31
Feedback and Suggestions / crew formation loadouts
« on: December 09, 2013, 06:11:36 am »
It would be really useful to have the loadout icon next to player names in crew formation the same as in the match lobby.
News:
Log in using the email address and password you selected when registering in-game. Forgot your password?
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.
32
The Docks / Storm Riders [Rydr] [sRyd]
« on: November 25, 2013, 09:37:48 pm »
What We Are
Faction of the Rider [Rydr] clan, created during the temporary inactivity of the Wind Rider [wRyd] faction.
Why We Are
Multiple factions have been discussed a lot amongst our clan. Since the inactivity of more than two thirds of our clan members, including the clan founder Archriel, I felt it appropriate to create the Storm Rider faction to continue clan growth and keep an active player base.
Who We Are
With respect to clan lore, the Storm Riders adopt everything that defines the Riders clan, exactly as when the clan was monolith, one faction. However our approach is somewhat more bellicose and avaricious than the Wind Rider faction, but by no means are we venal in any regard.
Faction of the Rider [Rydr] clan, created during the temporary inactivity of the Wind Rider [wRyd] faction.
Why We Are
Multiple factions have been discussed a lot amongst our clan. Since the inactivity of more than two thirds of our clan members, including the clan founder Archriel, I felt it appropriate to create the Storm Rider faction to continue clan growth and keep an active player base.
Who We Are
With respect to clan lore, the Storm Riders adopt everything that defines the Riders clan, exactly as when the clan was monolith, one faction. However our approach is somewhat more bellicose and avaricious than the Wind Rider faction, but by no means are we venal in any regard.
33
Feedback and Suggestions / Toggle-able aim asist
« on: October 09, 2013, 08:40:28 am »
I'd really like a toggle-able option in settings, to change the behaviour of aiming guns, the current system is independent of ship movement which is fantastically simple for most situations, however if the reticule were to move with the ship, it would allow gunners to better predict turning speed of ships and adjust their aim accordingly. This would be particularly useful for example on a galleon where there is no point of reference to calculate ship movement as it turns or accelerates. It would ofcourse be more difficult to master but could allow skilled gunners even more freedom to hone their art.
34
Feedback and Suggestions / Depth Charge
« on: September 28, 2013, 02:51:59 pm »
A cool but perhaps silly suggestion that'd be hard to implement, but nevertheless here are some possible ways it could be used.
As a medium weapon that drops (big) bombs vertically, big AOE damage with a LONG reload, one bomb per clip. Shouldn't be a problem, to my knowledge there is no hull beneath any of the medium weapon spots on the current ships.
As a two stage light weapon, one or two bombs per clip. (problems with hull beneath weapon spots, thinking of the Mobula in particular) It could launch a (large) projectile horizontally, which would then fire vertically downwards after an arming time in it's second stage. (think a slightly right-angular net-projectile-arc)
As a piloting tool that would sacrifice some or all of the hull armour (or even core hull health) to drop a projectile vertically from the centre of the ships hull to deal damage to enemies below. (maybe as a one use per game, if multiple persons aboard a ship have it equipped, they would not be able to use it after it's initial use, or it could only be used if on the helm.)
Imagine this as a finishing weapon to a balloon-pop.
As a medium weapon that drops (big) bombs vertically, big AOE damage with a LONG reload, one bomb per clip. Shouldn't be a problem, to my knowledge there is no hull beneath any of the medium weapon spots on the current ships.
As a two stage light weapon, one or two bombs per clip. (problems with hull beneath weapon spots, thinking of the Mobula in particular) It could launch a (large) projectile horizontally, which would then fire vertically downwards after an arming time in it's second stage. (think a slightly right-angular net-projectile-arc)
As a piloting tool that would sacrifice some or all of the hull armour (or even core hull health) to drop a projectile vertically from the centre of the ships hull to deal damage to enemies below. (maybe as a one use per game, if multiple persons aboard a ship have it equipped, they would not be able to use it after it's initial use, or it could only be used if on the helm.)
Imagine this as a finishing weapon to a balloon-pop.
35
Feedback and Suggestions / Wardrobe
« on: September 28, 2013, 02:18:46 pm »
Why not allow costumes to also be saved in the load-out pre-sets? Often my captain chooses his ship depending on the map, for each of his builds I take a different load-out. During times of intense MLG steam-punk RP it'd be nice nice to have the costume change with my load-out to suit the appropriate map/ship. It would also be fun to alternate costumes on a regular basis, without the hassle of changing multiple parts each time players want a fresh look (which for some, is frequently).
