the Gunner effective and distinct while not causing tool slot confusion. It will also help the Gunner have more responsibility on the ship (pre-buffing weapons), and help solidify the buff into a pre-combat tool and not a mid-combat tool. Finally, it has a nice side of effect of discouraging Mallet Gunners, which are a bane to my existence and unfortunately more common among newer players than I'd like. :P
Thoughts?
EDIT: Might even be worth re-thinking the gun buff in this case. Maybe to make guns more durable instead of giving them more damage? Maybe to give them a bit of both (+5% damage, +25% durability, for example)?
-
already suggested long ago that all other crews revert to the old ammo change mechanic of being trapped on the gun to load ammo.
While the gunner has the exclusive ability to quick reload.
Being trapped on the gun or just needing to jump on the gun last second?
If the latter then I'm all in for this too.
If I recall it was coded that the ammo only changed to default right on the moment of the reload so I guess the latter.
Isn't coding it just a matter of adding a variable of detecting whether a gunner class initiated the reload or not? Hence when a non gunner jumps on mid reload cycle and changes the ammo, the guns goes nop non gunner initiated the final ammo type if non gunner crew leaves, default ammo. That being thinking about it for a sec. The gunner still needs to initiate the reload regardless (hence he has to actually go to the gun), if the engie changes that ammo I struggle to see the issue of the ammo change mid reload cycle by non gunner. The fact that the gunner initiated auto-reload gives enough utility to the gunner
And frankly blackie I don't give a crap what a bunch of babies think (even if they are lvl 45). Proper balance is the final goal and change is inevitable to that end. Because frankly its clear to me some "vets" don't really care about fairness, but more about making their meta more OP. And I don't care for it.
-
Last time I participated in a "Gunners are useless" discussion was before the Stamina patch. Back then the extra DPS of a buffed gun was sometimes more desirable than the flexibility of different optimal ammos for different ranges. Gunners were still useful when you needed one crew member to shoot more than one gun. The stamina patch with its reduced reload time have made gunners optimal for slow reloading weapons like the Manticore. I am happy with where the gunner sits right now in the current meta.
-
And frankly blackie I don't give a crap what a bunch of babies think (even if they are lvl 45). Proper balance is the final goal and change is inevitable to that end. Because frankly its clear to me some "vets" don't really care about fairness, but more about making their meta more OP. And I don't care for it.
Who's defining proper balance? The consensus is that gunners are useful since stamina and the meta game reflects that. When stamina was first released I tried to convince Muse to increase the gunner stamina recharge rate not to benefit me (I don't use gunners) but because I thought that was fair. Muse didn't think so and neither do they think that auto load should be reserved for gunners. The won't change auto load because it's an established feature and would be unpopular to change
The top competitive players bring gunners on many but not all ships. They've made it clear that gunners have use, but that there's also times to bring a buff engi. I don't see the problem
-
I never liked the auto ammo reload function. I argued against it when it was implemented, but I have grown used to it as an engi. It's stronger than people realize, an certainly wouldn't hurt gunners if it were to be gunner exclusive
-
It made double hwacha galleons far too easy to manage. But if it must exist to be exploited. At least let it be done exclusively by gunners.
-
Just my 2 cents:
- I agree that gunners are underused, and I would like to see changes that make them more viable.
- The 3-engineer-setup somewhat destroys the athmosphere for me. The (one) "engineer" actually should feel like they fullfil a specific role in the team.
- Likewise, I think gunners should adhere to their identity, i.e. shoot guns. If you give them a repair buff, gameplay-wise you would just have two different kinds of engineers.
- Giving gunners an increased shooting angle is a nice buff, but having this ability only temporary through stamina always felt weird. Also, gunner stamina is too complicated, as it has too many uses: faster reloading / more dps / wider angle.
My suggestion would be:
Make the increase in shooting angle permanent. This would simplify the use of gunner stamina and give gunners a reasonble boost to be used over engineers.
-
- I agree that gunners are underused, and I would like to see changes that make them more viable.
My suggestion would be:
Make the increase in shooting angle permanent. This would simplify the use of gunner stamina and give gunners a reasonble boost to be used over engineers.
