Messages

76

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Please Make Gunners Useful

« on: October 11, 2013, 07:30:51 am »

Yeah but it's not in "the spirit of the class"..
You're just making a Gungineer..

Captains should take gunners for their gunnery.
Also, different types of ammo isn't terribly interesting...

I'm gonna quote what I wrote on the last page, because personally I feel that the gunner not only needs to be more viable but also more interesting.

What's not in the spirit of the class? And who's just making a gungineer? Not sure who you're talking to there!

Like the OP, I think engineering is as dull as dishwater compared to gunning so I get a bit ticked off having to go engineer 90% of the time. I'll do it, but it's nowhere near as fun as piloting or gunning for me hence why I do more piloting...

Edit: Yeah I thought it was a very elegant idea!

77

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Please Make Gunners Useful

« on: October 11, 2013, 07:01:52 am »

I still think the simplest change that makes sense, given that gunners are forced to bring wrench/mallet/spanner or risk being totally useless when anything breaks -- while engineers get an additional ammo choice (because they can gun under any circumstances) -- is to make standard/vanilla rounds an ammo type. This forces the engineer to tradeoff versatility for specialisation or vice versa (just like the gunner does with engineering tools) and makes the gunner's repertoire all the more valuable (like the engineer's). With regards to ammo preloading/abuse: introduce unattended ammo reloading (this is far more intuitive) and allow anyone to use whatever is preloaded (again, this is far more intuitive).

As it stands:

Gunner:
Repair/rebuild or buff or extinguish/spray. (And even choosing 'repair/rebuild' sacrifices one or the other, or both to some degree)
Standard ammo and 3x specialised ammo types.

Engineer:
Repair/rebuild and buff and extinguish/spray. (I know it's not quite this simple but you get the idea)
Standard ammo and 1x specialised ammo.

With the fix above it would be:

Gunner:
Repair/rebuild or buff or extinguish/spray.
Standard ammo and 3x specialised ammo types.

Engineer:
Repair/rebuild and buff and extinguish/spray.
Standard ammo or 1x specialised ammo.

And I think that would make a world of difference. This was originally suggested by Mr Mouse I believe.

Anyway, if Sunderland is right and Muse are working on a solution to all this then the above doesn't matter an awful lot until we know what they're doing, so I'll get me coat...

78

The Lounge / Re: What did you name YOURSELF and why?

« on: October 10, 2013, 06:23:19 am »

My real name is Gregg. Some people used to say Gegg and sometimes people said Greggi or Geggi. When we had LAN parties my computer used to be called 'geggis computer'. And there's my screen handle right there.

79

General Discussion / Re: beta dayz

« on: October 10, 2013, 06:01:28 am »

Remember when your ship blew up the entire crew fell to the ground and spent a few moments vacantly staring at each other? Or jumping around? Or wondering how you survived the fall? And the blast?

80

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Captain's Requests

« on: October 10, 2013, 04:59:53 am »

Or how about having a captain's notebook to accompany each ship or preset? Like a text box somewhere on the ship overview page (perhaps using one of the book graphics?) which a captain can fill out and explain their loadout, desired crew compositions, crew options, tactics and strategies. This would be easier to implement, be flexible and open to some humour and flavour. To make this feature more apparent to newcomers, it might be worth showing some help balloon/tooltips explaining that you can click on a captain's ship to view their loadout and notes. Of course, the captain's notebook wouldn't be visible to enemies. It could be a terrific learning tool as well in the right hands.

Edit: The other plus with this is that you could simply say as captain over crew chat: "Check my notes crew!". You could even put at the end of your notes "Feel free to ask me any questions." Stuff like that.

Oh, and by the way, great idea RedHound!

81

Gameplay / Re: The Spire.

« on: October 09, 2013, 09:34:44 am »

I'd like the Spire to be able to put the fear in anyone caught in its sights. When you see one staring you down it should be an 'Are we organised enough to engage this thing head on?' type of situation. Much like finding yourself on the port side of a Galleon. At present it feels like they're kill-bait at worst, and a potentially problematic soft target at best.

82

Gameplay / Re: The Spire.

« on: October 09, 2013, 06:49:07 am »

Yeah that's why the angles would need to be tweaked carefully! I'd be happy to see how the Spire fared with easier trifectas on either side of the ship before venturing into the dark waters of four way fire (with a medium gun)! That could get nasty.

83

Gameplay / Re: The Spire.

« on: October 09, 2013, 05:47:17 am »

^ Basically what Echoez said.

It would be nice to make Pyra pilots think twice before facing down a Spire.

84

Gameplay / Re: The Spire.

