Messages

1

Feedback and Suggestions / Gun Ports

« on: August 27, 2013, 03:19:08 am »

I think something that could spice up the gameplay and expand new ship design/customization possibilities would be gun ports on ships. Essentially, a particular set of guns on a given ship would be protected by the armor and hull (closed ports) until someone mounts any of said guns (opened ports). This would prevent your ship from being completely disarmed from a distance and allow engineers to focus on more defensive repairs (hull, balloon, engines) while you close the distance. This would also translate into not losing your guns the instant you rebuild them, thus allowing you to fully repair them before using them again. The catch is that it would take an amount of time for the gun port to open, so you couldn't just immediately open fire once you mount the gun.

I've got some expansion to this (different ways it could be implemented and stuff) but I wanted to just throw this out here first before making some long-winded, be-all-end-all post.

2

The Pit / Re: Weapons that suck

« on: August 24, 2013, 03:08:39 am »

3

Gameplay / Re: GUNS & GUNNER SKILLS Balance Discussion v1.3.1

« on: August 23, 2013, 03:24:54 pm »

Ah, I guess I missed out on that discussion.

4

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Sound for being hit by the chaingun

« on: August 23, 2013, 02:12:12 pm »

I am in full support of this, for the sake of gameplay and immersion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMP11swbhpM

5

Gameplay / Re: GUNS & GUNNER SKILLS Balance Discussion v1.3.1

« on: August 23, 2013, 01:57:02 pm »

What if each class had base stat advantages over the other two? I think it would help if being a gunner meant you had things like decreased jitter, increased yaw/pitch speed, and decreased reload time just because you were a gunner. The idea is that, if you spent your career firing guns, then you should be better at firing guns than the other two classes.

6

Feedback and Suggestions / Please fix the spectator camera

« on: August 22, 2013, 01:36:21 am »

Whenever I'm flying around in freelook mode, the way the camera turns is extremely odd. Just imagine in real life if your eyes were positioned 100 meters behind your head, so, when you turn to look to the left, your eyes are swept over to your right side, the same distance away from you. That's what it's like in freelook mode, and it is just not natural at all. In fact, it's down right frustrating to use and nauseating as hell. I'll get right up close to a ship or two, try to turn around and strafe to see the other side (like a normal spectator camera in like every other game in existence), only to find myself on the other side of a mountain that I saw in the distance. Even if I don't strafe and simply turn around, the camera still ends up a long distance from what I was looking at.

Please position the camera as if it were at the center of the turn, like the PoV from a player on a ship.

7

Gameplay / Re: GUNS & GUNNER SKILLS Balance Discussion v1.3.1

« on: August 21, 2013, 05:16:05 pm »

I'm curious what you have planned

I'd like to see the flak cannons becoming medium-long range support weapons. A spotting ally can get in close and take down the armor, allowing the support ship to use its flack cannons to hammer away at the base hull health (not armor). Make the arming time high enough that the weapon is almost useless at close to short range, which is where mortars would be dominant.

8

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Match replays

« on: August 20, 2013, 05:49:17 pm »

Yeah, game replays are usually just a log of the actions taken and the events that occur. It makes for an extremely small file.

As a result, the game engine itself has to be used in order to view it.

9

Gameplay / Re: Firing mechanism and damage explanation

« on: August 20, 2013, 05:36:45 pm »

Ah, okay.

So, if Weapon X had hit the destroyed engine directly, then the AoE still would only apply once to the hull?

10

Gameplay / Re: Firing mechanism and damage explanation

« on: August 20, 2013, 04:09:57 pm »

Alright, cool. I think I understand now.

So, if I hit something, the direct damage affects only the component which was directly hit, but the AoE damage affects the component which was hit and anything else within the radius, but only once per each component. What I'm wondering is, if AoE damage that hits a component that is destroyed transfers to the armor (and then to the hull if the armor is gone), then does that mean that AoE damage could potentially affect the hull more than once?

For example, let's say Weapon X deals 50 Direct and 50 AoE damages. The SS Roflsauce has had an engine and a gun destroyed. If Weapon X manages to hit the hull directly (50 direct + 50 AoE) and then the destroyed engine and gun are within AoE radius (50 AoE each), then does that mean a total of 200 damage (50 direct + 150 AoE) hits the hull? (I've ignored modifiers for the sake of simplicity.)

11

Gameplay / Re: Firing mechanism and damage explanation

« on: August 20, 2013, 03:22:05 pm »

I've read over this a few times and I have a question, but before I ask it, I need some clarification.

Damage transfer only happens when the component you hit has already been destroyed, right?
Then the damage first transfers to the armor (unless it was the armor that was hit) and then to the hull, right?
And a multiplier isn't applied until it gets to the component that it actually does damage to, after which it applies the multiplier for that component, right?

12

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Guildships :)

« on: August 20, 2013, 12:08:00 pm »

2 galleons held together with duck tape?

A galleon with a Squid taped to the back. Upside-down.

Two Pyramidions attached by their blind sides, constantly spinning in circles.

13

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Ship decorations

« on: August 20, 2013, 12:04:20 pm »

Totally for the idea of flying flags.

I almost like the idea of being able to upload your own flags for your ship, but then again that could be abused . . .

*thinks back to some of the most repulsive tf2 sprays he's ever seen*

14

Gameplay / Re: Typhon, Heavy Flak Discussion.

« on: August 19, 2013, 05:15:29 pm »

Why would you want the lumberjack to be pure explosive? That'd leave us with three explosive heavy guns, one of which would be ridiculously overpowered.

Like I said, it's just a random idea. My main focus was on making the flak cannons more interesting, not so much changing the other stuff.

15

Gameplay / Re: Typhon, Heavy Flak Discussion.

« on: August 19, 2013, 04:10:19 pm »

Idea puke time:

If I could mess with the flaks, I'd give them both explosive direct damage and shattering AoE damage, make them medium-long range weapons with much less jitter (if any), give them an arming time that makes them useless at short range, make their clips 3 to 4 times larger, and then balance damage as needed. Basically, I'd like to see them in a long-range support role (engine/gun disablement and hull destruction).

This of course would create overlap with the Mercury and Artemis. So, I would make the Mercury either piercing only or piercing with a very very small shatter radius. As for the Artemis . . . idk, maybe we could do something whacky with it, like a wire-guided function where you have to turn the gun to guide the missile to its target (tech was developed for this by the germans in WWII, but it's probably just a little too high tech lol)

Make both mortars explosive only (direct and AoE), eliminate their arming time, add a touch of jitter to them, and cut their range down some, so they're limited to melee-short range engagements.

Just throwing things on the table to make flaks more interesting *shrugs*