Why do you think gunners are underused? Most ships have gunners and when they don't it's because they're using a simple gun that doesn't need multiple ammos. Permanent arcs (shooting angles) won't make gunners more useful on simple guns like gat than the extra damage, buffs, and repairs from a buff engi. The gun arcs were designed years before gunner stamina was implemented
Gunner is used on guns like hwatcha because despite only needing one ammo (burst), the extra arcs from gunner stamina is a great bonus. Making the extra arcs permanent would only buff guns the gunner is already used on. This would break balance because all guns would have 20% better vertical arcs which benefits some guns much more than others. It's a common complaint that it's frustrating enough fighting a hwatcha with the current gunner stamina and it'd be infuriating to do so with permanent arc bonuses
-
Why do you think gunners are underused? Most ships have gunners and when they don't it's because they're using a simple gun that doesn't need multiple ammos. Permanent arcs (shooting angles) won't make gunners more useful on simple guns like gat than the extra damage, buffs, and repairs from a buff engi. The gun arcs were designed years before gunner stamina was implemented
Gunner is used on guns like hwatcha because despite only needing one ammo (burst), the extra arcs from gunner stamina is a great bonus. Making the extra arcs permanent would only buff guns the gunner is already used on. This would break balance because all guns would have 20% better vertical arcs which benefits some guns much more than others. It's a common complaint that it's frustrating enough fighting a hwatcha with the current gunner stamina and it'd be infuriating to do so with permanent arc bonuses
Agreed.
Which begs a question: what CAN a gunner improve that will give them a more permanent place? Let's look at a list of options and figure it out from there.
Off the top of my head:
- Damage
- Reload Speedl
- Swap Buff to Gunner (either as a tool or a built-in feature like my previous suggestion)
- Second Engineer tool
- ...list continues?
I'd like to avoid the second Engineer tool direction unless it's required to bring them up to par, as that blurs the lines a bit too much for my tastes. Other thoughts on mechanics we could use and/or add?
-
Just get rid of gunner entirely. Make a single, unified "Crew" class. People who want to call themselves "gunners" still can. It would open up new combinations for crew (and consequently ship) loadouts. We might even start to see something new. Some of the tools might need re-balanced. We'll deal with that when we come to it though.
-
Just get rid of gunner entirely. Make a single, unified "Crew" class. People who want to call themselves "gunners" still can. It would open up new combinations for crew (and consequently ship) loadouts. We might even start to see something new. Some of the tools might need re-balanced. We'll deal with that when we come to it though.
If you gave it three engineer and two-three gunner slots it could work. I'd be worried about only 2 engineer tools though.
-
If I'm counting correctly everyone gets 5 tools. Gunner has 1 pilot, 1 engineer, and 3 gunner tools.. right? so just combine the engineer and gunner tools. "Crew" would have one pilot tool, and their choice of 4 crew tools. (and yes, ammos are tools)
-
If I'm counting correctly everyone gets 5 tools. Gunner has 1 pilot, 1 engineer, and 3 gunner tools.. right? so just combine the engineer and gunner tools. "Crew" would have one pilot tool, and their choice of 4 crew tools. (and yes, ammos are tools)
That's sort of a non-choice though. Mallet/Spanner would be taken on EVERYONE.
Heck...few guns need more than 2 ammo types, and many only really run one. Mallet/Spanner/Chem+Ammo/Ammo and Mallet/Spanner/Chem/Buff+Ammo are pretty much ALWAYS your best options.
-
I think you're misunderstanding me.. Ammos would take up tool slots. So if you wanted 2 ammos, and to be able to buff your gun you would bring: Wrench, Buff, Ammo, Ammo. This way if you need someone to have alot of repair-power, they would have to sacrifice firepower. or vice-versa. Sidenote: "Crew" stamina would be the current Engi stamina. If we decided we needed those extra arcs on guns, we could add a tool (similar to the buff hammer) or an ammo, that increased the angles guns could face. (which would also take up 1 of those 4 tool slots)
-
I think you're misunderstanding me.. Ammos would take up tool slots. So if you wanted 2 ammos, and to be able to buff your gun you would bring: Wrench, Buff, Ammo, Ammo. This way if you need someone to have alot of repair-power, they would have to sacrifice firepower. or vice-versa. Sidenote: "Crew" stamina would be the current Engi stamina. If we decided we needed those extra arcs on guns, we could add a tool (similar to the buff hammer) or an ammo, that increased the angles guns could face. (which would also take up 1 of those 4 tool slots)
No, I got that. I just misread it as 5 slots. My bad.
Still, I'm not sure that's a good solution to the problem.
-
Still, I'm not sure that's a good solution to the problem.
Why not?