« on: October 09, 2013, 04:52:28 am »

My initial idea was to just angle the lower port gun at 45 degrees, keep the front gun facing forwards and keep the upper starboard gun at its current angle. I kind of like the spread this arrangement gives (which fits with the idea of it being a sentinel ship) and it also opens up a few more options (and that lower port gun has been a bugbear for me since the Spire launched). Having said this, I do echo what Echoez said that two awkward trifectas might not be enough to put the 'cannon' in 'glass cannon'. I think angling the starboard gun forwards would be formidable but I like the symmetry of keeping two 45 degree angle guns on either side and the arcs they provide. The best bet for me would be to have the port and starboard guns share the same angles facing outwards so 45/45 or 35/35 (or tweaked perhaps so they're not absolutely symmetrical seeing as their relative positions are different on each side ie. the port gun is close to the hull, the starboard gun is far out). I think Muse would have to experiment with the angles to establish a sweet spot -- although dual mercs sound delicious to me! :-D -- but this tweak could transform the ship without having to make any sweeping changes. I'd still welcome some more acceleration, and having the Spire go backwards as fast as it can go forwards sounds interesting. It's the only ship I can imagine that making sense on really.

85

Gameplay / Re: The Spire.

« on: October 08, 2013, 08:52:31 am »

...the Spire could be very easily turned into the frontal gun platform version of the Galleon, kinda like how the Pyra and the Junker relate...

I think that's a good comparison too, with the Galleon being the only other ship where the pilot hopping off the helm is viable or even expected behaviour given the proximity of the balloon, the nearest gun and the nature of the ship (in that it's more of a static platform than a super mobile ship so the captain should have more down time than, say, a squid).

86

Gameplay / Re: The Spire.

« on: October 08, 2013, 07:13:11 am »

Yeah I'm meaning more acceleration rather than speed so it feels really responsive moving and turning rather than outright fast. I was just thinking some more after posting: the Spire is a sentinel ship so it should be able to stand its ground once it's dug in. Its name, appearance and composition make it the perfect ship for parking up, watching and waiting for the enemy. In this regard I think it could do with being tankier so it's more formidable if allowed to get into a good position. It's going to be inherently more vulnerable as a stationary target (that's also huge!) so the added HP would only help solidfy its role in my opinion, without unbalancing it.

87

Gameplay / Re: The Spire.

« on: October 08, 2013, 06:34:26 am »

As a Spire fan too, I can vouch for a lot of the feelings here. The buff made a slight difference to survivability but it's still sorely lacking as a sensible option. The possible trifecta is limited to a handful of gun combinations and even then is difficult to achieve and maintain. The lack of speed or responsiveness is a big issue when you consider the size of your balloon and hull, the HP of your hull, and the spread of components across the ship for engineers to fix up. Vertical movement is highly restrictive as well, as Crafeksterty says above, thanks to the height of the ship so you can't escape rams or carronades easily.

One of the things I love about the Spire that isn't usually possible on many of the other ships apart from the Galleon and perhaps the Mobula, is that it's a good ship for pilots who want to help gun. I'll usually bring the Spire to a halt and jump on the starboard or bow gun, fixing up the balloon and tweaking the angle of the ship occasionally. I'd personally like to see any tweaks play to that strength because the space on the top deck is hard to fully man with so many important components on the lower decks that are likely to need fixing.

The Mobula has happily filled the space that I wanted the Spire to fill though, but I'd dearly love to be able to fly it with confidence. What about sticking the lower port gun at a 45 degree angle too similar to the upper starboard gun? That should open up a trifecta on either side of the ship and make that gun slot more useful. I'd happily see some acceleration and HP buffs too.

88

General Discussion / Re: I played with X

« on: October 08, 2013, 04:34:09 am »

I played with Phelan, Wundsalz, Sprayer and General Cusell (sp?) briefly last night with a few random players and didn't have a particularly good run, thanks in no small part to the terrible lag I was having (something I haven't suffered from in a long time), piloting badly and running alt builds. At one point on Northern Fjords when I was flying a squid the game hung for about 10 seconds before spitting me out half way across the map. Needless to say it was horrible and hugely distracting so after that I quit. When I rejoined later on I didn't have any more issues and managed to play some good games for a couple of hours with a few familiar names (lukewin, SirVanceALittle and CustardInc - hi!).

89

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Interface additions for Pilot/Gunner

« on: October 07, 2013, 11:03:08 am »

Maybe instead, have the pilot tool icon pop up on the components that are effected. So, if I was using kerosene, my engines would flash fairly subtly with the tool being used, so I know it's still on.

Nice idea. That could work in a similar way to fire actually, where the component icon is cycled with the pilot tool damaging it (and fire if that's also doing damage). If it was visible to crewmates (in the same way fire is) they could also warn cap'ns if they're still sloshing moonshine/tar/kerosene into the engines, or pumping hydrogen into the balloons for instance.

90

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Interface additions for Pilot/Gunner

« on: October 07, 2013, 10:02:48 am »

I think these are all great suggestions. Not sure about the icon on the helm though, looks a bit too much like a screen! The ammo type next to the turret icon works well in that mock up I've got to say and would be useful information to anyone about to hop on. How about instead of having the ammo type next to the bullet icon next to the ammo counter you just have the ammo type replace the bullet? The ammo type could be outlined like the bullet and gradually fill up as the ammo is reloaded. That would keep the HUD trim and serve to communicate what ammo is being loaded.