31
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Return of Resource Race
« on: January 07, 2018, 12:48:26 pm »
I could work with that, Psi. That makes plenty more sense than the others. Testing it out on Paritan might be the best chance to try it out.
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
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Return of Resource Race
« on: January 06, 2018, 08:31:34 am »
Honestly? It sounds like KotH with more complication. Since all three points are in the same effective area, then there's no incentive to play it any different than KotH, just a bit more annoying to keep the full point.
If you were to have, say, four points on the map, some on the outer periphery of the central area, and then one, central point, it might be more engaging. You'd obviously have squid-rushes for some of the outer points, but a team that holds one outer and the central might have an edge.
That, of course, inspires just holding two points and sniping anyone who tries to take the central point, but the above is just a possible theory.
As I recall, Resource Race was less KotH and more Domination, where you had to control the multiple points over a larger area. The distance was part of the problem, as was ship speed, meaning you only utilized some of the faster moving ships. No real way to fix that, as people will spam faster ships to ensure a capture, no matter how tightly you try and put the points together.
As for having the 'sweet spot' to capture all three points.... Like I said. Over-complicated KotH. Players would sit in the exact same spot as they do now, with no incentive to play differently.
If you were to have, say, four points on the map, some on the outer periphery of the central area, and then one, central point, it might be more engaging. You'd obviously have squid-rushes for some of the outer points, but a team that holds one outer and the central might have an edge.
That, of course, inspires just holding two points and sniping anyone who tries to take the central point, but the above is just a possible theory.
As I recall, Resource Race was less KotH and more Domination, where you had to control the multiple points over a larger area. The distance was part of the problem, as was ship speed, meaning you only utilized some of the faster moving ships. No real way to fix that, as people will spam faster ships to ensure a capture, no matter how tightly you try and put the points together.
As for having the 'sweet spot' to capture all three points.... Like I said. Over-complicated KotH. Players would sit in the exact same spot as they do now, with no incentive to play differently.
33
Q&A / Re: How does one pilot/build the Judgement airship in PVP (if at all?)
« on: January 06, 2018, 08:23:37 am »
First of all, welcome to our humble and wonderful game, and we hope to see you stick around!
Second, however, is that I, personally, would say try a few of the other ships first. Judgement has had some mixed opinions about it, some absolutely love it, others are less enthusiastic.
As for piloting, I would learn some of the base ships first, such as Goldfish, Pyra, and Junker. These give a good baseline on piloting and are really good for beginners, and they keep current throughout your lifetime through the game. Goldie is the bread-and-butter of GOIO.
Easiest way to try and figure out a build? Try and find a higher level and ask if you can crew with them aboard a Judgement. You can get a build suggestion from anyone, but until you see it in action, it's hard to tell if it's the right build for you. Crewing one while in a less-than-critical role, i.e. Gunner, gives you some time to understand how the ship fits together, and how it works for your playstyle.
Other than that, trial and effort. That's pretty much how every single meta and offbuild that GOIO offers formed, through a lot of attempts, not a few explosions, and the wonderful Eureka moment when you finally piece that fun, efficient build together.
Good luck, and fair winds!
Second, however, is that I, personally, would say try a few of the other ships first. Judgement has had some mixed opinions about it, some absolutely love it, others are less enthusiastic.
As for piloting, I would learn some of the base ships first, such as Goldfish, Pyra, and Junker. These give a good baseline on piloting and are really good for beginners, and they keep current throughout your lifetime through the game. Goldie is the bread-and-butter of GOIO.
Easiest way to try and figure out a build? Try and find a higher level and ask if you can crew with them aboard a Judgement. You can get a build suggestion from anyone, but until you see it in action, it's hard to tell if it's the right build for you. Crewing one while in a less-than-critical role, i.e. Gunner, gives you some time to understand how the ship fits together, and how it works for your playstyle.
Other than that, trial and effort. That's pretty much how every single meta and offbuild that GOIO offers formed, through a lot of attempts, not a few explosions, and the wonderful Eureka moment when you finally piece that fun, efficient build together.
Good luck, and fair winds!
34
The Cantina / Re: Air shanty attempt
« on: December 04, 2017, 08:38:08 am »
Same. Thanks for the Melody, Gguy, seriously.
35
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Mount light gun in heavy gun slot.
« on: November 11, 2017, 08:41:50 am »
LongMax, they tried to have PvE only ships. And guns.
If they tried that, people would call out to have it ported over, and get annoyed if Muse said no.
If they tried that, people would call out to have it ported over, and get annoyed if Muse said no.