36
Feedback and Suggestions / [This post contains expletives, I am unaware of any selective langage filters.]
« on: September 22, 2013, 01:39:15 pm »
Profanity: you either want to read it, or you don't.
Why allow us some expletives which are "nice friendly loving curses like bastard" and not other "disgustingly filthy obscene words like pussy cat"? I also find the censorship of the word nigger (by the lightest filter setting) to be entirely racist, and censoring of the word homo to be homophobic.
It is ridiculous that words of the same definition are censored in some languages and not others, regardless of their cultural meaning. For example, bastard in English which is not filtered by the light setting, and the Spanish word cabron (of the same meaning) which is filtered.
Secondly I think that the notion of a gradated language filter is absurd, different words cause different amounts of offence throughout different English speaking societies and cultures, and indeed different cultures speaking other languages. (I remember being shocked as a British person at a water-park in Florida being told to "watch my fanny on the way down" a water slide, just as I would imagine Americans being shocked at people asking to buy packets of fags at newsagents in Britain.)
There should be an option to completely disable the language filter, it's not as if people with microphones aren't able to curse as much as they want completely uncensored anyway.
Why allow us some expletives which are "nice friendly loving curses like bastard" and not other "disgustingly filthy obscene words like pussy cat"? I also find the censorship of the word nigger (by the lightest filter setting) to be entirely racist, and censoring of the word homo to be homophobic.
It is ridiculous that words of the same definition are censored in some languages and not others, regardless of their cultural meaning. For example, bastard in English which is not filtered by the light setting, and the Spanish word cabron (of the same meaning) which is filtered.
Secondly I think that the notion of a gradated language filter is absurd, different words cause different amounts of offence throughout different English speaking societies and cultures, and indeed different cultures speaking other languages. (I remember being shocked as a British person at a water-park in Florida being told to "watch my fanny on the way down" a water slide, just as I would imagine Americans being shocked at people asking to buy packets of fags at newsagents in Britain.)
There should be an option to completely disable the language filter, it's not as if people with microphones aren't able to curse as much as they want completely uncensored anyway.
37
Feedback and Suggestions / If you're here, who's flying the ship?
« on: September 22, 2013, 12:46:19 pm »
I believe that the leave counter should be displayed as a percentage out of the number of matches played.
Over long periods of dedicated gameplay it is inevitable that a situation will eventually arise where a player must abandon a game.
Eventually these occasions could begin to accumulate until the leave count reaches a very high number.
Say if a player had abandoned 50 games, that would be pretty bad. However, if they had abandoned 50 games out of >9000 the direct impact of the 50 missed games could tarnish their reputation rather heavily. For example if they wanted to join a particularly competitive clan that required no more than 10 games on the leave counter to join. Having the information as a percentage would prevent discrimination against longer term players, and provide a more comprehensible representation of their likelihood to rage-quit out of a game.
Also, we should show the percentage below forum avatars.
Over long periods of dedicated gameplay it is inevitable that a situation will eventually arise where a player must abandon a game.
Eventually these occasions could begin to accumulate until the leave count reaches a very high number.
Say if a player had abandoned 50 games, that would be pretty bad. However, if they had abandoned 50 games out of >9000 the direct impact of the 50 missed games could tarnish their reputation rather heavily. For example if they wanted to join a particularly competitive clan that required no more than 10 games on the leave counter to join. Having the information as a percentage would prevent discrimination against longer term players, and provide a more comprehensible representation of their likelihood to rage-quit out of a game.
Also, we should show the percentage below forum avatars.
38
Feedback and Suggestions / Wilson's Anti-ship Mines
« on: September 22, 2013, 12:29:44 pm »
Surely Wilson has laid a few mines during his time gunning aboard the Icarus,
why hasn't he made any notes about his mine launching apparatus?
why hasn't he made any notes about his mine launching apparatus?
39
Feedback and Suggestions / Character Screen Text
« on: September 16, 2013, 02:55:47 pm »
How about a concise rename of the equipment slots on the character load-out screen?
First, to explain the logic:
From
To
This list is far more pleasing phonetically, while being concise and exact.
Perhaps the existing headings are prefixed with derivatives of the class names to help further define their relevance? I feel this is made fairly obvious by the number of free slots available in each class load-out. If it is absolutely necessary that the headings reference the class names; I don't see why they can't be:
* The word gunnery sounds idiotic and is not contextually accurate.
