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 - naufrago

Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11]
151
Gameplay / Re: Firing mechanism and damage explanation
« on: May 31, 2013, 12:00:07 am »
I'm curious how the flare gun works. If it hits multiple components, does it set all of them on fire or just the first thing it hits?

The flare gun has an AoE of 0, so it's therefore impossible for it to hit multiple components, even with burst.

It may have an AoE of 0, but i've hit multiple things with one shot on numerous occasions, typically gun and hull or hull and balloon. I once hit a pyramidion's hull, side gun, then balloon from shooting underneath. Once it hits something, it doesn't stop immediately.

So yeah, I've been using it extensively the past few days and I'm really curious how it works.

152
Gameplay / Re: The Manta Ray
« on: May 30, 2013, 06:33:05 pm »
Might be fun with 2 Mercs on one side, 1 artemis on top (near the pilot), and an artemis/gatling combo on the other side. If you're far enough away from trouble, you might be able to have 2 mercs and 2 artemis firing at the same time.

It would definitely be a lot weaker at close range, but gatlings are pretty good. =]

153
Gameplay / Re: Firing mechanism and damage explanation
« on: May 30, 2013, 06:28:24 pm »
I'm curious how the flare gun works. If it hits multiple components, does it set all of them on fire or just the first thing it hits?

Also, the info for the flare gun on the weapons page seems to be a bit out of date (ammo is different, in-game shows secondary damage as explosive(?)). Would appreciate knowing the stats for it.

154
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Ship diagrams
« on: May 25, 2013, 09:12:33 pm »
My biggest issue with the 3d model of the ship is that I can't tilt it up or down. It can make it really hard for me to tell which gun I'm looking at.

155
Gameplay / Re: Buying Time: Using a spanner for repairs
« on: May 25, 2013, 08:23:24 pm »
While I'm worried that your opinions are skewed from just getting my perspective, you've convinced me that it's not a big deal. Your opinions mirror mine pretty closely, so I'll just move on. Thanks.

156
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Objective based game modes.
« on: May 25, 2013, 08:13:26 pm »
I had an idea for a new game mode and this seemed like as good a place to put it as any. Don't know if it's been suggested before, but here it is anyway-

So, both teams start with a pool of resources. When you die and respawn, it comes at the cost of those resources. Different ships could cost different amounts of resources to respawn. If you really want to get complicated, you could also make each weapon type have a different resource cost as well.

The goal is to deplete the enemy's resources by killing them til they can no longer respawn. In the case where the resource cost to respawn is greater than the number of resources left, the ship does respawn, but the resource count is moved to zero and their team can no longer respawn. It's to avoid the awkward situation where your team still has resources, but you lose anyway. One team wins when the enemy has no ships on the field and they can't spawn another.

This could be combined with capture points that slowly provide additional resources when captured. You'll still need to kill the enemy til they can't respawn, but that would be pretty awkward with the respawn rule above. So alternatively, you could make it so that you simply can't respawn unless your team has enough resources. It's not awkward when the number is gradually increasing. One team wins when the enemy has no ships on the field and they can't spawn another.

The point of resource costs is to give the devs additional tools for balance. Right now, the Squid isn't very useful in a death match, but what if it were cheap and had cheap weapons? You could afford to make a particular hull or weapon outright better than others if you give it a higher resource cost.

If it's at all possible, you could also allow the captains to choose a new ship and loadout every time they die. Could make more strategic use of resources that way.

EDIT: Just rearranged 4th and 5th paragraphs. Also, if you think this is too off-topic, you can separate it into its own topic.

EDIT 2: You could also choose to make better/worse tiers of engines, hull, armor, or balloons if you give them higher/lower resource costs. Obviously that would require a lot more extra work, but the gamemode makes it a possibility for future updates. Could come with unwanted extra complexity, so up to you to decide what to do with this idea.

157
Gameplay / Re: Buying Time: Using a spanner for repairs
« on: May 25, 2013, 05:08:15 pm »
Yeah, I know about that. =p It's actually kinda funny when the pilot doesn't know about it because they sometimes get confused why I constantly run back to hit them with my mallet. They assume I'm being silly or rude.

158
Gameplay / Re: Buying Time: Using a spanner for repairs
« on: May 25, 2013, 04:51:57 pm »
Ah, yeah, it was on a Junker. Just realized I forgot to mention that.

159
Gameplay / Buying Time: Using a spanner for repairs
« on: May 25, 2013, 04:37:24 pm »
I was recently called a terrible engineer, which kind of pissed me off. So I started thinking, what could I have done differently that would have kept us alive and made everyone happy? I'll start by explaining my general strategy for repairing as main engi.