36
Feedback and Suggestions / Map Idea; Vyshtorg
« on: November 06, 2017, 10:13:50 am »
Original lore on the Mercantile Guild, in the Faction spotlight boards of old, there's mention of 'Fleets of airships to rise above the filth and pestilence of the city streets'. If we were to take that literally, one wouldn't be wrong in assuming that the Merchants have a city basically above the city. Airship-borne houses and manors that could very well be airborn Versaille's.
So the idea is to address past desires for a more vertically focused map, with cover that, instead of being attached to the ground, more so floats as a static object. The ground is still there, of course, but a higher ceiling for the map allows for these floating bits of cover to give a new experience to the play.
For example, let's say there are 4-5 floating manors above the city below. Combat wouldn't oly focus on narrow corridors that enemies may be able to slip through, or on long-range snipes on relatively open maps, but more so on control of the islands that you can take for snipes, and darting in between, under, over, and around these cover points to take snipers by surprise.
An example would be, say, a Spire hiding behind one of these islands, with a Pyra running defence for any flankers. On an average map where cover extends to the ground, this would mean flankers would be able to go low and have to try and sneak below the Pyra, right under the guns and hope it isn't spotted. On a map with static, air-borne cover, the flanker may be able to simply fly under the cover piece and pop back up behind both ships. Some cover bits on most maps offer something similar from above, but the potential is there to make a very interesting combat scenario.
Visuals would also be rather interesting, the beauty of the flying manors points compared with the heavily industrial and slum-like city below, should enough work be put into both.
Tl;dr: Verticle focused map with floating manors acting as cover, with the ability to flank above and below, and control of these flying 'islands' being key to victory.
Anyways, a theory for something that I've seen requested a time or two for a verticle map. And it would allow us to see something in the south, as I believe very few maps are based there.
So the idea is to address past desires for a more vertically focused map, with cover that, instead of being attached to the ground, more so floats as a static object. The ground is still there, of course, but a higher ceiling for the map allows for these floating bits of cover to give a new experience to the play.
For example, let's say there are 4-5 floating manors above the city below. Combat wouldn't oly focus on narrow corridors that enemies may be able to slip through, or on long-range snipes on relatively open maps, but more so on control of the islands that you can take for snipes, and darting in between, under, over, and around these cover points to take snipers by surprise.
An example would be, say, a Spire hiding behind one of these islands, with a Pyra running defence for any flankers. On an average map where cover extends to the ground, this would mean flankers would be able to go low and have to try and sneak below the Pyra, right under the guns and hope it isn't spotted. On a map with static, air-borne cover, the flanker may be able to simply fly under the cover piece and pop back up behind both ships. Some cover bits on most maps offer something similar from above, but the potential is there to make a very interesting combat scenario.
Visuals would also be rather interesting, the beauty of the flying manors points compared with the heavily industrial and slum-like city below, should enough work be put into both.
Tl;dr: Verticle focused map with floating manors acting as cover, with the ability to flank above and below, and control of these flying 'islands' being key to victory.
Anyways, a theory for something that I've seen requested a time or two for a verticle map. And it would allow us to see something in the south, as I believe very few maps are based there.
37
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Allow a 8-16 man crew to pilot a capital ship
« on: November 05, 2017, 05:02:19 pm »
If Muse ever decided to make a sequel to Guns, taking into account all of what the community has offered up, and trying to address everything from scratch, there might be a chance.
As it stands, I'd still love something like this to happen, but unless there was a rerelease or a new game... unlikely. And I thank you for mentioning my ancient post @Guras. I'd honestly forgotten about that.
As it stands, I'd still love something like this to happen, but unless there was a rerelease or a new game... unlikely. And I thank you for mentioning my ancient post @Guras. I'd honestly forgotten about that.
38
Website and Forum Issues / Re: [PC]
« on: October 17, 2017, 02:00:37 pm »
My guess? Player Council.
39
The Gallery / Re: GOIA memes
« on: September 27, 2017, 05:35:25 pm »
"From the ruins of wrecked ships, we will set our course with one simple vow; Not that way"
Just due to all of the doom and gloom around GOIO player count. I thought a good funny would help.
40
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Lock Gunner out of slots 1, 3, and 4 for midmatch join. Poll
« on: August 07, 2017, 11:41:57 am »
I like it. Coming in from the Matchmaker would make this pretty effective and ensure that we avoid mishaps with people joining as roles that they don't need aboard the ship.
I can see a lot of newer players quitting a match because they can't be the role they want, however. It'll be annoying for both parties, but it's a healthy change to avoid toxicity. If the newer player joins in Lobby, of course, it'll be fine, so that's going to keep most of the issues to a minimum.
