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.

Messages - Caprontos

Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11]
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Make gunner a muti-class..
« on: March 04, 2014, 06:37:50 pm »
with your idea

Example ship: Junker
Pilot:Claw kero Hydro,wrench,burst
Gunner:wrench,chem, burst lesmock
Gunner:Wrench,Buff,Burst lesmock
Gunner:Wrench,Greased Burst lesmock

Now the junker is optimal at 2 ranges and has all types of damage covered and the ability to buff .. engineer would become obsolete wrench chem and wrench buff would be the standard loadouts and say a 3rd gunner take 3 ammo  types, i really don't see a need to change the class system, so drastically and it really would unbalance the system why can the pilot not get the choice for a second repair tool or the engineer the choice of a second ammo in sacrifice to one of there designated tools?

I really do not feel the gunner is an under powered class just under appreciated, 3 ammo choices are not for every light gun but can be applied to every heavy weapon i.e lumberjack lesmock burst loch is essential for all 3 ranges to remain effective within arming time,

I think it comes down to play style some captains prefer damage over tank so they take more aggressive crew load outs and need a gunner where some are more tank and snipe and take 3-4 engineers.

To counter your argument of why you can not see this not working i say why is it needed in the first place? if you change one class to have the ability to pick and choose the other 2 have to have it as well,

I think that junker will be easier to kill though, because you can't rebuild or repair as fast.. So if you fail to kill the enemy ship quickly you lose. Also if fire gets out of hand you won't be able to keep up.

But I wouldn't mind seeing that as a viable option for a crew personally, as you sacrifice better repairing power for more dmg potential - more potential effective crew loadouts would be more interesting I think.

Also I don't think the gunner class is underpowered either, but I do think it is underused because its benefits are not useful in as many situations as an engies benefits.

I also disagree this change would make engi useless, as I doubt 2 tools could main engineer most ships... Nor do I think that its necessarily better then engi in the middle slot as that would depend what your trying to achieve.. (ie as you say more aggressive/risky play or more passive/defensive play) - it should however make gunner chosen more often in the "gunner" spot.

I don't know if it is needed persay (I mean nothing is even needed anymore in the game except maybe balance fixes but that's debatable.. ), but I think it would open up more options to what crews to use.. rather then keeping it limited.. which might make more interesting games.. Maybe..  So I think that's the main benefit of the change..

Also I don't agree all classes should need to have to pick because pilot is already the best at piloting.. and engi is already optimal for repairing. Its just gunners are not always optimal for the "gunner spot" of a ship.

I think better solution to gunner problem is to remove dfailt ammo, and make it a choice of loadout - check,3576.0.html

Personally I don't like this idea.. as I feel it takes away from the game more then it adds..

The problem here is that people can only use 1 ammo type when shooing and gunner doesn't seem that special if you think about it.

To make the gunner special, wouldn't it be better if they can do an small percentage more damage then other classes?
This amount should be around 5-7% I guess. It's small but its still more damage.

I personally don't like the passives idea because I like the all classes are equal except for there equipment options..

I don't dislike the idea of gunner tools(which I noticed is brought up a bit on this topic) though to add more value to them but it still wouldn't make them viable in more spots (maybe depends what they did with it I guess).. just make them better at what they do in the spots they are in.

Like geo said, gunners have to be used correctly.
Does your ship have a heavy weapon on it? Then you should have a gunner. Each heavy weapon can utilize at least 3 types of ammo.
Do you have a mine launcher as a featured weapon? Gunner, so you can modify the deploy range.
Do you have a hades? Lesmok-burst-greased, so you can fight effectively at almost any range.

Gunners always increase your situational ability. Their ammo types allow them to begin engaging an enemy sooner and maintain maximum dps throughout the engagement.
If you want to stay at one range specifically and never deviate, then maybe you don't need a gunner. But if you can't maintain that range, then your gungineers are going to be helpless.

If I am using a gunner, I want them carrying 3 ammo types to maximize their capabilities. 2 ammos and 2 repair tools makes them a glorified gungineer.

While I agree gunner is fine in all the standard gunner spots atm... Why should gunner be a situational class? Why is it bad if gunners are able to be more versatile as engineer is? 

I feel the reason we opt for a 3rd engi over a gunner in the situations you do, is because the gunner can't repair and buff or just the lack of repair power.. and you don't need more then one ammo (though two could be useful.. the second ammo doesn't out-weigh the buffs worth or the extra repair ability depending on the spot).

