Messages

1

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Design Paradigm, Game balance, and Gunner vs Engineer.

« on: May 27, 2014, 05:56:02 am »

I know passive skills aren't the desired idea, and this may have been suggested elsewhere, but what if gunners repaired weapons automatically when using them.  I'm not suggesting that it works continually, but only when the gun is being reloaded.  Obviously some weapons have higher hit points than others and finding a good balance on the amount repaired would require testing.

Just for example purpose, say gunner autoheals... 20 hp per .5 seconds while the gun is reloading.  This means on Gatlin guns, you would heal very little, but on say, the Hwachi Rockey launcher (about 8 seconds reload) you could heal a respectable amount (and those things take a long time to fix because of their high hit points when you have to hop off.)

As I said, the numbers would need tweaking and it would  have to be determined if it's on ongoing effect, meaning it occurs each time unit you are on the gun while it's reloading or if you could actually start reloading and jump off to boost the repair with tools as long as you can hop back on before the reload is complete (similar to how loading special ammo works now, just as long as you're in place before that last click).  With this method, the game would just determine the total reload time and if the gunner was in place just assign the repair points.

The second methods a bit abusable since an engineer or anyone could just set a gun to reload and as long as a gunner hopped in the seat in time it would be a free boost of repair.  Better in my opinion to have it cycle during the reload process only when a gunner is manning it.

I think this would be a fair buff without stepping on engineers' toes or overshadowing their talents.  Certainly if flying around without enemies nearby you could start reloading and thus repair the weapon but unlike a constant auto repair, there are actually times when you get caught with your pants down while reloading when an enemy comes out of nowhere and your pilot is yelling, 'Take the shot!' and you just have to sit and wait out the 6 seconds.

Also, it won't stop the need for helpful engineers since it has no effect on fixing destroyed weapons or being knocked off a gun with more than 8 fire charges.

2

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Call for Gunner Ammo Ideas

« on: May 27, 2014, 05:10:52 am »

Okay, so I don't have the time to read and reply to all of this, but I didn't notice when you mentioned it only has a 25% chance to go off.

Really, so you didn't take time to even read the suggestion before declaring it bad.  It's the very first sentence of the description.  You quoted it in your reply.  Instead of just letting the suggestion sit, you got all negative and started going off on a rant which makes other people believe your misleading remarks.  Now Sammy B.T. thinks the ammo works with flamers, which the description clearly states it does not.  All you did was force someone to take time to correct your misleading statements because they gave you the benefit of the doubt that you actually had the basic, common courtesy to read a post, and actually think before quoting and bashing on it.

The flamer would be ridiculous.

Yes, that would be powerful, but as stated, flamers use particles, not projectiles.  They don't impact they pass through and as such, would be hugely overpowered which is why the ammo doesn't work with flamers.

As for implementation, that's not the point.  It was a suggestion, and even if not viable as presented, it could at least spark some ideas or creativity elsewhere.  Who's going to want to put forth what might be a reasonable idea if they're just going to get ragged on by people not even taking the time to give them the common courtesy of being thankful they took an interest in trying to help and improve the game when requested.

3

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Call for Gunner Ammo Ideas

« on: May 26, 2014, 09:20:42 pm »

Other than the potential of it being unbalanced, which everything has the potential to be, I'm not seeing the Armageddon you're describing.  This is a thread for ideas, if the numbers don't work, they can be tweaked, if the burst radius on weapons turns out too large, the rounds can reduce burst size.

Say I take your ammo and apply it to Hades.

As for your Hades example, you've taken one of the heaviest weapons with a large burst radius (which is obviously what this ammo would work well with, not a Mercury Field Gun), which just so happens to fall in an arc which, except at close range will almost always drop on the balloon (where no one will ever be.)  Even if you did hit the hull, you would have to catch a character in the effect range, and they would have to be unattached to a gun or helm (which even engineers can man).  Furthermore, there is never a guarantee that it does anything at all.  Even if you were say that 1 out 4 shots definitely moves a person (and that would be untrue) there's no guarantee that they they're blown off the ship or even that it had no effect on their performance because they were in a 6 to 9 second round time from just hitting a component with wrench or mallet and thus able to realign with no effect of their performance.  Also, if your gunner is dropping 4 mortar rounds dead on where it would catch the same area, then they're a crack shot or you're right against the enemy and you should be going for damage.

As for hindering a gunner; against this ammo, a gunner is actually less likely to ever be unattached from their weapon since these rounds would cause reduced damage to the gun they're on, meaning they're less likely to get thrown off when it's destroyed or spend more time unattached repairing the damage, since it would take half as many swings to fix any damage, and that's just using a -50% damage example.  And that's before even factoring in a 3 in 4 chance that the round does not even affect them.

Mines and Lumberjack using that effect on players... No. End of discussion.

