Messages

901

Gameplay / Re: 1.3.6 Hotfix Flamethrower

« on: May 04, 2014, 02:04:10 pm »

I have the feeling that Wundsalz is requesting an alternitiv to the incendary gatling...
And as far as noob-friendliness goes, we will have to rely on the tutorials, showing the new players how to use tools against fire.

Another thing is that having the pilot bring drouge chute is not the same as having the entire crew go firefighting, but since most competitive teams already use constant chem spray and heatsink is always an option, there is not much that changes, actually. As said before, we have to rely on tutorials showing non-competitive people what to do in case of fire.

As a side note, this game should not have a gun that can be countered with tools to make it entirely useless, else everybody has the potentional to be invincible/"immortal". Staying out of range requires pilot "skillz" as well as hiding behind cover to render artemis useless and even destroying enemy guns before they can even do anything is strategy. Tools, of any kind, should only help you gain the upper hand and not negate death indefinitely.

902

Gameplay / Re: 1.3.6 Hotfix Flamethrower

« on: May 03, 2014, 10:17:17 am »

I too believe flamer is in a somewhat good spot right now. It certainly is something different than the most basic gat/mortar combo. The damage is decent. What most people seem to have problems with is the immense stack of fire in such a short amount of time.
But I don't have too many troubles with that thing myself... I played as a galleon in desert scrap against a pyramidion with double flamethrower. I honestly can't recall if the sandstorm destroyed everything or my allies helped get that thing off of me, but the worst thing that happened was that my guns were down for a second and them somehow went back up and we killed that pyra. What I learned in this match was that my gunner was constantly depending on my engineer to get rid of the fire stacks on his gun, because there were too many stacks on it.
And this is were I have to agree with sammy: The gunner's inability to fight against flamer, even with heatsink, is just too great a loss to bear. And I refuse to load heatsink into a hwacha, just because I fear 1 pyramidion to come out of nowhere. I rather have burst or heavy loaded to destroy everything else, after all, that one pyra wasn't my only opponent, so I would like the ability to deal with the other enemies the best I can, which means not using heatsink. And nobody should have to use heatsink on EVERY gun just because of 1 flamer. You might as well bring an engineer with pipe wrench, fire ext and chem spray...

What we need to concentrate on is not the Flamethrower itself, but ways to counter fire in general. Of course it doesn't mean that we should give engineers the ability to make a ship invincible against flamethrowers with ease, but rather make suprising instant stacks of fire easier to fight against.
Chem spray is good, heatsink is good, fire extinguisher is useless. You either chem spray the component or load heatsink into the gun, but if you miss the opportunity, you might as well led it die. You can extinguish all you want, but you just can't repair anything before it catches fire again, which makes the use of Fire Extinguisher useless. You might as well hit it with a Mallet regardless of fire or not, Fire Extinguisher won't save anyone. If you ask me, I see fire extinguisher only useful against mines and on squids. Mines do more than 3 stacks of fire and the Squid does have the ability to escape combat rather quickly, even against another squid.

What I want to suggest is either
1.) Have a way to extinguish fires in a way that it doesn't interrupt repair cooldowns
2.) Give the gunner 1 more engineer slot for fire tools

1.) This might need a bit more tuning, since it negates the use of chem spray, if you could extinguish fires anytime you want
2.) For this I want to say: Already do gunners get replaces with engineers since many people believe that for most if not all guns there is only 1 ammo type they need for what they want to do (in most cases lesmok) and it also provides them with more shiny buffs. With this suggestion the gunners could help fighting fire, or even buff their own guns or just have a Mallet/Spanner combo for maximum repair/-build power. No matter what combo you do, something would have to be given up: Repair power, Ability to fight fires, Ability to Buff
It would make the gunner class more viable and even allow 2 gunners on a ship without asking for a deathwish.

This might actually belong to a new thread, but 'till then I wanna know what people thing of it.