-
My suggestion to Muse was swapping Buff hammer and Gunner Stamina. After reading a lot of the ideas here, my thought is this (copied from the email I sent them):
"OK, so, you know I am not a big fan of 'stamina', especially on the gunner (pilot is a close second). As you may know, there is one thing I dislike even more than gunner stamina, that being the effect of the buff hammer on guns. We all know this breaks the balance between gunners and engineer with a buff. There are very few cases where a really good gunner is more valuable than a really good buffgineer. In addition, you have to practice quite a big to be an efficient buffgineer. This makes it inherently unfriendly to newer players.
Then we have stamina, which is trying to bring gunners back to a valid choice, mostly because of the buff hammer.
I feel this solution is ignoring the original problem, and would like to make a suggestion to overhaul both buff and gunner stamina. while making both more fun and relevant.
The suggestion is basically this: Switch the effect of the buff hammer and gunner stamina completely. Rename 'Stamina' to 'Focus'. The new effects would be as follows.
Buffed guns would:
1. Have improved arcs.
2, Reload faster.
3. Move faster.
4. Perhaps have more health.
These make sense from a mechanical point of view. Unless you are taking individual bullets apart, no mechanical change should increase the damage of the ammo. However, adjusting stops can increase arcs. Tuning mechanics can make things turn and load faster. Tightening loose bolts can make it hold together longer under stress.
Gunner Focus would:
1. Increase damage.
2. Reduce recoil.
3. Give the gunner a 'tunnel vision' visual effect, slightly zoomed in with a dark haze around the edges
4. Possibly muffle all other game sounds.
[[To add to that email, and taking from this thread, I would increase the repair power gunners have on guns with all tools.]]
These are very common aspects of most shooters. 'Holding breath' is a common way to reduce recoil and gain focus on a target. Gaining focus generally comes with some sort of zoom and tunnel vision, along with bonus damage due to the extra concentration put into hitting the target just right (supposedly). All these effects would make a great deal of sense to new (and old) players. There is an instant "Oh, I get what this does." familiar feel to the 'holding breath to focus' mechanic. Stamina is for running. Focus is for shooting. It is not intuitive for your guns to be briefly moved out of arc or load faster just because you push a button.
These changes would shift classes back where they belong, with gunners ruling the guns, and engineers making everything work better while running around like insane people."
Finally, to top off the "Gunner OP" shift, add in four new ammos:
1. Gibble mount - Shifts gun arcs to the left. Could be several ammos that shift 5-10-15 degrees left at the cost of 5-10-15% ammo.
2. Hook mount - Shifts gun arcs to the right. Could be several ammos that shift 5-10-15 degrees right at the cost of 5-10-15% ammo.
3. Airburst - Shift gun arcs up substantially, removes most arming time, cuts clip size, increases burst radius.
4. Depth charge - Shift gun arcs down substantially. Have not done the math on this to figure out balance, but it would need a substantial debuff.
-
Still, I'm not sure that's a good solution to the problem.
Why not?
Mainly because I'm opposed to design that lets players trap themselves. I don't like the option to take no repair tools, either in current GoI or in this proposal, because a ship needs them to function.
-
My suggestion to Muse was swapping Buff hammer and Gunner Stamina. After reading a lot of the ideas here, my thought is this (copied from the email I sent them):
"OK, so, you know I am not a big fan of 'stamina', especially on the gunner (pilot is a close second). As you may know, there is one thing I dislike even more than gunner stamina, that being the effect of the buff hammer on guns. We all know this breaks the balance between gunners and engineer with a buff. There are very few cases where a really good gunner is more valuable than a really good buffgineer. In addition, you have to practice quite a big to be an efficient buffgineer. This makes it inherently unfriendly to newer players.
Then we have stamina, which is trying to bring gunners back to a valid choice, mostly because of the buff hammer.
I feel this solution is ignoring the original problem, and would like to make a suggestion to overhaul both buff and gunner stamina. while making both more fun and relevant.
The suggestion is basically this: Switch the effect of the buff hammer and gunner stamina completely. Rename 'Stamina' to 'Focus'. The new effects would be as follows.
Buffed guns would:
1. Have improved arcs.
2, Reload faster.
3. Move faster.
4. Perhaps have more health.
These make sense from a mechanical point of view. Unless you are taking individual bullets apart, no mechanical change should increase the damage of the ammo. However, adjusting stops can increase arcs. Tuning mechanics can make things turn and load faster. Tightening loose bolts can make it hold together longer under stress.