I can see a lot of newer players quitting a match because they can't be the role they want, however. It'll be annoying for both parties, but it's a healthy change to avoid toxicity. If the newer player joins in Lobby, of course, it'll be fine, so that's going to keep most of the issues to a minimum.
41
Gameplay / Re: The Meta is dead, long live the Meta.
« on: August 05, 2017, 11:32:14 am »
Honestly? Just have two ammo types.
Split the new Greased and bring back a modified old Greased, the same suggestion that was made for Old Loch and New Loch.
Give Greased a slower projectile speed and reduce it's range for a lesser negative to damage, and make a new ammo with the 90% jitter and a massive fire rate.
It covers both sides, an ammo for extreme close range and a monster DPS, and a mid-range replacement for somewhat higher DPS, but for a less efficient shooting experience.
Honestly, that would help Gunners a bit, giving them even more to choose from.
Split the new Greased and bring back a modified old Greased, the same suggestion that was made for Old Loch and New Loch.
Give Greased a slower projectile speed and reduce it's range for a lesser negative to damage, and make a new ammo with the 90% jitter and a massive fire rate.
It covers both sides, an ammo for extreme close range and a monster DPS, and a mid-range replacement for somewhat higher DPS, but for a less efficient shooting experience.
Honestly, that would help Gunners a bit, giving them even more to choose from.
42
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Autoswtich lobby slots. Dev discussion and poll
« on: August 04, 2017, 04:41:36 pm »
I like the visual change, as it does what is already done when you've only got a half-crew, but it doesn't take it to the point of pure annoyance.
Certainly, people may still join as a second gunner, but going with the second option I feel would take a lot of control away from the players joining. In some cases, this is a good thing, but it could also lead to a lot more half-crewed ships. Certainly could be confusing, but once people got used to it, it'd most likely be fine.
Certainly, people may still join as a second gunner, but going with the second option I feel would take a lot of control away from the players joining. In some cases, this is a good thing, but it could also lead to a lot more half-crewed ships. Certainly could be confusing, but once people got used to it, it'd most likely be fine.
43
Gameplay / Re: Failsafe
« on: August 01, 2017, 01:51:56 pm »
I've certainly had plenty of success with it, mostly on use preemptively and on engine burns. It's a really good tool, but I'm not confident enough in my personal skill to run a kit like that, especially on some ships. Generally, I'll run it with a Spanner, just as back-up, and you can double it up with the Failsafe for tap-repairs.
As for PvP... not certain about that. I feel like it could make for abuse of burns on ships that really, really need it, even if you're limited on rebuild. Certainly, you could balance it a little, but... still. It's the very principle that makes it a big worry.
A modified Armor Kit, now. That I want to see. Just give it -20% to all incoming damage rather than just tossing some free health on, and I can see it coming across.
As for PvP... not certain about that. I feel like it could make for abuse of burns on ships that really, really need it, even if you're limited on rebuild. Certainly, you could balance it a little, but... still. It's the very principle that makes it a big worry.
A modified Armor Kit, now. That I want to see. Just give it -20% to all incoming damage rather than just tossing some free health on, and I can see it coming across.
44
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Single/Coop Story Mode for Alliance - And Health Bars for PVP
« on: July 27, 2017, 01:17:08 pm »
Richard's heart is in the right place with this. He wants the game to be a lot more accessible to lower levels, draw in more players, try and open the game up from the elites, and to draw in more players.
The problem with that is trying to strike the balance between the Patricians and the Plebians. Plebs want more opened to them, more power, more capability, while the Patricians want nothing for it. Vets know the game inside out, backwards and forwards. Plebs are still trying to figure out how to swap ammos.
Partly, this is due to bad tutorials, bad expectations from the devs, and toxicity from vets who are tired of helping nublets learn the game. I'm guilty of it myself, even though I've helped at least.... 10-20 nublet crews? Not just a single novice, but the entire crew. They learn as much as they can, but Guns is not a simple game, even if it's a simple premise. But that's neither here nor there to this discussion.
You can only offer the newer players so much, and can only give them so much. Higher levels need something too, to keep them in the game. Not as much, I don't think, since we are (mostly) all friends here, and come to have a good time with one another. The core game is sound. It's what the newer players have to walk into that fails them. The core game doesn't need too much in the way of changing, with the exception of minor tweaks to balance meta and try and keep the game alive, but it doesn't need to change too overly much.
My point is this; if you want to help newer players, fix the Tutorials, again. Have the players have an impact on tutorials, with some oversight so that newer players aren't innundated with information.
