Guns Of Icarus Online
Info => Feedback and Suggestions => Topic started by: Ace of Hawks on September 08, 2016, 05:21:15 pm
-
I had an idea for a new "heavy" weapon. I am a huge fan of the quadruple bofors AA seen on second world war ships. I thought of having the same damage as light flak guns except that there would be 4 barrels firing at once instead of 2 as well as a larger clip size. Too make sure it's not over powered the guns traverse speed would be slowed when firing, similiar to the apollo lense array. For a design idea i thought of four copper coloured barrels that would have horn shaped ends like a blunderbuss, as well gold springs on the barrels to absorb recoil. I'm taking a wild guess in the dark that maybe 5 shells per barrel for a total of 20 shells depending on what ammo type you take may be a good number. An ammunition reload animation is yet to be thought of. This gun will probably find more use in Alliance mode because there are aircraft but im sure it would find some use in Skirmish.
Would love to hear some feedback as this is my first forum post about a future idea!
Your eye in the sky,
Ace of Hawks
-
Finally, Ace, been waiting for the post.
Anyways, the damage would need to be a bit higher, and the firing rate I think would be a little slow, but steady. Slow traverse speed is a plus, but a semi-flat trajectory would serve it well for dealing with enemy ships and planes at a distance.
Damage types? Piercing is an obvious, but what might be the second?
-
ill leave that up to the devs and community to decide on what it should be
-
Quad barreled Bofors AA mounting huh....
You mean this?
(http://i.imgur.com/zvguVAz.jpg)
I wont deny that it eminates strength, but the real question i have for you right now is...
Why?
Why should Muse spend time and effort to animate and program a gun that basically acts like a Flak based gun already ingame?
What sets this apart from the Typhon heavy flak cannon or the Echidna light flak cannon?
Do the shells explode after a certain distance? Or are they Impact detonations?
Is this gun for Piercing armor? Why this over the minotaur?
Does it pop balloons? What about Heavy carro or Lumberjacks?
Will it disable everything? Over hwatcha?
Is it a hull breaker? Again why over the current flak?
Is it a long range weapon? Close?
Does it fill a specific role that the other heavy mounts havent been able to?
You say this would find more use in alliance for swatting Airplanes...
But alliance brought out the Chaladonian Gas mortar launcher which swatted out planes by the dozens in a single shot with its huge cloud of green death. And it doubled as an Armor melter. For a light mount...
Many questions. Need answers.
-
I actually was discussing it with Ace in game a while ago, and here's what my thoughts on it were:
This weapon would be more endurance based rather than high damage. It would be an armor melter, but rather than creating a defensive screen or else launching out a single shell, this would be longer duration with effective armor destruction and perhaps kill potential.
The idea is to, perhaps, simply lay down withering fire into an area and attempt to keep said fire going. Rather than the slow fire and AoE of the Gas Mortar or else the quick-reload-small-clip Light Flak needing a quick trigger finger to make it fire quick enough, this could possibly launch rounds out over a longer range and with a large enough clip to simply clear a forward area.
While yes, the Gas Mortar is extremely effective against the basic fighters and acts as a melter, it's slow fire rate and reload, as well as quick dissipation, means that the clouds are almost more of a defensive weapon rather than an offensive one, especially since the gas doesn't affect your own ship or allies. This would take the role of offensive, plowing the road with lead, so to speak.
In response to current flak, this would have higher piercing rather than whatever the secondary damage type would be, which Ace and I discussed as being very lightly Explosive, though that might be a little too powerful. This would be designed to grind away at larger enemies, instead of simply hitting in a short spurt and then requiring the reload. With current flak, you could grind away with the Typhon and simply keep pouring rounds down, but it is a tad less effective against armor, and it has a substantial drop over a longer range, requiring a deal of skill to arc it appropriately. This would have an equivalent range but a much flatter trajectory, meaning that you could engage and strip an enemy while another ship lines up the shot, or else your secondary heavy Typhon readies for the kill.