First thing you probably tell a new engi is that mallet is for repairs and spanner is for rebuilds. But what if the hull is only taking light damage? A mallet often results in a lot of overhealing and a hefty cooldown, which is kind of wasteful. It can give you time to run around and whack other components with the mallet, but doing so can cause you to lose a large amount of armor before it can be repaired again. In those cases, sitting on the hull and whacking it with a spanner can let you survive significantly longer. I'll explain with a purely hypothetical situation.

Say you have 270 armor and you are taking 30dps. After 9 secs, the armor will break and the hull will be exposed. If you wait 7 or 8 seconds and hit it with a mallet, you bring the armor back up to about 270, which will then break 9 seconds later. Total armor uptime is now ~16secs. Now if you try healing with the spanner initially (which heals 20hp/s), you effectively reduce the incoming dps to 10. After about 22 seconds, the armor will drop enough where you can get the full effect of the mallet (which is more efficient at 25hp/s), which will bring it back to about 270. 9 secs later, the armor will break, resulting in a total armor uptime of ~31 secs, which is nearly double the amount of time it would have stayed up if you'd just used the mallet.

In actual combat, the incoming dps varies significantly, but it usually buys at least 5-15 seconds of armor uptime. It's especially effective against gatlings and flak that chip away at the armor relatively slowly (as opposed to bursting it down). However, all the time you're sitting there on the hull, you're not doing anything else. On the Spire, Goldfish, and Pyramidion, that's not much of a problem. On a Spire, you're not really doing much else. On a Goldfish, armor is still low enough that your captain will love you for keeping them alive longer, and the other engi can handle most other things himself since he's not doing much else anyway. On a Pyramidion, it's still really useful since the balloon isn't your responsibility and the hull has enough armor that you can still run back to hit the engines when necessary once you're no longer using the spanner. Even on a Squid, you can usually buy an extra second here and there between rebuilds.

The decision is a little harder to make on a Junker or Galleon. Since main engi is responsible for both hull and balloon, and pulling the gungineer off a gun results in a significant loss of dps, you have to choose between keeping the hull alive a few more seconds or keeping the balloon up a few more seconds. However, the Junker and Galleon have a lot more armor than most other ships and the balloon tends to be the primary responsibility of the main engi, so the extra few seconds of armor uptime tend to go less appreciated on those ships. But when both armor and balloon are dropping, i tend to prioritize hull.

The primary thing to take away from this is that every second you can afford to delay using the mallet, you're keeping the armor up an additional second. It's also important to note that it's better to use the mallet a little early than a little late, because burst damage could ruin your world.


Back to my story, both the armor and balloon on the Junker were taking heavy damage, so I decided to buy as much time for the hull and let the balloon pop. This upset the captain because all he saw was me camping the hull for several seconds, followed by the armor breaking while I was still standing there. There was also the problem of how I couldn't make a round trip between hull and balloon during the mallet's repair cooldown. No matter how I tried I couldn't manage to do it. It was weird because I knew I'd managed to make the round trip before, but couldn't manage it in that match. I just tried it again a few seconds ago in the Sandbox and managed it in 7 seconds. Really weird. Potential bug maybe?

So because I couldn't keep both hull and balloon up, I prioritized the hull. When I tried to do both, we died faster, resulting in him calling me terrible and ragequitting after the match. I could have done better to communicate what I was doing and letting the other engi know to help with the balloon, so that was bad on me, but is there anything in my strategy above that you see is glaringly awful? Am I prioritizing hull armor too much?

160
Gameplay / Re: Engineer Strategy Dicussion
« on: May 23, 2013, 02:11:37 pm »
That's always confused me- why does extinguishing start a cooldown where you can't repair? I can understand a cooldown where you can't extinguish again, but extinguishers initiating a repair cooldown is unduly frustrating in cases of new/bad engineers, AI engis DOOMING US ALL, and lag (occasionally I'll hit a part to repair it, then immediately after spray it with an extinguisher. For whatever reason, the repair may not register, but the extinguisher does, meaning I'm probably dead).

It just doesn't make sense that I can repair then extinguish, but not extinguish then repair. It actually seems more intuitive to extinguish then repair since the part will be at full health afterwards (doing it the other way around means the fire will probably damage it a little, so it'll be less than full health afterwards). You could argue that it's something you should know if you're any good, but nowhere does it tell you that or explain why it's even a thing. You have to discover it for yourself or wait for someone to eventually tell you why you're terribad.