Gunner Focus would:
1. Increase damage.
2. Reduce recoil.
3. Give the gunner a 'tunnel vision' visual effect, slightly zoomed in with a dark haze around the edges
4. Possibly muffle all other game sounds.
[[To add to that email, and taking from this thread, I would increase the repair power gunners have on guns with all tools.]]
These are very common aspects of most shooters. 'Holding breath' is a common way to reduce recoil and gain focus on a target. Gaining focus generally comes with some sort of zoom and tunnel vision, along with bonus damage due to the extra concentration put into hitting the target just right (supposedly). All these effects would make a great deal of sense to new (and old) players. There is an instant "Oh, I get what this does." familiar feel to the 'holding breath to focus' mechanic. Stamina is for running. Focus is for shooting. It is not intuitive for your guns to be briefly moved out of arc or load faster just because you push a button.
These changes would shift classes back where they belong, with gunners ruling the guns, and engineers making everything work better while running around like insane people."
Finally, to top off the "Gunner OP" shift, add in four new ammos:
1. Gibble mount - Shifts gun arcs to the left. Could be several ammos that shift 5-10-15 degrees left at the cost of 5-10-15% ammo.
2. Hook mount - Shifts gun arcs to the right. Could be several ammos that shift 5-10-15 degrees right at the cost of 5-10-15% ammo.
3. Airburst - Shift gun arcs up substantially, removes most arming time, cuts clip size, increases burst radius.
4. Depth charge - Shift gun arcs down substantially. Have not done the math on this to figure out balance, but it would need a substantial debuff.
...this is fantastic.
-
note - written before the previous 3 comments
I'm starting to like the idea of a single crew class if its structured that way, I can't off the top of my head think of any one 'superior' setup that would kill the variety it would open up. I would even be tempted to bring Spanner-Mallet-Chem-Extinguisher sometimes. I would want to see having a spanner or wrench be a mandatory minimum for crew, a loch-incendiary-burst-charged 'crew member' would be infuriating to say the least.
Either way IMO the current gunners state is mostly tied into the underlying structure of how ammunition works, with each ammo type having the same numerical effects on all guns (rounding aside) leading to changes in effectiveness that are all over the place and only a few guns that benefit from 3 or more ammo types. I would rather see each ammo have a theme - long run dps, increased effective range, bonus fire stacks etc - and unique effects for each gun that fit the theme and are balanced for that gun. It could be cut back to just 5 ammo types even and offer more choices than the current 8.
-
Buffed guns would:
1. Have improved arcs.
2, Reload faster.
3. Move faster.
4. Perhaps have more health.
I just looked up the buff hammer and found that with the exception of the balloon it buffs exactly one attribute from each part (engines +25% thrust, hull 30% hp, balloon -25% vertical drag +100% lift) And you want to change at least THREE attributes because you don't like guns get damage increase since the bullets themselves aren't affected? I feel as this would make buff hammer a must have on all ships as it'd make gunning so much better. I would strongly suggest just sticking with the improved arcs for guns if you really must get rid of damage increase.
Gunner Focus would:
1. Increase damage.
2. Reduce recoil.
3. Give the gunner a 'tunnel vision' visual effect, slightly zoomed in with a dark haze around the edges
4. Possibly muffle all other game sounds.
1. Increase damage.
You are unhappy that a hammer improves each bullet's damage output and instead would be happier if it was from a gunner squinting? This is just wrong. I can see how most of the points in your post would be viable, except for this. Now I did read your justification for it and can understand why you'd say because it's in other shooter games, it'd be nice to have here. The issue is that those other games you're referencing probably don't crew operated mechanical warmachines, just organic warmachines. Rewarding extra damage for accurate hits is not a valid reason, mainly because we already reward players for accurate hits. You get that reward when you use a mercury, artemis, even a flare gun, you get to greatly damage maybe even break the part that you directly hit.
For focus, I would be behind point 3 and 4 being included but reducing recoil would effectively negate heavy clip. Maybe it would, maybe it wouldn't, you didn't suggest how much recoil reduction so I don't know. What would be a viable replacement is the 'Move Faster' from the buff section. This is easily justified as the gunner simply throwing his/her body weight around to move the gun, obviously you can't do that all the time. Reload speed could be justified this way too, having the gunner shove the automatic parts along to go faster.
With those changes I'd see the buff and focus being more viable.
-
Reduced gun recoil cannot be an attribute of anything except ammo. Doing so would break balance. If gunner stamina reduced recoil it would make burst hwatcha broken while having no effect on the lumberjack. It would make little or no difference on most guns but have a powerful effect on others. Like I point out every time it's brought up Richard, this isn't an option
-
And every time, you have been wrong.