903

General Discussion / Re: Return Of Resource Race

« on: May 02, 2014, 09:19:46 pm »

I too think that having 2 points is nice a idea and something new to the gamemodes and maps, escpecially with at least 3 ships per team. It would allow to have long and close range on the same team and forcing either the team to
- split up: 2 going for the next point and 1 protecting the current one or 1 going for the next point and 2 protecting the current one
- stay together: everybody attacks or defends

The latter one needs a bit of tuning, since you don't want the scenario where 1 entire team protects its own point that it captured before the enemy team even captured their point and then just camp it out. But then again, Desert Scrap proves that even 3 ships together and ready can be beaten.
If this game mode should be availabe in 4v4 then it needs to be tested if you can 4 ships at once just like 3 ships...

Another thing is to consider where the ships spawn in the beginning of the match as well as in the middle of it.
For the beginning of the matchs hould they spawn in the middle of the map and just fight it out or disable the other team or just book it for the point?
Or should they all spawn at a point where both teams have the same distance to both points?
The second choice could lead to interesting engagements when the teams decide to split up whereas the first choice would need long range cover less the spawned ships dies immediately.
And for the spawns in the middle of the match, should they be set spawnpoints like normally or actually change with the captured points to get spawn advantages? For example: You captured point A now you can spawn closer to point A, giving you an easier opportunity to block the enemy from capturing once more, however the fight might not be easier for you.


Needless to say, I highly approve of this suggestion since it offers a style of gameplay that cannot be replaceted by any other gamemode and replaces the old original resource race where the fastest capper wins, which completely eliminates the thought of using one of the slower ships.

904

Gameplay / Re: 1.3.6 Harpoon Changes

« on: May 01, 2014, 09:43:25 pm »

Of course the harpoon works on a Galleon, well "works". I had used it before the patch as well on the back of the Galleon, saved me a few times from a carronade, can't say that about now though. And I have yet to find another ship that can use a harpoon without eliminating or it least disabling itself in the process.

905

Gameplay / Re: 1.3.6 Harpoon Changes

« on: May 01, 2014, 06:41:54 pm »

Hmm, mines. There's an idea for a side of a pyra. Harpoon and mines.

Won't work, trust me on this one.


And I too thing that the reload time is just too devastating. Especially when you want to harpoon from a longer range, the chance to miss is high enough already, especially on Junker's hull and against Squids manouverbility.
Also, from a logical point of view: Why would you want to harpoon somebody to close the distance between the two of you, if your target already IS close to you?
Ramming pyra aside (which is literally every pyra in the game, harpoon or not), a shorter reload time would allow this gun to be used against medium/long range ships without the already high risk of falling prey to the endless sniping and ultimately dying on the spot, since you have to expose yourself and yada yada. If you could hit with the harpoon, it could render the longer range ship either useless or helpless against your own close range barrage. And it wouldn't even be too powerful either, since you still have to hit and gun disable through artemis or merc isn't rare either.

Currently the harpoon is not even a utility weapon. It's even less worth than that. It's a gun that has only 2 scenarios:
- Miss with the harpoon and fail, which might end in ship destruction
- Hit with the harpoon and ram, which might end in ship destruction

I tryed using this gun on a Spire, I really did try to reel the enemy in. What happened was that the weird pyhsics kicked in instantly, turned me the wrong way, thus losing some gun arc and moving towards the enemy instead of the enemy moving towards me.
What am I supposed to do with this? I can't hit from long range and in close range it's less usefull than a beacon flare, because I know that 10 stacks of fire don't throw my ship around.

Next thing is, I don't get the fear of "harpoon abuse". What about the carronade? It can shred a balloon and keep an entire ship disabled without too much trouble if the carronade pilot has the ship and the skill for it. Neither drouge chute or impact bumpers will save you from that either. How is harpoon worse? You push the enemy around and have him be 1m away from your face, congratz. And Mines are utility weapons too, you know? Like the beacon flare, it can be used offensively, only with more effect, if executed succesfully.

TD;DR
- The Harpoon is the best weapon for suicide bombers
- The Harpoon was never fixed and, personally, less fun than before

906

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Visual tool ideas that are not gameplay based

« on: April 30, 2014, 09:08:01 pm »

All these tools should be taking up a pilot slot. Especially the Wilsons handbook since it shows everybody sees every damage that is being done and also, if you are a gunner or "gungineer" would you really give up a gunner slot just to see the damage?