I do realize the current place of a gunner and its value in those places - but then those are its only spots. It is currently almost always -save a handful of load-outs- where two gunners is viable or sense-able, and many ships lose more from having a gunner then it gains.

Also if you had a glorified gungineer would you find more places to use a gunner in your ship choices? As that would be the benefit I'd want to see. Also they can still opt to bring 3 ammo types so its not like they stop filling that role. It isn't an either or question in this case.. as they would be able to opt to be either or.

My solution to the gunner problem is that there is no problem, leave the class as is and think more carefully how to utilize them.

I agree that there isn't anything wrong with the class, I just think its not able to be used in enough areas effectively.. and so limits crews to only a few combinations that are really useful.

I do suspect this change would still only make 1 gunner two engi ships more practical and not necessarily open up a lot of 2 gunner one engi able ships.. But it would make more ships able to be at lest some what effective even with two gunners compared to now.

2 ammo types and 2 repair tools makes them overpowered.

Possible issue.

Considering a gunner could buff lesmonk hades or burst hades - or Be able to buff and shoot two different guns that are optimal with two different ammos.. Also chemspray gunner = even less use for heatsink.

Also mallet/spanner burst/heavy clip for hawcha.. easier to repair with out someone to help while not losing anything.. really.. (similar for all heavy guns really).. You do sacrifice putting out fires so you can have two ammo's for hawcha.. but since you already would have a gunner on hawcha usually - its all gain in this case.

Which could be balance issues potentially, depending.

It would make gunner more useful in places he isn't usually needed.. and make it possibly useful for you to bring two gunners in more situations - but if the above issues and like issues really are game breaking issues then it could be bad for that reason.

But I don't know if I agree that they would be that game breaking..

Another issue is making to many effective crew combinations maybe make the system more confusing then having it very simplistic as it is now... 

Feedback and Suggestions / Make gunner a muti-class..
« on: March 03, 2014, 11:41:00 am »
I did post this elsewhere and I am aware this is partly suggested elsewhere but in another context.. But there wasn't any replies to it really why it can't work.

What if Gunner is made to be able to chose, either a third ammo type or a second tool. (IE to make it clear, they can be like they are now or opt to take a second engi tool over the 3rd ammo type) (I am not suggesting a 4th class like the other topic that has this like idea).

This way the gunner class can be a lot more versatile like engi can be. and might open the option for two gunner ship load-outs (at lest non-competitively) and not be a very do or die ship... because you can still have decent repair power, for the benefit of more ammo to pick..

I can't think of any negatives or balance issues it could cause.. Because anything this lets the gunner do the engineer can already do it more or less, the only difference is gunner would be a little more effective on the gunner side of it (since he can take advantage of 2 ammo types.. where as an engineer is more on the repair side since he can repair better.. As it should be I guess).

Engineers are still better then gunners at engineering (3 tools better then two tools on the repair side.. clearly).. So it doesn't remove the need for engies or diminish there core value.. I doubt we'll see all 3 gunner ships if this happened.. :P

Pilot doesn't matter cause pilot is pilot.. But maybe gunner pilot could work more so in this situation though.. why? haha

So what am I over looking with this? Is probably some major flaw that I just can't think of.. If it was suggested in the past in the same context (An I imagine it was), was there any dev input on this type of change?

(I did see it in a place elsewhere, after doing a little searching awhile back but didn't again see much or any follow up replies)..

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Simple suggestions to improve gameplay
« on: February 25, 2014, 01:45:03 pm »
I think number 1 should be done for various reasons. But it should be a "toggle" thing.. like press P to show/hide ally spot box.. This way people who want to use it can and people who do not don't have to.. so win-win.. I can think of several benefits for having it available and think I suggested it in the in game chat before..

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Crazy King
« on: February 18, 2014, 09:57:29 am »
Perhaps making it so the next point is random.. well almost .. It should pick from points that weren't picked within the last 3 points  (ie once it picks C it will not pick C for at lest 3 points before it is open again) and likewise raise the time a point is active to compensate the travel times (since it is unlikely you will be at a point early).

Or maybe the point order is decided completely randomly every 5 points... This way all 5 points are always used but the order isn't always the same.. So you can plan ahead. (depends what is easier).

This would cut down a lot on the whole run to the next point early since you don't know where it is yet... raising the chance people fight at the current point longer, or fight at a more central location..

It would also make crazy king a bit more.. Crazy... (Maybe this is more a new type though as I am sure some prefer knowing the order.. and I agree its nice to)...