The recoil nerf on heavy clip was one-half of the suggestion I made right before they started testing it at my strong suggestion. The other half was adding a stamina recoil reduction of an amount that would put Heavy clip plus Gunner stamina at close to 100% recoil reduction. It would have been a partial nerf that could be temporarily compensated for by a gunner. Someone decided to reduce the spread on hwacha all the time instead, and broke it.
So what if the recoil reduction is useless on some guns? Breaking arc is useless on most builds and completely useless on some guns. Reloading faster is completely useless on most guns. Both of those are powerful on other guns. Your point is null.
Kingsania... where to start, besides pointing out that you are wrong about everything.
I just looked up the buff hammer and found that with the exception of the balloon it buffs exactly one attribute from each part (engines +25% thrust, hull 30% hp, balloon -25% vertical drag +100% lift) And you want to change at least THREE attributes because you don't like guns get damage increase since the bullets themselves aren't affected?
Let me explain something about the components you just described. Engines only do one mechanical thing, thus can only have one attribute buffed. Balloon does two distinct forms of movement, so can only have two attributes effected. Armor only does one thing, again, only one attribute can be changed. Guns, on the other hand, have many mechanical attributes. Almost all of which are effected by a magical stamina.
I feel as this would make buff hammer a must have on all ships as it'd make gunning so much better.
I feel you have not played the game much. If you did, you would know that the best crews always take a buff kit, and sometimes two, forgoing fire tools. They are already required for the damage because the ALREADY make gunning so much better. For an ENGINEER. This change would make buffing better for the gunner, as it should be.
I would strongly suggest just sticking with the improved arcs for guns if you really must get rid of damage increase.
Why? Your reasoning is wrong.
You are unhappy that a hammer improves each bullet's damage output and instead would be happier if it was from a gunner squinting? This is just wrong.
You obviously know nothing about shooting guns or any task that requires extreme focus. 'Squinting'? Honestly, do some research. Tunnel vision does not come from squinting. It comes from having your eyes wide open while focusing intensely on a single task. Your brain literally blocks everything else out. All information deemed unneeded for the task is discarded. Time can even seem to slow down due to the reduced processing load.
The issue is that those other games you're referencing probably don't crew operated mechanical warmachines, just organic warmachines
.
Aside from having no idea what you are referencing, there is no difference. Racing a motorcycle and racing a horse take the same kinds of extra focus.
Rewarding extra damage for accurate hits is not a valid reason, mainly because we already reward players for accurate hits.
Reward? This is a mechanic that would replace the random weird effect of current stamina with things that actually make sense to a career gunner. It is not a reward. You could just as well make the same silly argument with why reward Engineers with the ability to run fast when all players can run fast? A person more familiar with guns is simply going to be able to inflict more damage with them. That is NOT THE CASE NOW. An engineer with a buff hammer can deal far more damage, despite being the class that is supposedly a career mechanic. Put an engineer and a gunner on a gun, and there is no difference in damage output. That is what is wrong. That is what this fixes.
For focus, I would be behind point 3 and 4 being included but reducing recoil would effectively negate heavy clip. Maybe it would, maybe it wouldn't,
It would't. See first paragraph.
What would be a viable replacement is the 'Move Faster' from the buff section. This is easily justified as the gunner simply throwing his/her body weight around to move the gun, obviously you can't do that all the time.
Trying hard to stay nice... but you do realize this is already part of gunner stamina, and really stupid? The light guns, maybe. The heavy guns are mechanically driven machines that your character SITS on. Let that sink in.
Reload speed could be justified this way too, having the gunner shove the automatic parts along to go faster.
Yup. He can shove his fingers into the mechanical gears WHILE throwing his weight around on Buick-sized mounted guns.
-
And every time, you have been wrong.
The recoil nerf on heavy clip was one-half of the suggestion I made right before they started testing it at my strong suggestion. The other half was adding a stamina recoil reduction of an amount that would put Heavy clip plus Gunner stamina at close to 100% recoil reduction. It would have been a partial nerf that could be temporarily compensated for by a gunner. Someone decided to reduce the spread on hwacha all the time instead, and broke it.
So what if the recoil reduction is useless on some guns? Breaking arc is useless on most builds and completely useless on some guns. Reloading faster is completely useless on most guns. Both of those are powerful on other guns. Your point is null.
