Messages

31

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Alliance-inspired pvp modes?

« on: September 15, 2015, 04:26:55 am »

A super threatening Hunter Killer Mega ship what will roam the map and try to destroy any ship within it's patrol path
(A relic from the old past, no one knows who built it or when it was built, but it still survives and those who survived are not the same)

Any kills it pulls off on you, count towards the kill count
Players from both teams can decide to kill it together or just fight in areas where it can't see you.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dead zone
A labyrinth that has nasty traps (Basically a Labyrinth type map with a Dust/Tar Cloud layer). Mine laying Sentries, Towers that shoot fire when you get near them, Heat-seeking Lumberjack shots. 5 of your ships have to make it to the enemy spawn before 5 of the enemy's ships make it to yours. Once a ship makes it to the enemy spawn point, it will re-spawn at their own spawn to bring another ship to the enemy spawn point.
(We just want to go home and we're ordered to not let them escape, this is a really bad day)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armageddon remake - Cargo delivery
Teams fight to deliver one cargo to enemy base. Once 1 cargo is deployed, it will destroy a spawn point. Match is finished when all spawn points are depleted and no enemy ships remain.
(The only thing tough enough to destroy a "Faction" Supply depot is a "Insert Ridiculous steampunk inspired mega bomb", only problem is there's only one at a time and we don't like sharing)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clash of the Titans
Two mega ships on either team fight. Which ever ship dies, the killing team wins the match.
(They've hired us for a battle between "Faction" flag ship and the "Faction" Flag ship. I guess they really want the recognition. I don't see why they haven't just gone to war yet?)

32

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Ship special abilities

« on: September 15, 2015, 03:50:04 am »

Pyramidion - Armor increase
Junker - Damage reduction for Engines, Guns, and Balloon Health
Spire - Armour increase
Goldfish - Damage reduction for Heavy Gun Health
Galleon - Damage reduction for Heavy Gun Health
Squid - Damage Reduction for Engine Health
Mobula - Nothing

33

Gameplay / Re: A Suggestion for the Echidna Light Flak Cannon

« on: September 15, 2015, 12:57:40 am »

Hey, I figured out how to Quote!
This is so cool

Okay, back to the topic at hand,
If you look back, I mentioned that guns with Arming Time offer High rewards in return for difficulty of use within a short time frame. I have a tendency of not being very clear, so once again please bear with me as I will try to be as clear as I can.

I mentioned that in order to deal with the fact that Arming time makes a lot of guns not very flexible, guns with arming time utilize high rewards per clip as well as difficulty of use.

Not to mention, they are also hard to operate (Fly/Shoot) and so the effectiveness of the high reward is balanced toward this aspect.

My Points were

These are all guns that are not only popular but they are very effective at their jobs
Can you imagine how ineffective these guns would be if their first clip was not able to do their job?
They work because they are effective within a short amount of time and that works perfectly with arming time as a factor.

Okay next point

There are reasons to put a Light Flak on your ship, the problem is that the enemy often gives you enough reasons to not put it on your ship. Not being able to kill within one clip is never the primary reason, which is its lack of disable or brawling ability.

I'm going to have a look at the ships that incorporate Explosive Explosive weapons that I mentioned previously because I didn't elaborate on them.

Brawler Spires and Mobulas, the Meta Galleon, and the infamous Loch Spire all incorporate these weapons. There should be more reasons to put a Light Flak on your ship, much like a Mortar and Heavy Flak.

All of these ships carry something that disables in order to stand up against the Current (Super Quotation Marks) Multi-Range Disable Meta(Super Quotation Marks)
On all of these ships, you would pretty much be able to replace the Explosive Explosive guns for something that disables such as a Hwatcha, an Artemis, a Banshee, etc. I remember flying these ships because

we often got the kill very quickly, while disabling our own enemy

Onto the Next Point

However, the Heavy Flak at range is very much not guaranteed as timing armor breaks with it is nigh impossible and the Light Flak can actually destroy 3/7 ships in one clip. How many times did you manage to one clip a Squid or Goldfish with a Heavy Flak? The Light Flak makes up for its lack of one clip kill ability with its ability to empty the clip very quickly and reload fast, which means that Squid, Goldfish and Spire, ships that the Light Flak can't one clip and have very low amount of armor so it breaks very easily, are in danger of being two clipped very quickly.

I'm want the Flak to have the Potential to one clip a ship. You can miss shots with the Mortar or Heavy Flak, you don't always kill with two clips on those either.
The Flak is still pretty hard to use as I mentioned

(The spread at range, the projectile speed in terms of predicting Armour break, Determining effective range, Flying at mid-range etc)

You wouldn't always land every shot with the Flak just like with the others. If you increase its overall clip damage... lets put it this way, you would increase the chances of killing a ship in a second clip (Without the use of a buff hammer). In return, being able to land every single shot would be up to the skill of the shooter.




I would be okay with the ability to only be able to kill in 2 clips if Muse incorporated some system of play where a severely damaged ship had permanent disable properties. Examples being:
-A broken ship being harder for crew members to move around
-Gun arcs being slightly harder to angle
-Piloting perspective distorted (Having a broken wall in your face obscuring your situational awareness)
This change however would probably make Kill weapons a little too over-powered but I would be all for having quicker matches.

