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.
RottedBeef:it's the Ducks, so they're like "Why aren't you guys flying a Junker?!"
We haven't seen any valid uses for having more than one of any types of those weapons. Anytime we've seen a build with anymore than one of the above weapons, it tends to fail miserably.
Do not trust the forum - I have no clantag to play with.
Log out and back in, that usually fixes it.
1) It becomes much more difficult to maintain the trifecta with the forward artemis with either a banshee or a flak. As it stands, the trifecta window (as viewed from the helm in first person) for the double artemis-hades setup is barely wider than the width of the ladder leading up to the turning engines, requiring constant attention from the pilot in order to track an even slightly moving target. Even with the more ample 65 degree horizontal traverse of the artemises, this meant that the pilot was constantly making micro-adjustments in azimuth in order to ensure that all three guns had arc at all times. The flak and the banshee, with traverses of 50 and 60 degrees respectively, became even tighter, with the flak in particular almost impossible to maintain in arc with the front artemi1) It becomes much more difficult to maintain the trifecta with the forward artemis with either a banshee or a flak. As it stands, the trifecta window (as viewed from the helm in first person) for the double artemis-hades setup is barely wider than the width of the ladder leading up to the turning engines, requiring constant attention from the pilot in order to track an even slightly moving target. Even with the more ample 65 degree horizontal traverse of the artemises, this meant that the pilot was constantly making micro-adjustments in azimuth in order to ensure that all three guns had arc at all times. The flak and the banshee, with traverses of 50 and 60 degrees respectively, became even tighter, with the flak in particular almost impossible to maintain in arc with the front artemis.
In contrast, this thread started with: This fails.
Multiply that with 2 and you have the most annyoing enemy in GoIO history, so annoying in fact that you might just surrender because there is no way to win (in the worst case scenario).
If you are going to take 2 artemis, why not take a light flak or a banshee instead of your second artemis?
My own personal example is that when I take carro-flamer pyramidion, I refuse to put carronade on the left and flamer on the right. It makes more sense that way, and is probably a better build. But I think it is prettier with carronade on the right, so I take that.
My point being, whether you believe there are diminishing returns or not, whether you think doubling down on a weapon is good or not, having a variety of weapons on your ship adds diversity. Incoherent diversity can be easy to fight, and well-meshed diversity can be OP. Either way, I personally think it makes things more interesting, which is always a good thing.
The usefullness of a ship with double merc, double carronade, double triple whatever, all depends on somebodies preference, crew skill (including pilot), enemy and the engagement itself. Every combination has its advantages and disatvanges and depends on a lot of factors.
Nothing fails in this game, if executed correctly, no matter the opponent.
I mean, I suppose an elite squadron of all-flare death commando Squids could conceivably beat a full Ryder team, but only if Hillerton, Geo, Medic and co. simultaneously undergo brain aneurysms that leave them incapable of higher motor function. To me, if something fails 99 times out of 100, it might as well fail all 100. I don't think that this is a helpful generalization, nor one that contributes to a deeper understanding of the game.This thread has no reason to exist.
My conclusion: It doesn't matter wether you have 5 artemis or 2 and a hades, combined with gat mortar on the other side on junker. Both builds can work and fail likewise.
But preferences are always a thing ^^.
But imo it can be abused to easily.
But as soon as the enemy gets in closer you wont get it.
Double Lumberjack
Quite possibly one of the most annoying Galleons in the game, this ship is a powerhouse but ultimately a flawed one. One competent lumberjack can easily suppress a balloon, and a godly lumberjack can suppress two balloons. At the range at which you engage at with this long range of a galleon, you've got time. Throw an H flak or Hwacha and you still have the enemies bouncing on the floor but you gain the ability to kill them too.
Now to pick your brains, how about a double merc pyra, that is a common enough build and seems to do a good enough job, it has shatter for disable and piercing for taking down the hull, and ultimately can ware down the hull enough for a kill, i would love to hear your thoughts on this?
Two gunners. Diminishing returns.
A lumberjack merc flak is probably the best and most versatile build at longrange.
The dual lumberjacks ability to pop the enemy balloon so fast gives you the ability to kill enemys much closer to you.
I wont compare that to a dual carronade cause the higher rate of fire of the carronade leads to a much faster pop of the enemy balloon.
Artemi Junker
With those its similiar. Yes you sacrifice alot of different dmg types. But you also get a much fastened ability to do what you want. That can count alot. Usually 3-4 is all you need thats true.
The decreased effects are sometimes higher than expected.
Thus double H.Flak could kill everything. An advantage.
I still very much feel that our choice of ships was the correct viable counter at the time...
Support ships
Oh and as for the "need" for an explosive weapon... Rams (;
But most of the time, muse has designed its guns to be effective by themselves. One flamer is enough to cause chaos, one mortar is enough to kill a ship, one hwacha is enough to disable a ship, etc.