HOLD ON
Faster reload and better arcs benefit EVERY gun. Some guns benefit MORE from a faster reload and one gun benefits a TON (mine launcher) but no gun doesn't benefit from a faster reload
Same with arcs. All guns benefit from better arcs. Some guns benefit less (merc) but there's been plenty of times where I was out of merc arcs just to get hit by a merc! There's no gun that doesn't benefit from better arcs
Most guns don't benefit from reduced recoil. There's a few that it would have a minor effect on (gat, carro, taur), but only one where it would have a major effect on...
Say it gave -30% jitter to compensate with heavy clip. Congrats the hwatcha is broken
-
And every time, you have been wrong.
The recoil nerf on heavy clip was one-half of the suggestion I made right before they started testing it at my strong suggestion. The other half was adding a stamina recoil reduction of an amount that would put Heavy clip plus Gunner stamina at close to 100% recoil reduction. It would have been a partial nerf that could be temporarily compensated for by a gunner. Someone decided to reduce the spread on hwacha all the time instead, and broke it.
So what if the recoil reduction is useless on some guns? Breaking arc is useless on most builds and completely useless on some guns. Reloading faster is completely useless on most guns. Both of those are powerful on other guns. Your point is null.
HOLD ON
Faster reload and better arcs benefit EVERY gun. Some guns benefit MORE from a faster reload and one gun benefits a TON (mine launcher) but no gun doesn't benefit from a faster reload
Same with arcs. All guns benefit from better arcs. Some guns benefit less (merc) but there's been plenty of times where I was out of merc arcs just to get hit by a merc! There's no gun that doesn't benefit from better arcs
Most guns don't benefit from reduced recoil. There's a few that it would have a minor effect on (gat, carro, taur), but only one where it would have a major effect on...
Say it gave -30% jitter to compensate with heavy clip. Congrats the hwatcha is broken again
If gunner stamina's effects benefit every gun, then that is an even better reason to swap them around. The reason devs haven't touched the gun buffs' damage boost yet is because almost any other mechanic would benefit some guns more than others, whilst 20% damage increase across the board is fairly universal. So if we have 2 universal features, and one is catered more towards dealing damage and benefitting from shooting a gun more than the other person rather than benefitting more from recovering when things go wrong in specific situations (gunner stamina atm) then I would say the former fits the gunner more, especially considering pretty much everything an engineer does on a ship involves making it recover from a non ideal situation.
How would hwacha be broken, if it was returned from it's pre buff state and this mechanic was applied in combination with Heavy Clip? Unless you're implying current hwacha jitter + -100% jitter, in which case yes, that is broken, but that's not what Richard wants to imply, unless you think that the old Hwacha was broken aswell, which is an interesting if not a debatable opinion.
-
If hwatcha was reverted then this -30% jitter reduction would turn it back into the current hwatcha. It wouldn't be used with heavy clip and instead would mostly be used in conjunction with dps ammos like greased and charged (and burst). Reducing gat or carro jitter by 30% isn't a big change but it's a powerful buff to hwatcha and only hwatcha
-
These make sense from a mechanical point of view. Unless you are taking individual bullets apart, no mechanical change should increase the damage of the ammo. However, adjusting stops can increase arcs. Tuning mechanics can make things turn and load faster. Tightening loose bolts can make it hold together longer under stress.
Gunner Focus would:
1. Increase damage.
I'm a bit confused here. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you say it doesn't make sense that buff would increase weapon (ammo) damage, but on the other hand it makes sense that "gunner focus" would increase damage? Why? How would someone who is mentally focused on shooting a gun able to inflict more damage? Gun does or should do same damage no matter if guy shooting is fully concentrated or drunk. As long as he hits the target it should do the same damage.
Some of your suggestions are not bad, but I'm not sure the changes are really needed. This whole idea that gunner is underpowered seems it's just matter of opinion and some say it is underpowered and others it's not. I personally think gunners are fine. They are relevant and good enough to have one on almost every ship, which seems perfectly fine for me. Unless you're wishing for 2x gunner + 1x engineer combo to be ideal.
It's really just a matter of preferences, each class has it's own strengths. Engineers won't be able to reload faster and get extra arcs and ammo types, while gunners won't carry buff kits or whatever seems to be a problem for people here. So it's matter of preference like I said, you decide what "bonuses" you would like for each ship or match. Some people will prefer buffed guns, while other will prefer benefits of gunner over buffer. Which makes sense to me. But maybe It's just that I'm not concerned about things making sense on a realistic level, like for example why can gunners turn guns out of arcs or why can pilots turn ship faster using their muscles. As long as gameplay is fun and balanced (which I think it is if we're talking about gunners) it's good for me. I can see why some people would be bothered by such things, but certainly not in this game. It's a pvp game about shooting airships for flaks sake.
