Messages

1

The Docks / Re: Zill's Merry Men

« on: May 17, 2017, 06:51:43 am »

A bump for Merriment! OP has been updated and we are accepting new applicants as of this post! Check it out: https://gunsoficarus.com/community/forum/index.php/topic,1216.msg20156.html#msg20156

Clear Skies.

2

General Discussion / Re: My renewed argument for Free to play

« on: May 11, 2017, 07:27:07 pm »

Well said Naoura. While I have no right to claim I know what all it takes to make a game like Guns and keep it ticking, I definitely lost my way between the initial kickstarter hype for adventure mode and here. I carve out as much content as i possibly can from the current Alliance, but want for more.

And in that context, I really can't say if free-to-play for Online would really do much for the current status quo. I imagine with all the sales and the fact we've been here for years, just about anyone who would of found Guns pvp interesting would already own it. May net more then a sale in terms of a population buff, but it'll bleed out if the roots of the current issues aren't addressed. My 2 cents.

Also,

Definition of end times may differ person to person.  If you consider this population weve had for the last year a healthy active community, then it is not dead.  But if I start seeing the same people every single time I play the game, sorry to say that means no growth which means only a handlful are keeping it active. 

That's fair. Perhaps mine is a vain hope.

You know what's great for building a community? Stifling open conversation about why its dying.

Aye, and sarcasm and insult add such depth to forums.

3

General Discussion / Re: My renewed argument for Free to play

« on: May 11, 2017, 11:45:02 am »

Lets keep things civil and on topic guys.

Too much doom and gloom here...I remember days where the average pop was ~30. Call me an optimist, but I'd hate to see Guns die with final conversation like this. I'm not buying the "end times" talk.

4

The Lounge / Re: Prove you're oldfag

« on: March 03, 2017, 11:31:06 am »

I feel like my post would be too long...

5

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Controlling A.I

« on: February 08, 2017, 11:00:53 am »

Individual control of AI would be swell, even with the generic orders we have now. At least a step in the right direction.

Biggest issue I see with AI on a Mobula/Spire/Galleon/Junker is option overload and AI paths. Option overload being the amount of guns and the AI just using whatever has arc if told to shoot something. Paths being no stamina usage for movement (to my knowledge) on large ships and their lack of parkour.

While making AI super customizable would be cool, I don't think it's that feasible given their scope. I doubt Muse want us to have that kind of control because then we could make them better than a lot of players, which leads to worse conditions for newer players. A little more use out of them would be nice, but within reason.

6

Gameplay / Re: Burst ammo, oh no. Artemis, why you so good?

« on: November 18, 2016, 10:27:07 am »

Bumping to raise the awareness. Want to see what people think of my revised changes to burst ammo.

7

General Discussion / Re: On the subject of vote kick...

« on: November 18, 2016, 10:23:59 am »

CA Mods do in fact have a stick to use, but nowhere is there a rule that states someone has to accept your "recommended" load-outs. As a veteran who has strict builds in play to maximize my boat's play, I can sympathize, but how far will kicking go?

The biggest issue here isn't even trolls. It's the design of Guns of Icarus (not a bad thing, I'm elaborating). What other game forces this much team play? Even "team-based" games allow individual players to shine. Guns puts a lot of pressure on a Captain to literally tell the three others to do x y and z. Beyond very structured raids, you just don't see this elsewhere, and people can do as they please, to a degree. A crew in Guns just can't do as they please and be at the top of their game, even going so far as to say it generally sucks when that goes on.You have a random person from the internet telling you orders and how to play. If you get the design of Guns, you're ok with this. Welcome to our community. Many don't.

Any system put into place can be then trolled. Required load outs? Troll captain puts useless tools. Kick functions? You're going to have cases where a decent person gets kicked because x y and z. No kicking? Trolls and decent people alike get berated and shunned for not doing something they "should." The low population can't sustain any of this, and people end up ditching it altogether.

Do I have a solution? Not really besides getting this design mentality across when I can. I realize the implications of keeping everything the same right now, but so far any solutions I've seen to the current issue of "rogue" players who are either trolling or not trusting some guy on the internet to order him around just hurt the system in play.

8

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Lower Goldfish hull health to 1000

« on: November 18, 2016, 09:50:15 am »

1. Lets not turn this discussion into something it shouldn't be. Let's keep it civil and get our points across eh?

2.

Actually, back when heavy flak used to be more or less overpowered it was extremely common to see it on goldfishes aswell. I'm sure RearAdmiralZill would tell you a lot about that if you brought the notion to him. Lumberjack had no arming time back then aswell, I wouldnt know but it was probably good on goldfish aswell. Probably still is.