Now, the major role would be a mid to long range armor stripper. The Minotaur can do this, yes, but it acts as a scrap-cannon, and for longer ranges requires Heavy. Not to mention its slow fire rate, horrible recoil, and small clip. This offers an alternative to a heavy armor stripper in an impressive and potentially deadly manner. It would deal less damage than the impressive Minotaur, but it would still be worth the time and effort to learn how to use it.
I hope I answered at least most of the queries, and this is a majority of what I remember from the conversation (It's been about a week, apologies mate)
-
Why?
Why should Muse spend time and effort to animate and program a gun that basically acts like a Flak based gun already ingame?
What sets this apart from the Typhon heavy flak cannon or the Echidna light flak cannon?
Sooooooooooooo...... I feel like people that ask these types of questions don't understand how games and gamers work. People like variety, even if it is very minor variety. Lets look at other games that have a ton of different guns. They have MUCH less variety in function than GOIO. They shoot faster or slower, load faster or slower, and do a bit more or less damage.
Why have more than one tank in each class in World of Tanks if they are all pretty much the same in function, let alone different turrets on each tank? Why have hundreds of guns in TF2 that are basically the same, with a quirk or two? Don't even start with games like Diablo and Borderlands with their nearly infinite weapons.
These are the same reasons you have more than one gun in GOIO that does a similar action to another gun. It is necessary. I want to have five guns that are basically the Whirlwind with varying stats, or even IDENTICAL stats but in a twin barrel machine gun. I want several minelaunchers that each have their own quirk. I want a heavy carro that does less damage, but adds some Minotaur force.
Why? Because variety is necessary in a game like this. Not only wide variety of mechanics. It also needs small variety in function.
In essence, it is time to stop worrying about making guns and ships that are unique, and start looking at more variety. It is far easier to look at something that is working, and say, "This is working. How can we make another a little differently?"
The Heavy Flak is a prime example of a failure to do this. Rather than simply making a new gun that would be the current 4 shot spammer, they completely removed the 2 shot beast. Hell, even a different colored Hflak would be enough. Changing model colors is a classic way of making new and distinguishable assets. "Take the bronze flak if you want 4 weaker shots instead of 2 for about the same DPC." then when more models can be made, "Take the Atlas howitzer if you want to pack all that damage into one slow moving shot. If you want a small amount of armor damage and constant weaker hull damage, take the BOFORS."
Nothing has to set it apart from other guns. It just has to be different. And not even in any major way. We already have the gun classes (defined by the current guns). It is time to add to those classes. If someone asks why you would take a 4 shot flak over a 3 shot flak that does about the same thing, there is nothing wrong with simply answering, "Just preference."
-
All of these responses are good. As many of you have brought up the game just needs to have new items to bring some interest back into the game. The original idea started because we thought it would be cool to have light gun weapons in a heavy gun mount. or in other words to take a light gun and make a heavier version of it. This however will not work for all light weapons. i thought the Bofors would make a good prototype model of a light gun made heavy. As Richard LeMoon is doing his howitzer is sort of a heavy version of the mercury field gun but with a cool reload animation and model. GOIO has been losing players recently because of lack of new content. Some new weapons and ships would bring a major change to the game and give it a face lift. Hopefully bringing back players and possibly new ones with it.
-
Possible thoughts on Bofors after some shoddy math while being bored
Two projectiles per shot, meaning that both barrels on either side would be firing at the same time. At medium range the grouping would be good enough, but at longer ranges the spread would be similar to that of the Whirlwind, spreading 12 meters at maximum range. It'd make engaging with the weapon very tricky at long range, but extremely dangerous at medium and short ranges. The secondary
Thoughts on damage:
Direct: ~15 piercing
Burst: ~10 Explosive (Perhaps less)
Arming distance for Burst: ~0.9
Possible fire rate: 2.0, same as the fire rate on an actual Bofors (Note, this is the rate of fire for the barrels. Rounds per minute would be more accurate at 4.0)
Reload: 5.5 per second
Clip size: 16, 4 per barrel.
