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.

Topics - GeoRmr

Pages: [1] 2 3

Okay so it's been two years now and this tool is still more useless than the harpoon - I believe it's time we all try really hard and think of another passive tool related to ship spotting for muse to implement as the rangefinder.

My Suggestion:

  • The spinning circles used to show someone on a gun how to aim are removed from the rangefinder, or at least an option is added for a player to disable them. There is nothing more annoying than shooting a gun when a novice on your ship starts rangefinding and the spinning circles start to block up your reticle.

  • The rangefinder effect only works if the ship is first spotted by another player with a spyglass,[1] and the range finder effect remains active until that ship loses its spot through hard or soft cover.

  • The range finder is given the following limited spotting ability if used on an unspotted ship - ships are marked for a limited number of seconds visible only to players on the same ship (essentially the exact same functionality as the captains mark ability, but with its own distinct set of brackets around the targeted ship)

  • Once a ship is successfully marked by a rangefinder after already being spotted by a spyglass it displays the range of the ship in km from each ship on the spotting team as it does currently. This effect will remain active until the ship loses its spot through hard or soft cover and does not require constant spotting from the person using the rangefinder.

  • Once a ship is marked by the rangefinder after being spotted by a spyglass a variation of the ship status UI currently in spectator mode is displayed next to the spotted ship[2] showing: it's hull health, component cool-downs, which components are disabled, which components are on fire, the number of fire stacks on burning components, which components are chem-sprayed, and which components are buffed.[3]

  • Or by a pilot with both a rangefinder and a spyglass (lol)
  • Or perhaps fixed on screen exactly as it would in spectator mode if this proves to appear less cluttered
  • It may be preferable to make some of this information available only to the player using the rangefinder, or require "active rangefinding" (holding left click with the rangefinder over a spotted ship) to display this information to other players depending on how powerful an impact you feel this knowledge may have on the game

Q&A / Friends List
« on: February 23, 2015, 09:40:59 am »
So how does GOI sort our friends/block/clan list?
It's not alphabetical.
It's not chronological to the date the names were added.
It's not chronological to the time they were last were online.
It's not chronological to the time they logged in.
It's not sorted by the number of matches they have played.
It's not sorted by active/inactive lobby.
It's not sorted by clan tags.

When you add a new name they do appear at the bottom of the list untill they login/out where they are then arbitrarily sorted with the other names.

Why is no method to sort the names by any of the above?

World / Faction Borders
« on: January 27, 2015, 12:06:39 pm »
Because the factions are constantly warring, I'm assuming their borders are a source of conflict, will this be part of coop/adventure mode?

pic related

Q&A / Honorable Mentions
« on: November 17, 2014, 05:38:18 am »
Does anyone know what this badge is? What it looks like/who has it/what for?

"Honorable Mentions"

General Discussion / Hiding levels
« on: October 27, 2014, 03:16:21 pm »
In the live version of GoI 1.3.8(445) player levels are now censored in lobbies. What is the communities opinion of this change?

The Pit / A Drink for Real Gunners
« on: October 02, 2014, 02:04:38 pm »
Keeps you warm up north in the Fjordlands.

Q&A / What are these and why are they on the mlg ladder?
« on: July 23, 2014, 06:13:15 am »
The MLG ladder appears to be full of random spoof clans, IMHO this reflects badly on the GoIO community. How do these spoof clans climb the ranking/ become eligible clans? How do we get the real clans to become eligible clans, and climb the ladder?

The Pit / Too Fancy
« on: June 26, 2014, 12:31:46 pm »

I've made this post to try to collate all the ideas I've had since the ‘Call for Gunner Ammo Ideas’ thread:,4079.0.html
All though the initial purpose of that thread was enticing, my main problem with it is that awkm intends the new ammunition types to be a solution to the ‘an engineer is more favourable than a gunner’ problem. I hope to address why the addition of more ammo-types to the game is not a viable solution to this ‘problem’, and then repost Captain Smollett’s initial solution and justify why it is viable. The first section on gunners vs engineers is extremely verbose in order to address the issue of paradigm in the later section.

