1
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Helm rope - Tool or keybind suggestion
« on: September 05, 2013, 03:43:55 pm »
I like this idea very much. I can think of a few different ways this would be really good on the pyra and the junker.
News:
Log in using the email address and password you selected when registering in-game. Forgot your password?
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
2
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Lock out noobs
« on: September 04, 2013, 12:09:19 am »
What if completing the tutorials took you from rank 0 to rank 1? (Or 1 to 2). Then we can look at a player and nicely suggest: Hey, it looks like you haven't done the tutorials. You probably will have a better time if you do.
3
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: In-Game Map Distance Scale
« on: September 02, 2013, 10:23:46 am »
How about if the distance only showed up when looking through the spotting tool? A pilot or person on a gun might call out that they need the range and an engineer could check 
.
.
4
Gameplay / Re: Ship Tier List
« on: September 01, 2013, 05:48:13 pm »
Flak on the fish can still be good, but only with an ally dedicated to anti armor.
I had great success playing a flak fish (carronades on sides) when my ally took a double gatling pyramidion. We had a very mobile killing team going for a while, though it was a bit tough for me if my ally bit it.
Its not exactly optimal, but can be fun.
I had great success playing a flak fish (carronades on sides) when my ally took a double gatling pyramidion. We had a very mobile killing team going for a while, though it was a bit tough for me if my ally bit it.
Its not exactly optimal, but can be fun.
5
Gameplay / Re: Ships with the power to kill
« on: September 01, 2013, 03:09:41 pm »
I'll try to put this diplomatically: that chart completely undermines your position. You've put up a neat chart, gave it a sarcastic comment about how it backs you up, and completely ignored what the chart is actually showing. Observe that the red bar is longer. Guess what? Thats time that a disabler can successfully disable before getting blown up. And once it gets a disable, the kill ship's bar grows enormously. Yes the blue bar grows proportionally longer. But the scenario is more complicated than just trading DPS. Its all about how long it takes to disable, and the effect that disable has on the other ships killing power.
Throw in allies and the situation still favors more hull. Example scenario: Red team has two kill ships. Blue team has 1 kill, 1 disable. If they go 'man to man' (not optimal, but usually what ends up happening), then the disable ship now actually has the opportunity to disable one ship and help with the other: the kill vs kill fight is not already over. Other example scenario: focused fire. The kill ships bear down on 1 of blue team. At the moment this is an instant destruction of blue ship. With more hull health, the ship has time to climb/dive or disable or tar or something before being blown up. In that time, the ally can engage one of the other ships, either disabling or forcing them in turn to break off.
We are both trying to do the same thing: make disablers more attractive. However, there is a strong limit on how much you can buff disabling weapons: if you make the other side so completely screwed that they are not having fun, then that is bad game design and it will never stay. If however you make it so that disabling can tip the balance, but both sides still have fun, then you can have disabling be competitive. To me buffing disablers is the first option and will never happen. Lowering the kill ships power a little is the second option.
Throw in allies and the situation still favors more hull. Example scenario: Red team has two kill ships. Blue team has 1 kill, 1 disable. If they go 'man to man' (not optimal, but usually what ends up happening), then the disable ship now actually has the opportunity to disable one ship and help with the other: the kill vs kill fight is not already over. Other example scenario: focused fire. The kill ships bear down on 1 of blue team. At the moment this is an instant destruction of blue ship. With more hull health, the ship has time to climb/dive or disable or tar or something before being blown up. In that time, the ally can engage one of the other ships, either disabling or forcing them in turn to break off.
We are both trying to do the same thing: make disablers more attractive. However, there is a strong limit on how much you can buff disabling weapons: if you make the other side so completely screwed that they are not having fun, then that is bad game design and it will never stay. If however you make it so that disabling can tip the balance, but both sides still have fun, then you can have disabling be competitive. To me buffing disablers is the first option and will never happen. Lowering the kill ships power a little is the second option.