Spread at max distance: 12
Bullet drop: ~3/s (Perhaps less? Light projectiles being fired at high velocity, basing the drop off of the Echidna)
Range: 1200-1400? Shorter range than a majority of the Medium weapon, meaning that it simply can't be used to spam from extreme range.
Arcs-
Verticle: 55 upwards, 35 downwards? Powerful for upwards attacks and defense, weak against lower attacks.
Horizontal: 35 left/right? Utilizing same to similar arc of Typhon.
Verticle speed: 25? (Slow turning speed so that competant pilots can outmaneuver the weapon)
Horizontal: 15? (Slow turning speed so that competant pilots might be able to outmaneuver the weapon)
Zoom: 1.80-2.00, mixing the zoom of the Gatling and the Typhon
Reminder, this was just me being bored and trying to do maths, which I am awful at. Thou hath been warned.
-
Here have some concept drawings:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1UHyB2jV_MgU2dVMVFzQ3ZPR28/view?usp=sharing
-
current guns and ammo and game meta isn't even properly balanced and yet these threads keep popping up...
-
As they should. If they did not keep popping up, it would mean people have given up on the game.
Besides, current guns are fine. What they lack is variety within type, the hallmark of successful MP PvP games.
-
Would you rather nothing but complaints about current guns, ammunition, and the meta, Arturo?
Not trying to be a jerk, but is that any better than asking for more weapons while current one's still need tweaking? Tweaking current weapons is necessary, but so is introducing new content. Any kind of new content, not just upsetting the meta a little by changing how much damage a weapon does, or how high the arc on it's projectiles are.
-
Historically, guns like these were defensive guns that effectively were area denial weapons for aircraft. The question is how this can be ported to the game without any obviously overpowered builds stemming from it. If it had heavy piercing, it would be a goto weapon for Galleons, comboing too well with the heavy flak. Or it with triple banshee on a Spire.
What about a defensive, supporting heavy gun? Give it nothing but shatter damage, horizontal arcs like a gatling, an excellent upwards arc, and carronade quality downward arcs. It is now an excellent weapon for denying attacks in its range, forcing enemies to approach low to attack or putting you self dangerously low to take advantage of it, but has neligible killing power. It would be great at setting up kills for allied ships or other guns, but the other guns still need to do work for the kill.
Some immediate strategies would be putting one on each side of a Galleon to defend against highly maneuverable ships or ships trying to outrise you at the cost of killing power. Or making a "trapping" Spire that hangs low, disables a target, then rises up on its prey to kill with its other guns. For a Goldfish, it would be like the Heavy Flak: almost completely useless. It may be able to be used as a weapon to occupy and harass one ship so the ally can have a 1v1 against the other, but that's it.
The idea of this is to give Galleon a heavy gun without abysmal arcs to defend itself with without augmenting it's killing power and to give the Spire another playstyle without giving another powerful option to the ubiquitous Goldfish.
With wide arcs and a good rate of fire, it would also be reasonable at shooting down Alliance planes, unlike all the others save the heavy flak.
-
I don't know about nothing but shatter, as the Hwacha already fills that niche extremely nicely, but I definitely agree with you on the area denial, and that's kind of how I'd fit my math together on it.
The general idea was for a mid-short range weapon that dealt effective piercing damage, but I played around with it and decided the double projectile-cast would actually do nicely for it. Overall, the thought was for dangerous power at mid to closer range, due to the projectiles spreading apart from one another, but for it to be very slow with it's arcs, as slow as a Lumber.
A fish could easily use it as a front gun, trying to get in close and deal a lot of damage with the front and swinging to a flak on the side, but that requires a great deal of coordination between the crew, encouraging higher level play. The slow turning speed of the weapon means that the captain would aim it more than the gunner, and make it very difficult to stay on target.