The stopwatch is reasonable, I think, but more if you are an engineer that has to watch out for his chem spray circles, since even when you bought this game, you can see the repair cooldown already visually, which kinda teaches you already that repairing with this engineer tool takes this long.
Also, I think the repair cooldowns, even from a mallet, are just too short in order to make this tool useful. I would add a buff timer to it with the chemspray timer, just to give more usage for this tool.

Now, "The Kitchen Timer" is nice when you are a gunner using more than 1 gun simultaneously, which is already rare enough, but is the bell sound really necessary? If you are going to use this tool, you might as well make use of it and glance at UI once in a while to know what's up.
The bell would enable the gunner to just ignore the UI itself and concentrate on shooting, yes, but then again the reload time of weapons are what? 4-8 seconds with a few excpetions? That bell would at times go off almost instantly, making it kinda pointless.

It's debatable if you combine the stopwatch and the kitchen timer, since both give information that's basically useless for the gunner and engineer. However, if you combine it, only 1 guy, (most likely one of the engineers) has to bring it and this guy just gives the necessary information to the other guys, which would increas the much requested communication, if you have a mic.

Another thing is: Would these tools still be active when you mount a gun? Because if they are not, then somebody who is not shooting has to give up a slot for this tool. But then again, it wouldn't really help the kitchen timer in some cases.

However, I kinda like the idea of having more tools that can replacing the spyglass, since there is no other tool that engineers and gunners could drive use from other than the occasional range finder, which is already rarely used.

907

Gameplay / Re: 1.3.6 Tar Changes

« on: April 29, 2014, 05:08:12 pm »

I use Tar Barrel on Squid. I use tar to escape. I can't use tar anymore because there is Tar only every 3 or so seconds while the skill is activated. Non-stop kerosen and enemy gun-fire already put enough damage on those engines, especially with the immensive amount of flamethrower going on lately, how am I supposed to get a second tar cloud going?
Also, tar is easily dodged even on a pyra without buff, thus I can barely hit anything at all and when I do, the damage seems to be just too little. Maybe you can trap a galleon with tar, if it isn't blasting it's hwachas into your behind.
A Junker or Spire making 1 tar cloud every once in a while might actually pull it off, but that can't be all right?

So, I have a question now: What is Tar useful now? Because I don't get it.

908

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: The Real Goldfish Fix

« on: April 23, 2014, 10:56:01 am »

Why don't you use this in your tactic then. Load your special ammo and then let the enemy in long range disable the gun and rebuild it so far until only 1 hit of a pipe wrench does the trick.

However, when people really think a "buff" is necessary then I would propose one of the following:
How about giving the ship more acceleration when it comes to engines? Negative side is that it would bring people back to the "slow paced game vs dogfighting"-thread(s).
An additional set of guns, one more for each side, as suggested before, does sound nice, as long as combinations like gat/mortar are at least nigh impossible to not create a second Junker. Or how about 2 back guns that somehow don't get in the way of the main engine but can be twice as useful in an attempt to escape!
To be honest, I am even starting to think about switching the Goldfish's side guns with medium guns and its front gun with a light gun... Who knows, that might actually do the trick.

909

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Bright Buffs

« on: April 23, 2014, 03:41:26 am »

MUSE said there will be a cloud fix next patch

Clouds will be consistent across clients as of next patch.  And still pretty.

Anyhow, are you sure you can see buffs inside clouds already? I now you can see fires and even broken party, but I can't remember seeing buffs inside it. Maybe it's just one of the rare occurences that I have never witnessed before...

910

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: The Real Goldfish Fix

« on: April 23, 2014, 03:38:37 am »

I can see what your problem is, but now we are stuck at different opinions. I still think the Goldfish is in a good place right now, if piloted right. It's already beating the Spire and Galleon in brawling capabilities with it's manouverbility (in theory).

911

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Bright Buffs

« on: April 22, 2014, 08:08:24 pm »

Can't you already see buffs in clouds?

I don't think so...


And I am not thinking of this suggestion only because it's used so much, that was just a less significant thought I had.

My suggestion gets more significant when it comes to you trying to stay hidden. Sneaking up (if executed right) already gives you the advantage of getting the first hit and usually leads to the killing blow. But if buff were to be visible inside clouds you would have to give up superior engine/balloon/hull power to be able to ride a cloud in secret. Even though you can get into a secure position behind the enemy and then buff everything...