Sorry, no.  Assuming that it takes 4 hits to 'proc' the 25% chance of Concussion, then your ship just flew into 4 mines.  You've got a lot more to complain about and it has nothing to do with this ammo type.  Even then, you've only taken the damage of hitting two mines.  Also, this ammo has no affect on the mine launcher's clip size since it fires one mine at a time.  I don't even think you could try and hit 4 mores on purpose to make your example even valid.  If your assertion is that your opponent is able to pinpoint 4 mines into your flight path through sheer skill then they would be using normal rounds for a kill, not these, which are a delaying/attrition tactic.

As for the Lumberjack, that's a primarily balloon disabling weapon.  Since it's highly unlikely anyone's standing on the balloon, only a hit on the underside of the balloon might affect someone (depending on ship configuration)  Since mortars arc down they're more likely to land atop or along the side of the balloon.  There's a chance you might claim you could cruise under and fire upwards to catch the target as the mortar rises but then you're likely getting within the range where the mortar has no AoE.  But taking it to the extreme, that you're an expert marksman and do land a mortar on the hull and it has a burst radius... Great!  That's what this ammo is for.  Except you just did 50% of the already low direct damage of the weapon to hulls and components (and cut it's phenomenal damage against balloons to half) and have a 1 in 4 chance that maybe an enemy crewman get skipped a meter or two over assuming they weren't manning a gun.  Sure, the potential is there but the weapons you're using as an example wouldn't be better off than normal rounds.

In fact, in almost all cases, it's better to use normal rounds than these, which are way less efficient except in a few cases where they might work well.  But since those cases are quite rare or unlikely, that means classes other than Gunners can't risk taking this ammo as their one option.  Which means, this ammo type is exactly the kind of example of something only a Gunner might be able to bring to table in a crew.  And if it turns out it's not useful, they still have their other two ammo types or normal as always.

That's the point of the thread.  There's obviously testing going on and things can get tweaked.  I don't know why you would assume that any idea is just going to be tossed into the game slipshod.  Other than a claim that 'It takes away character choice!' (Like your choice not wear a safety harness on a flying brick tethered to a gas-filled balloon.)  Everything else is able to be tested and tweaked.  As for, '...taking spotters away.'  There really isn't any reason not to take the Spyglass (rangefinder being the only option.)  This actually adds another choice for anyone other than the pilot (which is everyone else.)

4

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Call for Gunner Ammo Ideas

« on: May 26, 2014, 04:59:37 pm »

That said, I don't think it's a good idea.  I can't imagine it would feel fun to be on the receiving end of it.

Oh... gosh.  I'm sorry.  I didn't realize that in the entire history of the world in warfare and weapons design this is the criteria we established for weaponry; whether the target enjoys it.

Obviously the numbers are workable, but since it's only based off burst radius (of which each weapon has a different one and they can't be boosted with burst rounds since you'd be using these rounds) then you'd need a sizable round, that burst next to a character ( a hard target to hit since most weapons with appreciable burst have garbage accuracy for human-sized targets) and then there's only a 25% chance it pushes them to the edge, of the burst (and most places on a ship your can't fall off even if you tried jumping.)

I sure don't enjoy being on the receiving end of a flamethrower barrage, but it's there, serving it's purpose.  When I think of starting multiple fires on a ship and making engineers sweat and run around trying to time their extinguishers with the repair swings of other engineers their discomfort makes me smile.

I didn't realize this thread was for 'comforting' suggestions on ammo.  Perhaps you prefer the Barrel of Monkeys round?  If it strikes the hull, dozens of tiny monkey avatars cover the ship, racing back and forth and covering the eyes of any gunners.  Hilarity ensues.
Or you prefer to use the Two-ply rounds, so not only can those pirates trying to rob your ship, rape your female crew members, and plunder your wreckage enjoy the decorative streamers coming off their ship they can be soothed by the light scent of aloe?

Also, if you don't like the risk that one gunner might be choosing to fire substandard rounds just to annoy you, take the Safety harness tool and laugh all day long as not a damn thing happens to you and you easily fix all the piddly damage being done with a simple spanner tool.

5

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Call for Gunner Ammo Ideas

« on: May 26, 2014, 04:16:11 pm »

Concussion rounds
Lowers damage by 50%, increases clip size 25%.

Any characters caught within the AoE/Burst radius of the shot have a 25% chance to be pushed to the edge of it, possibly off the ship.
This does not affect any character on the helm or on a gun, as they are considered anchored or holding on.  This means that engineers will be affected most often as they're typically the ones running around deck banging on things.

It should come with a distinctive sound, either when it 'procs' and pushes someone or while being fired to differentiate the skipping and jumping of the character from lag.  It should not work with the flamer as that uses particles that pass through everything, but even with the gatlin it could be useful since, despite the small burst from the rounds, multiple hits could still jostle a character unnervingly while trying to aim their tools.

This leads to a new passive equipment called, Safety harness, which prevents being moved by concussion rounds and also halves the falling time it takes before respawning when falling off a ship (regardless of whether it was caused by concussion effects or just falling off.)  As for whether it should by Pilot gear (which breaks a paradigm of only spotting equipment being usable off the helm) or Engineer gear is up for debate, I think it should be pilot gear since it would give a real choice between spyglass or not and engineers basically need their own slots for actual tools.