I completely agree on terms of the gally, and that's the other reason I figured the double projectile-cast would balance it somewhat. Keeping the damage lower per projectile hit, but encouraging hitting with both projectiles for higher damage. This makes keeping a Galleon at range more difficult, since the rounds are supposed to spread at longer ranges, allowing a skiled captain to dodge the worst of the fire.
I do agree with a secondary of shatter though. Give them an actual AoE, unlike the Gatling, and you could have an effective pierce/disable.
-
I don't know about nothing but shatter, as the Hwacha already fills that niche extremely nicely, but I definitely agree with you on the area denial, and that's kind of how I'd fit my math together on it.
...
Hwacha does all of its disable at once, then has a 14 second reload. It's also a potent kill weapon, as it can one-clip a Pyramidion. It is good at disable, but the enemy can simply rebuild their artemis faster than the Hwacha can reload and now you're the one permanently disabled. My idea was slower, but more consistent pure disable that isn't as easily countered but that doesn't double as a kill weapon since it would already be a potent and consistent disable weapon. It would also bring a new weapon type into the game, as all current shatter weapons either double for killing or double for balloon shredding. There is no gun that is purely a defensive option besides mines, and even those are used as kill weapons.
I also don't want the fish to get another powerful option, it already is everywhere in pubs and I'm tired of seeing it. Any heavy gun that has been too potent on a Goldfish has gotten nerfed (Heavy carronade has terrible shatter damage now, Hwacha has damage nerfs and I think lowered arcs, all from being good on the goldy), so it needs to be something that a Goldfish can't use to be oppressive.
I also specifically do NOT want it to be a pierce weapon. We already got a heavy gun with piercing, and you can tell the devs were afraid of it being good at actually taking down armor, because they made it have absolutely terrible damage output unless you use nothing but Lochnagar. And they're rightfully afraid of making a powerful piercing heavy gun, the heavy flak, the most powerful explosive weapon in the game, can be slotted right next to it.
If this enters as a piercing weapon, they'll likely do the same thing and make it another Minotaur that doesn't see play outside of newbies' and Jedi's ships.
-
A good argument, I will give you that. I can agree on an extended shatter weapon, decidedly more suppressive than a Hwatcha, but I sideways disagree on the Fish. I'm sick of seeing Hwatchafish, utterly sick of it. It's so overdone that it's just pointless to think of anything else. It's a go-to for any new captain or a vet captain who doesn't really know what to take (or is drunk).
However, I will agree. Something like this might be better off as a suppression weapon, rather than the pseudo-torpedo that the Hwatcha is (Slow moving, easily seen, semi-easy to avoid unless at point blank range). On a Fish, it would work perfectly as a flank harrass, if you extended the range adequately to make it moderately dangerous, and very defensive on a Spire or Gally. From the (fuzzy) math that I did earlier, I'd say increase the ammunition amount and the reload speed, but I'd give it a somewhat small AoE for each round. That way it would reward hits and not firing randomly into an area.
However, that doesn't solve the idea of any kind of actual heavy piercer. Yes, I know, "paired with the Typhon, too OP", but isn't that what the Galleon is there for? It's built to be a major weapons platform with an extremely deadly broadside, but dirt turning. A double Hwacha broadside with a gatling topdeck is more than enough to cause death if it's a 1v1, and even in a 2v1 with a full hwacha gally if the gunner and the engie are in good sync. Not changing an awful lot WITH a heavy piercer, and how often do you even see the Typhon anymore? I only see it on noob ships, joke ships, or Jedi's ship, simply because he pairs it with the Mino and it still takes forever to kill.
Hwo about this for a heavy piercer: An actual Flak weapon. A weapon that you can change the ranging on to change it's arming time, say, from 1000 meters down to 250 meters. Once it hits arming time, it projectile-casts in an orb around it, dealing a pitiful amount of damage per projectile sent out from the burst. You'd only have the ability to hit them with half of the payload of said round, making the damage, overall, pathetic, but harrassing enough to be dangerous. It'd basically be a long range, even less accurate gatling at that point, where every second shot is missing the target. Interesting dynamic, low damage but easy to hit with, sub-range to the Flak while still being acceptable close range.