-I also agree with other points suggested above..

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Spire Hit Box
« on: February 18, 2014, 09:42:58 am »
I assume the metal parts on the balloon count as hull.. much like there is hull on pyra's or mobula balloon that can be hit.

Having bits of hull on the balloon can save you when an enemy is aiming for your balloon and hits the hull bits..

Perhaps it would be nice if on the ship menu we could press a button and it would highlight the ships hitboxes so we could see what is hull and what is balloon and such.. Then we could see if there is bad hitbox placement in regards to stuff like this.

I agree it should be changed if hitting the balloon counts as a hull hit.. when there is no hull to be hit.. but if there is hull to be hit then hitting it should count as a hull hit (IMO).

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Capture the Flag
« on: February 18, 2014, 09:36:47 am »
I've thought about capture the flag like maps but.. I never felt it would work out really given how ships are balanced. It sounds like it would tend to favor squids .. since once they have the flag they can just run away.. (depending on map design and such)..

And with only 4 ships it would be hard to defend your flag and attack theirs..

Maybe a gamemode like I think TF2 has (I have never played TF2 buy have seen my younger brother playing it..) Where you have to push the minecart to somewhere?..

IE a mode like CP where while one team controls it .. it moves one way and when the other team controls it .. it goes the other way.. and you win when it reaches your side..

Maybe it could be getting a transport ship of goods to your village.. or something..

That's not really capture the flag.. but it is capture something.. and I think would be a little more workable with how the game is atm....

This made me think of an aside idea... but I'll put it down anyway.. what if Resource race work more like.. You don't capture the points.. instead you collect supplies from the point then have to transport it back to your base.. if you are killed an enemy can then take those supplies.. While your loaded up with goods you could be slowed a bit.. making you more vulnerable if you try to do it alone.. (I guess this is another "Capture something" type map anyways).. It may work better if the map only has like 2 points.. or need to consider carefully where the collect points are and where the bases are to make it more likely you will fight over it..

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Post level 15 log/goal/whathaveyou idea(s)
« on: February 17, 2014, 06:25:56 pm »
Mainly to TyberiusTheThird post.

So you can't be helpful and have side goals? I don't see how this suggestion would make us any-less helpful to people.. I have always tried to correct/help people if I see them doing something wrong or inefficient to help them be a better player..

Also while I can understand you and others don't enjoy the log system - doesn't mean we should not consider the option for people who would like to have more of it (I think there is only a handful of logs that need to be reconsidered due to either difficulty or tediousness.. but log changes is a different topic).

Personally as said I find the game more fun when I have side goals to go for - and I doubt I am the only one. I am not asking for it to be made mandatory and there doesn't even need to be a visable reward (for me but I assume others would like it, and the weekly log idea would benefit from it to encourage participation, so it is included in the thought)- just to give continuation to what we already have or another side system that does the same thing.

I don't think the bounty system is fun or interesting in its current state(at all).. So should we remove it? No, because some people do like it and have fun with it... Same with additional log systems - imo - its something people who want it can participate and people who do not can ignore it.

Also I get some people will be against the idea but I'd prefer reasons beside I don't like it/want more of it.. as to why we shouldn't get it... or alternatives to add more.. Because why are options a bad thing.. if those options may not be that time consuming to include.. and help keep x percent of the game community wanting to keep playing.


As for the topic of training logs, I am fine with that to if they add them in way that's not ridiculous. (ie I don't want them to be full crews of 1-3.. give us at lest 2 above 3.. or expand the 3 to 5 so these ships are not so rare)... Also really level 1-3 aren't the only novice.. I think for the purpose of the log raising it to 1-5 is more then fair..

While I don't think we need logs to make us want to be helpful though, this community in general is all pretty helpful/willing to work with anyone who is willing to work with them and even to an extent the ones who are not willing..

So all the logs would do is encourage us to play more games on low level ships which in-turn puts us in situations we could help more, but logs can't be done in such a away as to reward you for being helpful.. (ie their is no way for the game to know if we told someone how to do something better or if we were a jerk and just used them for a log point :P).


Also To Yosh I agree we don't need more levels atm. .. Until we get enough new maps, guns, and maybe ammo/tools to warrant them adding more levels to cover those.. I see no reason to add more level oriented logs..

What I do want is a continuation of the side goals so that you have more reason to play what you want then feeling obligated to playing something that makes you quit playing the game out of boredom.. (at lest that is what happens for me). I understand everyone doesn't need that, but some people do prefer it (I assume I am not the only one.. but maybe I am special haha)...