-
Buffed guns would:
1. Have improved arcs.
2, Reload faster.
3. Move faster.
4. Perhaps have more health.
Gunner Focus would:
1. Increase damage.
2. Reduce recoil.
3. Give the gunner a 'tunnel vision' visual effect, slightly zoomed in with a dark haze around the edges
4. Possibly muffle all other game sounds.
Here's the issue: buffs are permanent while stamina is temporary. This would benefit buff engi much more than gunner. Their guns would turn faster, have better arcs, and higher dps from the reload bonus. In order for gunner to compete they'd need a sizable damage boost, but this isn't balanced because gunner stamina is temporary
Take the gat for example. It has a long empty clip time so you'd need to use a lot of stamina. The hwatcha however has a short empty time which means you'd only use it for a few seconds. Or the mine launcher where you'd use stamina for just a single instant
The current system works because turn speed, arcs, and reload are good temporary utility bonuses while damage is a simple permanent bonus. The gunner is for utility and gunner stamina reflects that. If +20% dmg is too much then the answer is to adjust it - not change everything else
-
Really, the main issue stems from the fact that all gunner tools are ammo.
Very few guns need more than one ammo type, and most organized ships have set guns for each crewman. This allows a single engineer to be as effective as a gunner... or more so with a buff hammer... on a great number of guns that only need a single ammo type.
A simple solution would be to introduce a set of non-ammo gunner tools. Something that can boost the gun in a similar manner to the buff hammer/chemspray. An engineer gunning a gun can at most take one tool, while a gunner could be much more versatile. Not just temporary buffs (stamina), but something that could be applied consistently. Ideally each would stack with gunner stamina, so that it would be ideal to have at least one gunner (or more for certain load-outs) at all times. All gunner buff items would be mutually exclusive, but stack with the buff hammer.
Example thoughts:
Arc Hook - This tool increases the horizontal arc and decreases the vertical arc of any gun it hits for 5 seconds with a 5 second repair cooldown.
Winch - This tool increases the vertical arc and decreases the horizontal arc of any gun it hits for 5 seconds, with a 5 second repair cooldown.
Spring Loader - This tool decreases the reload and mag size of any gun it hits by 25% for 5 seconds, with a 5 second repair cooldown.
Stablizer - This tool decreases jitter and dramatically slows traverse speed on any gun it hits by 25% for 5 seconds, with a 5 second repair cooldown.
An engineer would not be able to use these tools as well as a gunner, due to the fact that they would not get ammo types. While a gunner could use both a special ammo and a tool to buff their own gun.
-
Here's the issue: buffs are permanent while stamina is temporary. This would benefit buff engi much more than gunner. Their guns would turn faster, have better arcs, and higher dps from the reload bonus. In order for gunner to compete they'd need a sizable damage boost, but this isn't balanced because gunner stamina is temporary
Take the gat for example. It has a long empty clip time so you'd need to use a lot of stamina. The hwatcha however has a short empty time which means you'd only use it for a few seconds. Or the mine launcher where you'd use stamina for just a single instant
The current system works because turn speed, arcs, and reload are good temporary utility bonuses while damage is a simple permanent bonus. The gunner is for utility and gunner stamina reflects that. If +20% dmg is too much then the answer is to adjust it - not change everything else
You are making no sense here, and are only focusing on a single aspect of the suggested change. You are also ignoring how stamina actually recharges. Guns turning faster, having better arcs, and reloading faster would buff an engineer more? As opposed to the current buff that makes DPS gunners obsolete? And at the same time you are saying the change to stamina would make gunners overpowered on just the hwacha because reasons.
If you are so afraid of Burst ammo, then add some jitter to it. Problem solved (falloff is a better solution). But, but then engineers would have a harder time shooting it!!! They are engineers. They are supposed to have a harder time shooting guns than actual gunners. What a concept.