Any better, in this event? Note, I'm talking about a new weapon here, not what the Bofors should be. I cede the field to you on that, it's a better mechanic than simply double-shotting with a little bit of piercing. I don't know if it should be double shatter, but I can agree with it.
-
Typhon sees play on some long range Galleons and the rare flak Spire. It's really good at what it does, the issues with has more to do with its platform than the actual gun.
As for the actual flak/airburst weapon, I like the idea. I've been hoping for a gun like that to be added for a while.
It might actually make for a more interesting, mid-range goldfish with side flaks to be possible if the damage can be applied reliably enough. Just have to be mindful of it not being too good a close range armor shredder that the devs seem to be really hesitant to put on a heavy gun.
-
Onlt the AoE would be Piercing, I think the direct would have to be something silly. I'm playing around with the idea of fire (Charges inside the round that detonate it into the shrapnel go off unpredictably when hitting a barrier), due to not wanting an explosive/piercer.
And the damage was going to be pretty much tiny, maybe 2-5 damage per projectile, with a smallish clip but quick reload. Diferent ammunition types would change the amount of projectiles cast, where normally it would be 14 (Omnidirectional projectile cast), while loading up Loch or such would drastically increase the projectile amount, depending on the damage percentage. So loading in Loch would jump the projectile count up to 31 and charged would increase it to 18.
My thoughts on the half-life for the projectiles is basically just the burst range. Once the projectiles would be cast, they'd have a half-life until they reach the end of burst range. Burst amunition, and AoE altering ammunition, of course, extends or reduces the half-lives of the projectiles. Arming time would be reversed on it, so that the range is determinal on the arming time, which is also determinal. I think something with an optional arming time, somthing changable in a way different than just loading in a different ammunition, would be pretty neat, and I've talked about it in two seperate weapon concepts I've worked on. I just think it's a mechanic Muse happened to overlook.
-
Okay Okay. Enough you two. Howard and I had a discussion about this weapon last night on the Devapp. Players wanted a heavy Gatling gun, but also wanted the original Heavy flak back. I brought up this topic for discussion. First things first,we agreed that this weapon if it was added would be added to Alliance. It doesn't really fit skirmish. Second the weapon would primarily be used for aircraft and to take down hull armor of enemy AI ships. Third and final point, that it would have a high DPS rate so it could take the roll of a heavy Gatling/flak and we could eliminate the word light Gatling and just call it a Gatling gun.
-
Ah the folly of a piercing heavy weapon... Well as long as it's fun and stays out of PvP that's all that matters
It's a shame that effort isn't put into content for Skirmish mode, one reason being that it's much easier to 'balance' for Alliance
In essence, it is time to stop worrying about making guns and ships that are unique, and start looking at more variety. It is far easier to look at something that is working, and say, "This is working. How can we make another a little differently?"
-
We were just discussing the potentiality of a new-ish weapon, and a potential edit to the Bofors.
Also, I have to talk to you about that burst-projectile-piercer. Trying to think of damage levels and such for it. Think it could really find a place in both Alliance and maaaaaybe Skirmish? With a lot of tweaking, but not letting it become the Mino.
-
Also, I have to talk to you about that burst-projectile-piercer. Trying to think of damage levels and such for it. Think it could really find a place in both Alliance and maaaaaybe Skirmish? With a lot of tweaking, but not letting it become the Mino.
Piercing heavy weapons aren't balanced and don't belong in skirmish. The taur is an exception because it's for disruption and is very slow. Its 18.1 second cycle is exceeded only by the flare, with 3.03 seconds between shots and a 9 second reload. Alliance is different because you choose the difficulty, and fun, not balance, is the goal
-
Hence why I kept saying after heavy, heavy tweaking. I know how the Mino was nerfed, even if I asn't there for it. But hear me out.