The gunner vs engineer ‘problem’ and why it exists.

Firstly, one of the reasons why engineers tend to be more favoured than gunners is down to an imbalanced class overlap in what are intended polarised roles: The purpose of the engineer is to repair; engineers have access to 3 engineer tools in order to repair successfully. The purpose of the gunner is to shoot; gunners have access to 4 ammunition types in order to shoot successfully. Both of these classes possess the ability to perform secondary roles: The gunner is able to repair; gunners have access to 1 repair tool allowing them to repair suboptimally. The engineer is able to shoot; engineers have access to 2 ammunition types in order for them to shoot adequately.

The second and largest contributing factor is the role of the buff-hammer; buff hammers are an engineer tool that also increases damage output when shooting, and therefore to shoot more successfully. The equivalent ammunition type could be considered the damage increase of charged rounds. If we were to compare the buff hammer to charged rounds, charged rounds have a clear negative dps and clip size de-buff, the buff-hammer has no negatives. The buff-hammer is also able to be used simultaneously with an ammunition type while also being applicable to balloon, engines, and hull where charged rounds are not.

The gunners ‘buff-hammer’ equivalent could be considered heat-sink clip. Heat-sink clip can be compared to the engineer’s chem-spray; heat-sink clip allows gunners to repair more successfully by extinguishing and preventing fires. However, heat-sink clip does not ensure 100% fire protection (while chem-spray can) as it does not protect from fires while the gun is reloading, heat-sink clip cannot be used in conjunction with the equivalent engineer tool in order repair more effectively (the gunners only viable engineer tool is the pipewrench, engineers have access to two ammo types their choice + neutral ammo). Heat-sink also is unable to be applied to fires of more than eight stacks as the gunner is no longer able to mount the gun, where chem-spray can still be applied to the burning weapon. Chemical-spray is also capable of being applied to the balloon, engines, and hull, where heat-sink is not.


In short, the engineers ‘gunner tool’ is far better at gunning than the gunners ‘engineer tool’ is at repairing. Gunners also have access to 1 engineer tool, where engineers have access to 2 types of ammunition. Engineers can both repair and shoot more effectively than gunners.

Why the addition of more ammunition choices will not be an effective solution.

Any additional ammo you add to the game can still be taken by engineers, and adding more variety will not change that fact. Engineers can still perform the other Repair/Buff tasks that gunners cannot do effectively, while the gunners advantage is far more niche. An engineer can use 50% of the 'gunner' benefit (2 ammo types out of a possible 4), while a gunner can only use only 33.3% of the 'engineer' benefit (1 repair tool out of a possible 3). It is also worth noting that every single engineer tool can be used to benefit each component on the ship (except for using a buff hammer on a flame-thrower, which is arguably neutral), where currently different ammunition choices have the possibility of being detrimental to particular weapons. Every single gun can be operated effectively with 2 types of ammunition; no component can be maintained by only 1 repair tool.

The solution to the ‘problem’.

The first posed solution was to provide gunners with passive effects, however this would require a relatively large amount of game development and causes problems that awkm expressed concerning paradigm, the reload mechanic, and user interface.
My suggestion (inspired by Captain Smollet) is that instead of having literal 'passives' that are activated while mounted on a gun, to incorporate the effects into tools that would work in a similar manner to chem-spray and the buff hammer, being pre-applied before mounting the gun and requiring continuous re-application. This would not require a large developmental effort from muse (effects such as buff and fire resistance could be recycled and recolored along with tool animations) and would not cause problems with existing gameplay mechanics. It would also provide the gunner with more tasks to complete and by extension make gameplay as a gunner more interesting and dynamic. Another possibility (or beginning) would be to divide the existing engineer’s buff-hammer to be only effective on non-gun components and add a gunners buff-hammer that would only be effective on guns.

“Instead of making the engineers worse, make gunners more diverse.
Gunnery tools that stack effects would make gunners superior in so many instances.
A tool to make reloading go faster.
A tool to make the gun turn quicker and farther.
A tool to give longer zoom and range.
A tool to give an increase in rate of fire.