Appreciate that shout out  . I do miss the flak fish but that was definitely a case of the gun being OP, not our beloved fish. It works again with Alliance though! Small victory. When the lumber first came out with no arming time, yea it was OP as hell and I honestly didn't use it till they put it there. That was a hectic few weeks. Currently it's still a great gun to use on a fish, but kills are kinda slow. Very much more of a support boat. Carronades where made OP by Eric giving it 50m extra range for the hell of it (i'm exaggerating but the current heavy carro makes me sad) and the fish could utilize this to great effect. It got nerfed a bit too much in my opinion, but that's not why we're here. Hwacha is currently the best gun (opinion) to put up front, mainly for the versatility. It can support, it can kill. Burst ammo needs changes to mitigate this at long ranges, but if you don't de-fang a fish up close you should pay for it. What do all of these have in common? The gun was OP and needed nerfing, not the Goldfish.

And on to the proper discussion. The Goldfish does not need nerfs. Yea it utilizes a single heavy gun to pretty devastating effect because it gets to control the range of engagement. Any other boat using these guns can't as well for various reasons. Spire can't cause it's squishy and slow, but to compensate you get light guns forward facing to bring the pain. A Galleon can't by design due to broadsides, but you get two to play with, and a light gun on port. Goldfish requires what it has because your heavy gun defines how you're going to fly it, and if you want to be close, it needs health to do it. Enter the current perma and armor values. Armor is low and perma is kinda high. You generally trade perma to get close, especially against hard counters like a Pyra. Taking out that heavy gun is also made super easy with how it has 0 armor around it, and it's really the "teeth" of a Goldfish. Disable the gun, de-fang the fish, chip him away. A fish with low remaining perma is super limited in what it can do.

There are a ton of ways to counter a Goldfish these days with the prominence of burst ammo in Artemis and Hwachas, as well as guns like gatling that can very handily take out that front gun, or a merc for one-shot wonders. Squids have a hard time, and the changes put in place aren't helping. Needs more get-up-and-go.

Heavy guns needed nerfing because they were in fact OP. The Goldfish was just able to exploit those factors the best due to its great control over its choice of heavy gun. Spire and Galleon's issues aren't because the guns are underwhelming. It's a multitude of other issues which I can elaborate on if you wish.

9

World / Re: The player's role: Aces or Mercenaries?

« on: November 16, 2016, 10:57:37 am »

Forgive my ignorance, but where is all this confirmed lore stored at? Just spread out in the world threads or is there a central place cause Id love to read up on it all.

Didn't even know about the Guild backstory, though I see that lighthearted sentiment plagued with bottom feeders just wanting their slice of the Mercantile pie. That's just me though. Plus when we did the Burning Skies RP, all this lore was absent to draw on so we just made stuff work lol.

10

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Diminishing returns on custom Alliance maps

« on: November 16, 2016, 09:44:48 am »

What really needs fixing (although I do like the idea of giving more effort for maps that just take longer by design) before you try messing with effort gains from these missions is the fact Chaladon has roughly half the membership of the other factions (even worse for Anglea) and the effort they require to do map objectives is just low. I only deliver the cheese (retrieve missions) because 1. They are honestly pretty fun and hectic and 2. It's really the only way we can not just lose territory all the time. The effort amounts should be based on active faction membership, not total. The map clearly reflects this with Chaladon having the lowest member base yet the world map is rather green. Poor Angela man....

Now if I'm mistaken on how effort is calculated (im sure other factors are at play that I just don't know yet) then by all means someone tell me in a pm.

TLDR: Fix the issues with effort calculations for defense/attack before even considering lowering effort numbers. I wouldn't mind the other missions getting effort buffs to compensate for the time they take in comparison to delivering cheese all day.

11

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Playable Faction: Yesha Empire

« on: November 16, 2016, 07:08:59 am »

As much as I want Byron to be wrong, I can't deny how long this all has taken to get to where we are now and just hope they aren't last.

12

World / Re: The player's role: Aces or Mercenaries?

« on: November 16, 2016, 07:06:29 am »

Dont break my heart. From an RP standpoint I've always hated the Guild 

13

World / Re: The player's role: Aces or Mercenaries?

« on: November 15, 2016, 07:08:45 pm »

I figured one of the giveaways for the Goldfish origin was the hanging lamps with the "oriental" writings on them. Maybe I just took that along with the overall design as a clear Yeshan theme yet never confirmed it.

14

World / Re: The player's role: Aces or Mercenaries?

« on: November 15, 2016, 06:40:38 pm »

Galleon and Goldfish are Yeshan. I forget about the Pyra.

15

World / Re: The player's role: Aces or Mercenaries?

« on: November 15, 2016, 09:53:01 am »

Given the current system that lets you switch factions pretty easily, I'd say we're more hired hands. We even have to provide our own boats!

Now if you planned to stick to one faction forever, I can see some merit in being Aces for the given faction, but purely from an RP standpoint.