** Gunning being both a more accurate and consistent descriptor.
First, to explain the logic:
The word 'gunnery' usually pertains to heavy artillery exclusively. (As of the current patch we don't have any heavy artillery, only Medium and Light!)*
A more accurate descriptor would be Munitions, however this is now inconstant with the other two class types.
They can be made consistent with more accurate descriptors.
A more accurate descriptor would be Munitions, however this is now inconstant with the other two class types.
They can be made consistent with more accurate descriptors.
From
Piloting EquipmentEngineering EquipmentGunnery Equipment
To
- Instruments
- Tools
- Munitions
This list is far more pleasing phonetically, while being concise and exact.
Perhaps the existing headings are prefixed with derivatives of the class names to help further define their relevance? I feel this is made fairly obvious by the number of free slots available in each class load-out. If it is absolutely necessary that the headings reference the class names; I don't see why they can't be:
- Piloting Instruments
- Engineering Tools
- Gunning Munitions **
* The word gunnery sounds idiotic and is not contextually accurate.
** Gunning being both a more accurate and consistent descriptor.
Come on, you know it would sound better.
40
Feedback and Suggestions / There is no King of this hill...
« on: September 13, 2013, 11:58:10 am »
I do feel that Muse has nailed CP gameplay really well in both Crazy King and Resource Race. However the King of the hill game mode just, isn't King of the hill. (compared with the traditional King of the Hill mode of other video games)
This wouldn't be a problem except that the vast majority of King of the Hill games play out unbalanced and sluggishly. If you cap the point at the beginning, usually, and I do mean usually, that means you've won the match. This is because it's too difficult to recapture a point, and why I'm about to explain how this game mode isn't technically king of the hill:
Typically in king of the hill type gameplay, if you want to "clock points" you need to actually be in the hill. It shouldn't be a resource with a time cap that continues to give points if you aren't directly defending it. Additionally in typical King of the Hill game modes if an enemy is in the hill you don't continue to clock points regardless, the timer should cease clocking points.
I appreciate that Guns of Icarus is not your typical FPS by any means and shouldn't be regarded as such, this is why I do agree that there should be a timer to cap the point. However, I feel that it should be significantly reduced, require you to remain in the hill to continue clocking points, and not clock your points if an enemy is also occupying the vicinity of the hill. This I believe would silence the "GG", "Oh well now we've lost..." & "Oh my god we can't take the point in time, quick just meat rush them one at a time and get slaughtered like sky-whales." from happening minutes before the end of the match, while making the gameplay more challenging for the defending team, (less boring than sitting just outside the point and spawn whaling the attacking team "Oh God we have to sit in this hill with nowhere to hide, I don't know where they're coming from") and less soul crushing for a team that knows that no matter what they can't turn the game around in time even if they spectacularly obliterate their opponents.
EDIT: Please would a moderator move this topic to Feedback and Suggestions if they deem it necessary.
This wouldn't be a problem except that the vast majority of King of the Hill games play out unbalanced and sluggishly. If you cap the point at the beginning, usually, and I do mean usually, that means you've won the match. This is because it's too difficult to recapture a point, and why I'm about to explain how this game mode isn't technically king of the hill:
Typically in king of the hill type gameplay, if you want to "clock points" you need to actually be in the hill. It shouldn't be a resource with a time cap that continues to give points if you aren't directly defending it. Additionally in typical King of the Hill game modes if an enemy is in the hill you don't continue to clock points regardless, the timer should cease clocking points.
I appreciate that Guns of Icarus is not your typical FPS by any means and shouldn't be regarded as such, this is why I do agree that there should be a timer to cap the point. However, I feel that it should be significantly reduced, require you to remain in the hill to continue clocking points, and not clock your points if an enemy is also occupying the vicinity of the hill. This I believe would silence the "GG", "Oh well now we've lost..." & "Oh my god we can't take the point in time, quick just meat rush them one at a time and get slaughtered like sky-whales." from happening minutes before the end of the match, while making the gameplay more challenging for the defending team, (less boring than sitting just outside the point and spawn whaling the attacking team "Oh God we have to sit in this hill with nowhere to hide, I don't know where they're coming from") and less soul crushing for a team that knows that no matter what they can't turn the game around in time even if they spectacularly obliterate their opponents.
EDIT: Please would a moderator move this topic to Feedback and Suggestions if they deem it necessary.