161
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Static Component Icons
« on: May 18, 2013, 02:40:12 pm »
Agreed. Hard to tell what needs fixin' at a glance. Static indicators would be much appreciated.

162
Gameplay / Re: The Tale of a Disgruntled Engineer
« on: May 18, 2013, 02:10:52 pm »
This story actually highlighted something that's become something of a problem for me recently-  a lot of people (mostly people who only started playing recently) are just leaving the games early, and I'm pretty sure most of them aren't due to technical failures.

I actually think there should be some penalty for leaving a game early and not returning (sometimes I leave to change my loadout and jump back in). It could be as simple as being unable to join another match until the reconnect timer runs out. Consistently leaving early could increase the timer beyond how long the match will reserve your spot for you in case of a disconnect.

163
Gameplay / Re: Artemis Rocket Launcher
« on: May 10, 2013, 03:27:18 pm »
I think that the main reason that many people consider the Artemis OP now is how it's relatively easy to cripple all of a ship's components and KEEP them crippled. I don't see anything wrong with it being useful for precisely disabling components, but it's not much fun when you can keep everything disabled indefinitely. Basically, it should keep its ability to snipe components in the hands of a skilled gunner, but it shouldn't be able to permanently cripple them.

I think the best way to balance Artemis is to drastically increase its reload time. I'd also like to see its damage lowered a bit and its magazine increased by 1 - 3 shots. Basically let it do the same damage per magazine (or perhaps a little less), but over a longer period of time. It would give the enemy crew a little bit of time to react to the incoming damage. It would still be useful for sniping components, but not be overwhelming. It would also make it harder to kill a target with pure artemis launchers.

I think I'd rather see a slight damage decrease instead of a reload increase.  The latter would push it more towards the Field Gun and that's something we ought to avoid.  We could nerf its DPS by reducing its damage (this would also have the effect of requiring multiple hits on a component, thus further increasing the skill requirement).

Disabling weapons should have burst disable potential, or good sustained disabling.  Not both.

I agree that disabling weapons should pick between burst and constant disabling, but I don't think increasing reload time would make it too similar to the field gun. Basically, I'm suggesting the Artemis be useful for keeping a ship crippled (not necessarily disabled) by lowering its dps, and the point of increasing the reload time is to make it so that you can't keep everything offline 95% of the time (since that's no fun for anyone).

164
Gameplay / Re: Artemis Rocket Launcher
« on: May 10, 2013, 03:01:17 pm »
I think that the main reason that many people consider the Artemis OP now is how it's relatively easy to cripple all of a ship's components and KEEP them crippled. I don't see anything wrong with it being useful for precisely disabling components, but it's not much fun when you can keep everything disabled indefinitely. Basically, it should keep its ability to snipe components in the hands of a skilled gunner, but it shouldn't be able to permanently cripple them.

I think the best way to balance Artemis is to drastically increase its reload time. I'd also like to see its damage lowered a bit and its magazine increased by 1 - 3 shots. Basically let it do the same damage per magazine (or perhaps a little less), but over a longer period of time. It would give the enemy crew a little bit of time to react to the incoming damage. It would still be useful for sniping components, but not be overwhelming. It would also make it harder to kill a target with pure artemis launchers.

EDIT: You could also make the Artemis slightly more inaccurate, so if you want to accurately snipe components from range you could be forced to use Heavy Clip.

165
The Docks / Re: The Gentlemen Are Recruiting!
« on: May 04, 2013, 01:29:15 am »
Hello, I'm interested in getting into some more organized and competitive play. Had some good experiences with some of you folks today and I'd like to join. I sent a friend invite to Capt. Roy on steam, but I don't use its social features very often.

So.... yeah, I've never posted on these forums before and not really sure what the next step is =p

EDIT: I should probably talk about me a bit, eh? I played for a few weeks and then... just sort of forgot about it for a few months. I happened to play again today because I was reminded of its existence due to TGS folks saying they were going to have a tournament of some sort. Most of the games were with and against players who were a bit more coordinated and skilled than I'm used to, and it was a lot more fun. It made me want more of that.

I may need a few tips and I'm unfamiliar with the meta, but I'm good at running around and hitting things with a hammer. =p I'm also a good/decent shot once I get used to whatever gun I'm firing. I like to think I'm pretty good at the game already, but it's hard for me to judge my skill level when I'm not the only one responsible for keeping the ship alive.

Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11]