6
Gameplay / Re: Ships with the power to kill
« on: September 01, 2013, 01:50:14 pm »
Making engagements last longer is not breaking more things. I think the way things currently work is "broken" - a good crew on a pyra can kill every ship except the Galleon in 1 pass. Maybe this is just a fundamental difference between us, but I think the disabling weapons work just fine. Could some use a few tweaks? Yes. Flamethrowers are a little weak imo, and the Hwacha might need a tweak. However, you can drop a ship out of the sky with 1 clip of the light carronade up close (or blow out the engines/gun), knock out the guns of any ship at range with the artemis, and drop/kill a ship with the lumberjack.
What makes these awesome weapons not work in a build is that killing is too effective. Disabling ship can already knock out engines and guns and pop balloons with relative ease. The only way to buff disablers is to make them basically be able to "lock down" an enemy so they can't do anything (Heavy Carronade can basically do this, though there are ways to get away from blenderfish). To be honest with you, thats never going to happen because its such a terrible experience for the team on the receiving end. Its bad gameplay.
You say you want to make disabling ships able to operate with relative safety by themselves? The answer to that is to make it so they have a chance to disable before being killed!
Yes people will still use piercing explosive. They always will. It is the most direct, brute force way to get kills. However, if you make it mildly less effective then disabling has a chance. Not only that, but if killing is nerfed then teamwork is buffed. One of the key strategies of the disabler is 'disable one, help ally with other'. But thats not needed at the moment because killing is just so effective - the ally is either dead or won by the time you have disabled.
The reason I gave you piercing-explosive builds is because that was how you seemed to be judging a ship playable. I personally fly a carronade/mortar/carronade squid because I find it more fun. As to the Mobula... it is not a weak ship. At all. It is very hard to crew on, requires a different philosophy (kill now, repair later), and is very weapon placement sensitive. However, in probably 30 matches crewing the above build, only once did it lose in a 1v1 situation (and is even better at long range support).
What makes these awesome weapons not work in a build is that killing is too effective. Disabling ship can already knock out engines and guns and pop balloons with relative ease. The only way to buff disablers is to make them basically be able to "lock down" an enemy so they can't do anything (Heavy Carronade can basically do this, though there are ways to get away from blenderfish). To be honest with you, thats never going to happen because its such a terrible experience for the team on the receiving end. Its bad gameplay.
You say you want to make disabling ships able to operate with relative safety by themselves? The answer to that is to make it so they have a chance to disable before being killed!
Yes people will still use piercing explosive. They always will. It is the most direct, brute force way to get kills. However, if you make it mildly less effective then disabling has a chance. Not only that, but if killing is nerfed then teamwork is buffed. One of the key strategies of the disabler is 'disable one, help ally with other'. But thats not needed at the moment because killing is just so effective - the ally is either dead or won by the time you have disabled.
The reason I gave you piercing-explosive builds is because that was how you seemed to be judging a ship playable. I personally fly a carronade/mortar/carronade squid because I find it more fun. As to the Mobula... it is not a weak ship. At all. It is very hard to crew on, requires a different philosophy (kill now, repair later), and is very weapon placement sensitive. However, in probably 30 matches crewing the above build, only once did it lose in a 1v1 situation (and is even better at long range support).
7
Gameplay / Re: Ships with the power to kill
« on: September 01, 2013, 01:01:32 pm »
Hmm - I strongly disagree that nerfing killing will make the game boring, at least to me. In fact, I'd argue the opposite! I find the most exciting parts of the game are firing on an enemy ship, running around like mad repairing things, out maneuvering an enemy in combat, or even desperately trying to escape. At the moment 80% of the game is either flying back to the engagement or flying around hunting for the enemy... not very interesting imo. From engage to kill takes what, 30 seconds for a pickup game? 15 seconds with an expert crew? A little more for enemy galleons? Sure there is satisfaction in watching enemies evaporate, but I want my combat to last a little longer than a single pass in a Pyra.