I agree just letting us re-do the logs again isn't as fun as the weekly log ideas or things beyond it. That is just the simplest possible solution (I think) for the topics point (more class goals post level 15).. and would sever the purpose if something more interesting is to complicated to introduce in a reasonable amount of work time.

(... I don't think that]s a wall of text since its just a few posts mashed together.. :P)

Feedback and Suggestions / Post level 15 log/goal/whathaveyou idea(s)
« on: February 17, 2014, 12:25:12 am »
As the game ages more and more people will reach level 15..  and while I understand logs and levels aren't the focus of this game.. I think many people still like them and they give you some side goals to go for (I know personally like having the log goals to work on for the class I am playing)..

So I suggest once a person reaches level 15, they could re-do all the logs for that class, and a star is added after the level.. or something like this.. (basically getting level 15 twice)..

If this isn't possible because of the steam achievements and issues with that.. or some other reason..

A few daily logs that are picked at random could be given.. maybe every few days (not everyone has time I assume to do them daily so ever few days or maybe week would be more fair to everyone probably)... Where they could give a badge long term (like complete X daily challenges.. (or weekly or whatever)...

Another thought is add post 15 "ridiculous" logs.. that are very hard to achieve.. like maybe 3000m balloon pop.. or survive 10mins and get 2 kills with less then 1% hull health as pilot.. (idk I am sure you guys can come up with some ridiculous logs that could be for fun or maybe badges.. cause we all like them right?)...

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Social slot
« on: February 16, 2014, 07:49:24 pm »
Like the above I don't necessarily agree with items that can be used to troll.. but the "social/cosmetic items that don't have a great effect outside the crew itself" bit is what I was expecting.

Perhaps they could add items for a social slot that are earned from various things.. And what one is equipped decides what your after game animation is.. (things like a dance, reading a book, looking at a map, "responsible" drinking etc.)

Just to add a bit more.. personal touch to those after game animations..

Perhaps a cosmetic item could be equipped that changes how some item looks.. Like if a certain item is equipped your mallet will look different then usual.. (while not entirely interesting... a thought)..

But as said these would just be "fun" additions that don't add anything useful... But sometimes those things help make a game better..

Feedback and Suggestions / Three team games (an maybe 4?)
« on: February 16, 2014, 11:10:37 am »
Basically convert the 3v3 to a 2v2v2. and maybe the 4v4 to a 2v2v2v2... maybe even free for all matches where ever ship for itself.. (I don't think free for all would be as good as having a team mate for various reasons).

Granted I know 3 team (or 4) would mean altering the UI to accommodate the third teams score and spectate mode info and spawns.. But aside from that I am not sure what else would need to be done.

I think the main benefit of this is it could lead to much more hectic matches.. Which.. Would mix stuff up a bit.  I think it may benefit CP more then DM.

The draw back is.. 3v3/4v4 aren't known for filling up quickly as is and some people may not like it being more hectic..

As for team color.. Green and/or Yellow?.. They would probably be different from blue/red enough to know its not yours.

-maybe suggested before but not really sure how to search it-

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: New game mode - deathmatch with time limit
« on: February 16, 2014, 08:43:55 am »
I like this idea.

Likewise you could add timed cp(or CK or maybe resource race woo err), where most points win after 15mins (or whatever feels right). I don't see why it can't work both-ways.

The benefit of this over our current is.. games can't last more then 15mins (I have seen cp's drag on to where half the game leaves because it just is taking to long.. Granted it doesn't happen all the time).. + people know how long it will take so they can know if they have time for one more or not.

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Captin Mark Mechanic Tweak
« on: February 07, 2014, 01:19:22 pm »
A thing that would help a bit is making the captain target a helm key.. so it can be bound to a mouse key and not conflict with the mouse keys anywhere else... It would be a lot easier to click a ship then it is to press B while also trying to fly.. (imo). I get though this means no captain mark if your not on the helm.. I think that's fine...

A toggle would be handy to though I would say it only goes to spotted ships. (we don't want it to cycle to a ship you may not have seen thus giving away someones ambush attampt)..

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: The Bounty Season
« on: January 29, 2014, 11:10:54 am »
Adding more depth to the system would be nice..  and this post is entirely full of probably bad ideas but...

I also sorta dislike the fact that if you don't play starting day one and play a lot it becomes very unlikely you can even win.  And unless your top you get nothing.. so no point in actively trying unless you plan to put in a lot of time up front. Which is why I don't even bother..