Loosen up on the engineering tutorial, let the player try to fix the armor with whatever tool he or she likes, and see how effective or ineffective a tool is. Give them an actual 'combat scenario' where the armor is taking damage for a few seconds, and they fail if they let the armor fall.
Expand the Gunner tutorial, and make it an actual tutorial, not an on rails mortar shooter. Teach them to use different ammunition, use several different weapon types, and actually have a similar combat scenario, better than the one we currently have.
Pilot is the one that I honestly think is okay, no complaints on my memories of that one.
As for Novice DM... honestly? If you're below a certain level, make it a requirement. People who are quick-playing need at least a match or two playing against AI, with allied crew, in order to learn the game. I've said this before, and I'll say it again, it needs to be a requirement before you're allowed into regular play. It teaches, reinforces, and expands a novice's knowledge base so that they can actually play the game. Just make it an extension of the matchmaker and match list if you're below level 5. You'll actually understand the bleeding game if you go through the tutorials, and a few matches there will have you in regular play in a moment.
The problem with that is trying to strike the balance between the Patricians and the Plebians. Plebs want more opened to them, more power, more capability, while the Patricians want nothing for it. Vets know the game inside out, backwards and forwards. Plebs are still trying to figure out how to swap ammos.
Partly, this is due to bad tutorials, bad expectations from the devs, and toxicity from vets who are tired of helping nublets learn the game. I'm guilty of it myself, even though I've helped at least.... 10-20 nublet crews? Not just a single novice, but the entire crew. They learn as much as they can, but Guns is not a simple game, even if it's a simple premise. But that's neither here nor there to this discussion.
You can only offer the newer players so much, and can only give them so much. Higher levels need something too, to keep them in the game. Not as much, I don't think, since we are (mostly) all friends here, and come to have a good time with one another. The core game is sound. It's what the newer players have to walk into that fails them. The core game doesn't need too much in the way of changing, with the exception of minor tweaks to balance meta and try and keep the game alive, but it doesn't need to change too overly much.
My point is this; if you want to help newer players, fix the Tutorials, again. Have the players have an impact on tutorials, with some oversight so that newer players aren't innundated with information.
Loosen up on the engineering tutorial, let the player try to fix the armor with whatever tool he or she likes, and see how effective or ineffective a tool is. Give them an actual 'combat scenario' where the armor is taking damage for a few seconds, and they fail if they let the armor fall.
Expand the Gunner tutorial, and make it an actual tutorial, not an on rails mortar shooter. Teach them to use different ammunition, use several different weapon types, and actually have a similar combat scenario, better than the one we currently have.
Pilot is the one that I honestly think is okay, no complaints on my memories of that one.
As for Novice DM... honestly? If you're below a certain level, make it a requirement. People who are quick-playing need at least a match or two playing against AI, with allied crew, in order to learn the game. I've said this before, and I'll say it again, it needs to be a requirement before you're allowed into regular play. It teaches, reinforces, and expands a novice's knowledge base so that they can actually play the game. Just make it an extension of the matchmaker and match list if you're below level 5. You'll actually understand the bleeding game if you go through the tutorials, and a few matches there will have you in regular play in a moment.
45
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Single/Coop Story Mode for Alliance - And Health Bars for PVP
« on: July 27, 2017, 09:31:57 am »
I disagree on that, Richard. The Skirmish build already technically has health bars in the way your ship deteriorates as you take hull damage. You already have a very, very visible break to an enemy ships armor, and a couple rounds of experience would tell you 'this one is stronger than this one'.
You don't need the full knowledge of armor hitpoints to know that the Pyramidion is a little tankier than a Squid, that's visible just from playstyle. You'll note that a Pyra has lower health compared to a Goldfish when you see the Pyra enter stage 3 faster than a Goldfish.
Putting a health bar on the spyglass takes away from the experience, not adds. You can already tell that an opponent is low health by how damaged their ship looks. You can already tell if their armor is broken by the graphic that plays. At range, you do the exact same thing with the spyglass without the need to throw in a blank and standard health bar over their ship.
You don't need the full knowledge of armor hitpoints to know that the Pyramidion is a little tankier than a Squid, that's visible just from playstyle. You'll note that a Pyra has lower health compared to a Goldfish when you see the Pyra enter stage 3 faster than a Goldfish.
Putting a health bar on the spyglass takes away from the experience, not adds. You can already tell that an opponent is low health by how damaged their ship looks. You can already tell if their armor is broken by the graphic that plays. At range, you do the exact same thing with the spyglass without the need to throw in a blank and standard health bar over their ship.