It's not even that much either, since you would not see it THROUGH clouds.

Also, as a side note, there are already many teams that give up their gunner, just to have an engineer (Mallet/Spanner/Buffkit) that can buff his own guns and enables more repair power than a gunner does (but that's another story).
Another thing is that aside from gun buffs, buffs usually hold quite a while and a well timed/placed buff can still hold after a short engagement.

I don't think you really have too many downsides...

912

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: The Real Goldfish Fix

« on: April 22, 2014, 07:54:24 pm »

When does the spire charge into battle? The galleon has a huge hull to protect it when advancing. Fact of the matter is, even if you do get the jump on a ship with Artemis, there is a good chance they will still disable your front gun. When I'm piloting a blender fish, most of the time I don't feel like I'm rewarded for using height advantage, and this would fix that.

A Spire doesn't need to charge into battle to be an easy target that has to rely on it's sheer firepower, before getting destroyed itself (glass cannon).
A Galleon can't protect it's guns from being disabled in anyway. A Goldfish at least can gain enough altitude to escape a barrage of Artemi and Mercuries. So why only give the Goldfish this protection? Only because the Galleon can take a few more hits before it dies without ever getting to shoot?
I just wanted to point out that giving only the Goldfish some kind of protection would be rather unfair compared to other ships.

About height advantage, are you talking about being disabled quickly even though you are above enemy? Then I would say it's a basic counter to the ship itself. All ships have their disadvantages and it requires piloting skills and teamwork to win a battle even with those disadvantes being present.

Also, all ships are affected by vertical gameplay. The difference between the Goldfish and for example the Pyramidion in this aspect is that a Pyramidion can utilize more firepower than a Goldfish, which was why many people have suggested bringing atlest a second gun in arc for a bifecta.

If you ask me, a Blenderfish is just a bigger Squid, only being less effiecent at what it does. To be honest, a hwacha on a Goldfish is the only thing that a Goldfish can do better than any other ship. As well as quickly utilizing long range support from different angles.

It's not the ship that needs fixing, it's how people use it and to what extent people are allowed to use it.

913

Feedback and Suggestions / Bright Buffs

« on: April 22, 2014, 06:05:29 pm »

Basic idea: Buffs creating a glow inside clouds, after clouds are fixed. And with glow I mean just enough to know that there is something in these clouds. Buff glow is weak however and thus of course cannot be seen through clouds. Might not be as easy to see inside tar or dust storms, because buffs glow is so weak.

There are way too many buffs nowadays, gotta fix that somehow...

914

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: The Real Goldfish Fix

« on: April 22, 2014, 02:17:35 pm »

EVERY Hwacha and Heavy Carronade is easy to destroy, this is a problem for the Galleon and Spire as well .Howerver, these ships physique and how these ships are used differ too much from the Goldfish to give this subject too much attention.

Now the front gun protection that Medic is suggesting, would barely make any difference. How much protection would it really ensure without blocking the gun from shooting at all? If we are talking about the Artemis shooting downwards, why not stay above it to begin with? Same with Gatlings since their lower arc is superior over their upper arc and Carronades would just shoot out the balloon until the Goldfish drops in arc for these guns to destroy it's main gun.

And why only give the Goldfish a special kind of protection? Why not give the Spire protection as well? As tall as it is, it could need it very well! Or how about the Squids engines? Or the light gun-and-ram-equivalent: the Pyra? What's a Pyra without it's front guns? A less manouverable Goldfish without a front gun and side guns that barely get ever used...

Personally, it was a nice idea, but I don't think it's really all that helpful, if it's even necessary at all. The Goldfish has proven it's effectiveness more than once already, it only needs a bit of teamwork to get it going. But if your front gun really does get that much damage as it does and your ally just can't help you, you will have to make use of pilot tools and "special tactics" to help you out.

Otherwise, concerning gun destruction in general, there would only be the option of engineer and/or gunner equipment that reduces shatter damage on guns/engines...

915

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Guns jam, ammo changes, and passive class abilities

« on: April 10, 2014, 04:35:12 am »

It would absolutely destroy anybody new to this game.

However it does sound like it would ensure more dynamic gameplay and give the gunner a bit more importance.