Giving a gunner the ability to stack effects would make them outclass engineers on guns.  While engineers could still stack their buff to a gun, gunners could stack multiple tools.  In very high team work related moments, perhaps the gunner could apply their tools to an engineers gun in the same way and engineer applies their tools to a gunners gun.”
~ Captain Smollet

Concerns about Paradigm.

So far the only counter to the addition of gunner tools is that of paradigm. By design, Muse considers that each class has a selection of specific tools that function consistently with each other. The gunner has a choice of ammunition, each type of ammunition can be loaded into a gun to shoot more effectively. The engineer has a choice of tools, each tool is applied to components on the ship externally to repair them. The pilot has a choice of tools that are used when on the helm of the ship, (with the exception of the spyglass, and range-finder) to allow them to manoeuvre more effectively.

awkm suggests that gunner tools, other than ammunition, should not be added to the game because they break this design paradigm, expressing a desire to not add any more exceptions such as the spyglass and range-finder.

I observe that this game does not actually follow this design paradigm intended by Muse in its current state. Including the previously mentioned pilot tool exceptions, please consider that:

The engineer has access to the buff hammer; the buff hammer is capable of altering the damage output of guns allowing them to shoot more effectively, the buff hammer is also capable of altering the force applied from the engines and balloon allowing the ship to manoeuvre more effectively. Two things that expand beyond the scope of the engineers polarised role and should be exclusive to gunners and pilots respectively.

The Pilot has access to impact bumpers and drogue chute, two tools that are intended to negate damage, negation of damage being the quintessential basis of the engineer’s role.

The Gunner has access to heat-sink clip which is capable of both fire prevention and extinguish, neither of these properties directly apply to the gunners role but they do to the engineer.

The captain of the ship decides on the guns, not the gunner, and the ship itself not necessarily the pilot or engineer and never both.

I believe that by extending the gunner class to include externally applicable gunnery tools you do not create exception to the existing paradigm, only redefine a more clear and obvious one while simultaneously balancing and improving gameplay.

Feedback and Suggestions / Extinguished stat counter
« on: May 20, 2014, 09:46:45 am »
Add extinguishes performed using heat-sink clip to the 'fires extinguished' stat counter.

Q&A / PS4
« on: May 19, 2014, 09:04:25 am »
Anyone have any info on GoIO for PS4?

When you pop a mine Balloon the mine falls and explodes on contact with the terrain or ship bellow it. In all of my 4000+ games I have only thrice managed to successfully use this mechanic to damage another ship, yet have attempted multiple times. I think to make this amazing mechanic a more common occurrence a few tweaks could be made:

Mine balloons need a significant reduction in health.

Mine balloons should be able to accumulate fire stacks albeit with a low % multiplier.

Mine balloons should have a slightly larger hit-box.

EDIT: Heavy clip mines are heavier and therefore should sink like depth charges. (Ty Richard)

General Discussion / Leave Counter
« on: April 14, 2014, 07:17:28 pm »
Is anybody else getting tired of being punished with the leave counter because of frequently occurring bugs and/or server issues forcing you to abandon a match?

+ General discussion about why we have the leave counter, and if we actually need|want|don't-want|should| have one.

Dear muse,

The lag is getting worse, and worse, and worse. Slow-mo is happening more frequently, everytime someone joins or leaves a game there is a lag spike, lobby disconnects happen all the time and the UI bugs out from lag often. PLEASE schedule some server maintenence soon!

Remove the leave count, it is petty, useless, anoying, bad for the community, and inapropriate when the servers are so prone to dissconecting. Today I got a leave when I was kicked from raid on the refinery 2 seconds before the point limit was reached this is not acceptable or fair. (along with not registering the level 7+ win on my achievement)

Feedback and Suggestions / Capture the Flag
« on: February 18, 2014, 12:23:03 am »
4v4, one ship from a team is chosen as the flag, the flag has to reach one of two points red or blue, flags are taken by killing the ships. Flag is always spotted on the map as an area of probability.

Pages: [1] 2 3