I want to point at that the Squid and Mobula are not at all weak. The Squid can mount the piercing/explosive combo with just a little bit of attention from the pilot (gatling front, mortar/flak side - I'm torn between the two) and get kills very quickly. In the right hands they are much much harder to kill than Pyras/Junkers.
The Mobula just seems weak because only a few people have figured out how to play it effectively. I've run into several builds (artemis, flak, merc, gat, artemis is one, or go for a gat/gat/mortar close in constant trifecta) that require an expert crew and absolutely Destroy enemy ships. Even without a buffed balloon or pilot tools you can dodge lumberjack/flak/hwacha shots with ease at range.
I hope the Spire gets a hull buff - I know its a "glass cannon" but I call shenanigans. It doesn't have that much more firepower than anything else, give it a strong hull to compensate for its massive hitbox.
I want to point at that the Squid and Mobula are not at all weak. The Squid can mount the piercing/explosive combo with just a little bit of attention from the pilot (gatling front, mortar/flak side - I'm torn between the two) and get kills very quickly. In the right hands they are much much harder to kill than Pyras/Junkers.
The Mobula just seems weak because only a few people have figured out how to play it effectively. I've run into several builds (artemis, flak, merc, gat, artemis is one, or go for a gat/gat/mortar close in constant trifecta) that require an expert crew and absolutely Destroy enemy ships. Even without a buffed balloon or pilot tools you can dodge lumberjack/flak/hwacha shots with ease at range.
I hope the Spire gets a hull buff - I know its a "glass cannon" but I call shenanigans. It doesn't have that much more firepower than anything else, give it a strong hull to compensate for its massive hitbox.
8
Gameplay / Re: Ships with the power to kill
« on: August 31, 2013, 01:00:04 pm »Like I said in the Pyra OP thread, disablers need a strong buff.
...
Something we discovered when we tested triple hull health was that it made disabling weapons more viable. When the killing weapons couldn't kill so easily on the initial charge (1 clip explosive = dead) the disablers had their chance. That said, triple health was too much - the matches just took a really long time, even though we were all having a fantastic time. A general hull health buff might do the trick, or slightly lowering the damage explosives do to hull.
9
Q&A / Re: Gunner with buff hammer?
« on: August 31, 2013, 12:54:43 am »
Disabling is very common . If an engineer needs to repair the gunners gun while he sits there doing nothing, then you have a 3 man crew rather than 4. Then there are situations where you need 2 people camping the hull and 1 rebuilding engines/balloon... The best thing to do would be the pilot jump off and repair and the gunner take the wheel. Its a possibility, but very complicated and not a good idea.
The kicker is that you can't keep your gun constantly buffed and firing. It takes too long to buff compared to the reload time of almost every gun. You can get a hell of a first strike, but then its pretty much useless :/.
If you want an advanced setup, try running 3 engineers, 2 with buff. One mallet/spanner/buff, one wrench/buff/fire, one standard. Put each buff on gun duty (out of combat hull/engine buffs) and watch your opponent evaporate.
. If an engineer needs to repair the gunners gun while he sits there doing nothing, then you have a 3 man crew rather than 4. Then there are situations where you need 2 people camping the hull and 1 rebuilding engines/balloon... The best thing to do would be the pilot jump off and repair and the gunner take the wheel. Its a possibility, but very complicated and not a good idea.The kicker is that you can't keep your gun constantly buffed and firing. It takes too long to buff compared to the reload time of almost every gun. You can get a hell of a first strike, but then its pretty much useless :/.
If you want an advanced setup, try running 3 engineers, 2 with buff. One mallet/spanner/buff, one wrench/buff/fire, one standard. Put each buff on gun duty (out of combat hull/engine buffs) and watch your opponent evaporate.
10
Gameplay / Re: Countering the pyramidion gatling/mortar setup
« on: August 27, 2013, 09:52:31 am »
Yeah that ship is scary good. Some of that though is people not knowing how to approach it - it has a very narrow firing plane for the art/mercs. Ambush is really the best way to deal with it (easier said than done).