As for longer firing guns like Gatling, breaking things recharges stamina. Gatling is good at breaking things. Gatling with more damage and tighter recoil breaks more things. Stamina recharges faster. Not fast enough? Change it. They just have arbitrary numbers as it is. Also of note for the bad example you gave, Stamina currently lasts about the same time as unloading a Greased ammo clip. When shooting at hull and components with buffed Greased, things break fast enough to give you a full clip of stamina firing. Other guns could have a better argument against it, but still not a good one. The same argument can be made for the arc changing. It benefits fast shooting guns over longer clip guns. It benefits fast moving guns with good arcs over slow moving guns with narrow arcs. What is your point? It just seems like you don't like the idea of temporary damage increase that removes the buffgunner class from the game. No one is going to take a buffgineer over a stamina DPS gunner because the buffgineer has a little better arc ability. People will take them to supplement the gunner in the same way they supplement the pilot or another engineer. They will also take them for creative builds using the arc changes, which is far more useful than DPS increase.
Gunner stamina, as it is, is a melee thing. You can use it for arcs or use it for reload. Not both. The reload bonus is minuscule on long range guns. The arc changing is practically useless at range. These changes would make it all around better.
For the record, I would make the change to the arcs smaller than gunner stamina and leave the movement boost about the same. Not sure about reload. I would also increase the buff duration since it is no longer an active player tool, meaning it will be used more by players other than the one doing the buffing (hint, the gunner).
-
Yes. Faster turning with better arcs and quicker reload would buff an engi more than a +20% dmg gunner
I'll explain but first: No, nerfing burst ammo just to counteract the recoil reduction isn't an option. That's how you break balance. I already covered why a blanket recoil reduction cannot be implemented so go email Muse or ask someone else and maybe they'll explain it to you better
Gunner stamina is for increasing arcs and turn speed, OR reload. At long range you use it for reload and close range for arcs. Faster reload DOES benefit long range guns. By using stamina for the merc reload you've temporarily increased dps MORE than a buff engi! This is the true for all guns with a reload less than 6.5 seconds and an empty clip time less than 1.25 * reload time
Gunner stamina is used tactically depending on the situation and gun: either during the reload or while shooting. Under your proposal you'd always use it at the beginning of shooting which makes it less interesting. Stamina refills 8.3% per component destroyed. This benefits disable weapons but isn't significant for piercing weapons which likely break only one (or no) component during their whole clip. So for this proposal on gat/hades you use it the whole clip and break their armor but next clip you presumably won't have nearly as much stamina. For hwatcha/carro however you'd only use it for a few seconds and have an endless supply of stamina. Same for the mine launcher where you use it for just a single instant. This removes tactics from stamina and makes it less interesting/fun IMO
Giving gunner stamina effects to a buff engi would give them higher dps than a gunner with +20% dmg. For almost every gunner gun the faster reload increases dps more than the extra damage. I'd take this over a gunner any day and you're right it would make way for a lot of OP arc builds. Like has been said countless times: gunners are for utility and engis are for efficiency. I won't argue the +20% damage because I almost always bring 3 engis, but most don't. Most competitive players use gunners on most builds because they find the utility of a gunner more useful than the efficiency of a buff engi. Other times they bring buff engis because efficiency becomes more important than utility. That's the game design and I don't think the roles should be swapped
-
I'll explain but first: No, nerfing burst ammo just to counteract the recoil reduction isn't an option.
And this is why? Because you say so? Heavy clip was nerfed, rightfully so, for the exact same reason. It was too powerful on one gun with negligible effects on all others. Burst is used primarily on two guns. One has no recoil so would have no effect. The other is OP with Burst. It should be nerfed regardless of any stamina or buff hammer changes.
You are still wrong. Your explanations are weak. If reload increased DPS too much, then reduce it by half current gunner speed, just as I said the arcs should be less since they are 'permanent'. These are simple solutions.
I personally find the game less fun and more complicated with the addition of stamina. Many others agree with me. Many agree with you. It is an opinion-based non-argument.
I have emailed Muse on these things previously (falloff damage and stamina), and will now email them about a needed Burst nerf. Thank you for reminding me.
-
Whether burst should be nerfed is irrelevant to the gunner jitter proposal because the latter isn't possible
3. Give the gunner a 'tunnel vision' visual effect, slightly zoomed in with a dark haze around the edges
4. Possibly muffle all other game sounds.
These can be added as is and would be a good addition to gunner stamina
-
Still, I'm not sure that's a good solution to the problem.
Why not?
Mainly because I'm opposed to design that lets players trap themselves. I don't like the option to take no repair tools, either in current GoI or in this proposal, because a ship needs them to function.
you could always just include a popup when the user attempts to save an obviously bad loadout. just as a reminder they are forced to click ok on. and a checkbox to never show the reminder again