We all know how the mine launcher has a reverse arming time, correct? Flies out to a certain distance, and then it's a pure neutral, utterly dveastating weapon. Inside of that arming distance, it's a pretty powerful piercer, to be sure, but nowhere near as effective. Outside of that arming distance, you have the mine deployed, and it makes a great shield for defense, but you're not going to be able to do the same thing.
That's basically what I am proposing. A weapon that, inside of arming distance, is negligible, and outside is not even threatening. It is not a direct weapon at all, and using it as such is simply wasting it that way. That's also why I state that it's a projectile cast weapon once it hits arming, instead of a burst weapon. The idea behind it is to hit with the projectiles that are cast out from when it bursts, which are going to be sent in every direction around the burst area. You'll only hit with, say, maybe 40% of the projectiles from the burst. Each of the projectiles from the burst are supposed to be pitiful damage on their own, around 2-3 piercing or so, giving you swarm damage. The swarm damage is what the weapon I propose would be based on, not AoE. That would be much too powerful, period.
I'm not trying to attack, just to clarify if it came across as, and I fully admit, you are much more experienced than I am, and I do know your argument. Pairing any kind of heavy piercer with the Typhon, or even the Hwacha, is insanely powerful. But the theory behind this is a highly skill-based, defensive weapon. Inside of it's arming distance, it's ineffective. Outside it's arming distance, it's useless. Right at it's arming distance is when it's supposed to be effective, similar to the mine launcher.
I'll drop the subject, however. The Bofors is the one getting consideration, and mine would be superfluous against it, especially in Alliance. Skirmish, like you said, it would get too much outcry against, despite offering something new. Perhaps there's a place for it in the Shatter department.
-
Please make a new thread for your discussion^
-
Apologies Ace. Didn't mean to derail it like that. I'll work on my proposition and make a new post on it. I need to actually get down to actually writing it down is the only issue.
-
I'm not specifically addressing either of your gun proposals, I'm explaining why I dislike a new piercing heavy weapon for Alliance. If people want one that's fine, but ideally it would be in both games - which is very difficult to balance with piercing. There's a heavy piercing thread every 6 months or so and it never goes anywhere, so I'd recommend rethinking damage types if you'd like it to evolve from the hypothetical
Making a gun isn't simple. It costs money. Hiring graphic designers is one of the larger costs for an indie studio like Muse. They need to pick and choose their projects, and guns made for Skirmish are ideal because they can be used in both games. Skirmish is dying partially due to lack of content, and I believe focusing on Skirmish will help retain the player base and bolster the 2017 release of Alliance
-
Going back to the shatter idea for the bofors, I was thinking about the heavy carronade shatter nerf and how it has affected the Galleon and Spire. The heavy carronade was viable for both of them in the past due to being able to disable guns as well as pop balloons, I recall seeing some very old galleon loadout guides with hwacha-carronade mixes. However, because the goldfish was overpowered with it, it had its shatter removed. This means both the Spire and Galleon are forced to take the Hwacha if they want a heavy shatter gun, since the heavy carronade cannot even reliably take out light guns in one shot thanks to heavy nerf (unless very close so most pellets hit), making it effectively a light carronade with only two shots in that role. A new heavy shatter could fill the void on the other end of the spectrum, returning a tool to the Galleon and Spire.
If you really don't like double shatter, how about a weak flechette, low enough that you would have to dump 2 or three clips into a balloon to pop it without any repairs. This keeps the anti-air theme and gives something else to sink the rounds into if there are no components in arc. As for which would be the AoE, shatter is obviously the stronger as flechette cannot damage components. However, there appears to be some grumbling about Burst overuse, so flechette as AoE might be more interesting. It puts a limit on the effective range to disable guns since hits must be direct (giving a higher skill cap and encouraging heavy clip use). If the AoE is large enough to be significant, incendiary might also be usable to harness that burst radius to start more fires.
I should formalize this and think out stats.
-
Here have an awesome video on this awesome swedish weapon! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqM1PS1YTo0
-
Ace, did you take a look at the convo on this from, god, ages ago?
What were your thoughts on it?