What it needs in general is more reason to want to play it.. The currency idea could be thing. If I could obtain some in game item for just participating each season (eventually) then I would maybe more like trying.. not to win but to earn something. I might even sign up if I would get some benefit from that (I already know I don't play enough to win most likely.. so why try?)..

Perhaps just keep it low scale and.. every-time you beat a bounty you gain 1 point.. once per bounty per season like now... And if your a bounty then you gain one point every 10 or so matches you win in a row (this way being a bounty can gain you more points, if you can win multiple times in a row.. but not be to broken.. I think? may need some balance).

Then make some purchase-ables like hat/costume/badge that are separate from a "winning" prize.

Eventually though we will own all these items.. so then what?.

Lets assume you guys do add a proper clan system.. and add in clan benefits (like maybe customizable ships (cosmetic only of course).. or something).. You could make it so you have to pay for it with these points.. That way everyone in a clan has to donate and fund these types of clan "benefits".. So they could be kinda pricey..

Another thing could be a costume piece that you can let people add a logo to.. (maybe the trench coat? since it has space..).. Some people might like that.. That is paid for with points to put the logo on then each person has to buy one with points..

Another option is to let players make "prize" matches.. where the game is worth x points, so if it is a 1 point prize match the winning team gains one and losing team loses one point each.. and you must have a point to participate.. and the lobby has to be completely full to start.. and if you drop out mid game you still lose points if your side loses.. but you do not gain any if your side won with out you... Also the game would need to be auto-locked so no one can drop in to avoid more issues that may come up.... (clearly this idea needs some thought before being attempted)..

An for a point sink if we need one eventually... you could add in some grab bag that has a tiny chance of having an item mall item in it.. or you get back less points then you spent to buy it.. or you get nothing.. usually nothing.

I don't have any more ideas on what points could be used for.. atm haha..

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Gunner Passives
« on: January 27, 2014, 12:27:58 pm »,3022.0.html

Reminds me of my 'gungineer' role idea. Essentially the same thing (1 pilot, 2 engi, 2 gunner tools). I think the biggest complaint with it is that it would more or less phase out the gunner role. A few guns will benefit from 2 ammo types, but very few benefit from 3 ammo types. The only one I know of that consistently benefits from 3 ammo types consistently in the same match is the Mine Launcher.

The difference being it doesn't add a new class to fill that type of role but lets the gunner opt to be that role.. So gunner is more useful in more situations.. nor does it remove the gunner we have now since you can still bring 3 ammo types and 1 tool for the guns/ships that, that is beneficial for.

So their would have to be some other flaw for it to not be a workable idea.. IMO..

--To redria's post--
Also considering all classes can do all things... and the only real difference is what tools we brought (ie there isn't really classes - just equipment)... Everyone is a pilot.. a gunner and a engineer.. Just if you bring more pilot tools you give your self more options when flying.. If you bring more ammos you have extra options on what to shoot and if you bring more tools your more able to repair.

I don't really consider the roles in this game to be like your post redria because of that.. Also given the game setting.. wouldn't many of us just be "self taught"? Or learned from family and such at a younger age?..

How likely is it we go to university to learn how to be an airship pilot or engineer or how to aim a lumberjack to hit things really far away? I admit I don't know a lot about the game world but from the little I do know.. it doesn't sound likely..

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Gunner Passives
« on: January 27, 2014, 12:44:32 am »
Another idea.. that maybe bad but... what if a gunner could take either 1 engineer tool and 3 ammo OR 2 tools and 2 ammo's (if they pick a second engineer tool the third ammo slot is blocked)..

This way you can opt to have two gunners who have two ammo types and two tools... Then 1 engineer two gunners (or three gunners maybe on some ships).. etc could all be more viable.. because you do not lose all your repair power but you still gain that extra ammo..

(some actual play tests would need to be done to see how true this is.. but thinking about it from what I know from the game it sounds like it would go aways in opening up what class combo is best for what ship and load-out)...

It would make gunner more of a hybrid/versatile class though and less of a strict path, which may or may not be something they want to do.. (I don't think it makes them any more versatile then an engineer though).

I maybe over looking some major issue why this is just a bad idea (and I can't imagine it hasn't be suggested before.. perhaps with some reason why it won't work?)..

I assume there are issues that need to be consider with this idea if it were considered.. but I can't think of much atm.. (it is late and I am tired)..

Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11]