11
Guides / Re: Aboard a Junker
« on: August 20, 2013, 05:12:28 pm »
Good guide, although I agree with Pickle on the criticisms - its a very maneuverable ship that you can thread through tons of tight spots. I prefer lower deck gatlings so that they are firing at all times. My piloting loadout: Charged, Spanner, Kerosene, Tar, Altitude (depends on map and if enemies bring Lumberjack). I think its one of the more challenging and rewarding ships to pilot because of how valuable it is to be off the helm at times.
12
Gameplay / Re: GUNS & GUNNER SKILLS Balance Discussion v1.3.1
« on: August 17, 2013, 06:17:56 pm »
The Artemis is my favorite gun - I think it is perfect as is and needs no changes. Its not the most powerful and certainly not overpowered, but I think many people vastly underestimate its effectiveness. Its AOE lets you take out several components at once (the whole engine cluster on a Pyramidion will go down with 1 clip) and its explosive is a perfect long range complement to the mercury. Yes its biggest weakness is its poor zoom, but I can hit targets with burst at 1km (good conditions, to be fair).
Ah - your not using it because its the only gun that will do in the slot. You're using it for the specific purpose of coordinated, long range support fire. The side gun slots on a Mobula for example make excellent spots for carronades to pop harassers - however, the carronades can't hit the same target. Artemis' on the other hand can, and you can use them in those slots to great effect with a third gun... but you also lose the close range potential. Its just a design choice and strength of the gun, no more and no less. I think the wide arc is entirely appropriate on the Artemis because it is in essence a support gun.
...
Personally I'm of the opinion that if you only use the gun because it happens to be the only gun with a wide enough angle to let you shoot 1 more gun simultaneously, there's either something fundamentally wrong with the gun, or the ship's design that allows it to be used that way (e.g. either the gun is OP for letting you fire one more gun at an angle you weren't supposed to, or the ship's design is wonky for not letting you fire any other gun in that direction)
Ah - your not using it because its the only gun that will do in the slot. You're using it for the specific purpose of coordinated, long range support fire. The side gun slots on a Mobula for example make excellent spots for carronades to pop harassers - however, the carronades can't hit the same target. Artemis' on the other hand can, and you can use them in those slots to great effect with a third gun... but you also lose the close range potential. Its just a design choice and strength of the gun, no more and no less. I think the wide arc is entirely appropriate on the Artemis because it is in essence a support gun.
13
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Displaying fields of fire.
« on: August 17, 2013, 06:52:14 am »
Ah, I think you may just be misunderstanding the suggestion - this isn't about helping the pilot get guns in arc while flying. This is a suggestion just for the design screen to aid in making builds with overlapping fields of fire. None of these arcs would show up in game - the gunners would still need to tell the pilot to turn if they were out of arc.
As a point of reference, there are 161051 different gun combinations on a Mobula - realistically its 32768 when taking out flares, harpoons, and mine launchers. Even further drastic reductions come from common sense building principles. Checking out which combinations give double and triple firing spots quickly on the several hundred interesting combos sounds like a valuable thing to me *shrug*.
As a point of reference, there are 161051 different gun combinations on a Mobula - realistically its 32768 when taking out flares, harpoons, and mine launchers. Even further drastic reductions come from common sense building principles. Checking out which combinations give double and triple firing spots quickly on the several hundred interesting combos sounds like a valuable thing to me *shrug*.
14
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Displaying fields of fire.
« on: August 16, 2013, 09:07:25 pm »The solution to this one is easy. Its called sandbox and memory retention.
Ehhhh.... that takes a 1 minute task and makes it a 3 hours one. Its fine to test the visual reference for where to hold a ship to fire a trifecta, its an entirely different matter to try out the literally hundreds of weapon combinations looking for overlaps.
15
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Gatling Tracers
« on: August 13, 2013, 11:52:16 pm »
Yeah... the tracers really really DON'T line up with where you are firing. I've had many different times when I'm nailing the enemy with the gatling and heavy clip - leading a bunch to do so - and the tracers are no where near the enemy.