34

Gameplay / Re: A Suggestion for the Echidna Light Flak Cannon

« on: September 14, 2015, 01:34:31 am »

Okay, after some thinking I take back what I said about the whole smoke Flak thing
We would have to deal with a name change, damage change, how effective something like creating a piloting blind spot would really be, and a smoke cannon should really have a separate gun model.



I'm going to mention some more points about why I favor a damage increase rather than ease of use because I don't think I was very clear.
I know that I will be pissing a lot of people off by suggesting the Flak become a mid-range Heavy Flak as I have already suggested, but I don't see anywhere else the gun can go.

I mentioned that in order to deal with the fact that Arming time makes a lot of guns not very flexible, guns with arming time utilize high rewards per clip as well as difficulty of use.
Lumberjack
Heavy Flak
Hades
Mines
(I stated the sheer effectiveness of these guns in a previous post)

These are all guns that are not only popular but they are very effective at their jobs
Can you imagine how ineffective these guns would be if their first clip was not able to do their job?
They work because they are effective within a short amount of time and that works perfectly with arming time as a factor. Not to mention, they are also hard to operate (Fly/Shoot) and so the effectiveness of the high reward is balanced toward this aspect.

In my original suggestion, the Flak would be a mortar that has arming time (No Brawl) but more range and it would have been a Heavy Flak with less range as well as taking longer to kill.
Originally I wanted to only increase the damage because I was under the impression that a lot of people had a hard time shooting this Flak (The spread at range, the projectile speed in terms of predicting Armour break, Determining effective range, Flying at mid-range etc).
Even though I have been thinking for a long time, I don't know how much harder you can make the gun shoot. I'll probably think of something quick.

I know that this would be a significant change to a gun that has had a bad past but I would rather see it have a place in the game rather than be a gun for Vets to use to make their ship load outs unique or bring it out when they need to farm Achievements. Actually, I think that the Flak has a place in this game.... I don't like it and I want it to have a higher priority on ships.

An alternate route the Flak could take would be to get rid of arming time and make it do only a fraction of it's previous explosive damage. This would mean; however, that the Flak would truly have no place as it would be outclassed by the capabilities of other guns. I'm sure you would all hate for this as it would be a return of the previous Flak but useless as it would probably not kill anything fast enough to stand up to a disable in the current Meta.



In regards to the Disable Meta, People still bring kill weapons like the Mortar and Heavy Flak. Although there are many many reasons as to why someone would put them on their ship in the age of the Disable Meta, one of them is the damage potential of Only-kill weapons. Brawler Spires and Mobulas, the Meta Galleon, and the infamous Loch Spire all incorporate these weapons. There should be more reasons to put a Light Flak on your ship, much like a Mortar and Heavy Flak.

35

Gameplay / Re: A Suggestion for the Echidna Light Flak Cannon

« on: September 12, 2015, 01:02:09 pm »

I have a tendency to do this where I state a point and I don't explain it so bear with me as I try to explain my points.

Banshee:
Utilities in fire stacking
multi-range capabilities
low explosive damage for killing ships
I didn't want to compare the Flak to this gun because it has ulterior effects other than full on kill potential due to having fire and explosive damage. Other than being able to kill a ship, fire can pressure crew members off guns, potentially incapacitate components, and a multitude of different factors other than being able to kill. The trade off being that it has relatively low dps in explosive damage to compensate.

Artemis:
Utilities in Disabling components
Multi-range capabilities
low explosive damage for killing ships
I didn't want to compare the Flak to this gun because of the nature of it's disable potential. Other then being able to kill a ship, this gun can break components and so crew members will be spending less time pressuring your ship with firepower if the gun is broken and less time making sure the armor doesn't go down if engines are broken when they shouldn't be. The trade off being relatively low dps in terms of explosive damage.

I would argue that the effects of these guns are what make the disable meta shine and thus I consider these weapons disable weapons. I understand that the Flak has greater killing potential and this should give the Flak an edge over these guns. These weapons however have the ability to be used to greater effect in more versatile circumstances due to usage outside of Armour break. Even in the time of Armor break, they have the ability to potentially decrease the effectiveness of a ship at killing your ship. I would argue that comparing explosive Dps is largely problematic due to the fact that the disable potentials of these guns have extremely versatile uses.

Although the decision to put one of these guns on your ship could be for ranged killing potential (A niche that the Flak occupies), they have ulterior purposes that factor into the nature of the gun itself. I would say that it is arguable whether this makes these guns superior in comparison to Kill focused guns like the Flak, but I wanted to keep the discussion based on kill focused weapons as I feel it would deviate from the reasons people put Flaks on their ships. The reason being to kill ships at range.



I would say that because it is an Explosive Explosive weapon, it is a weapon that is going to be ineffective for a reasonable portion of the fight. I understand that there should be limitations put in place due to the factor of having increased range, ease of use, and low damage. I would say; however, that having low damage potential on a weapon that is solely focused on killing as well as arming time has cause a decline in the usage of the Flak. I wish that the Flak was harder to use and had more damage because damage becomes a big factor in deciding whether to bring a gun that can only kill a ship. I say that Arming time on the Flak has made it not very versatile. Even though there is a fair percentage of effective area the Flak has to utilize the Aoe damage, engagements in my experience of using the Flak have tended to emphasize Brawl or Mid-Snipe ranges. There is always the risk of Arming time coming into factor and I wish that that damage was used to compensate for this limitation instead of ease of use.

That being said, as I stated before. I am all for an increase in smoke stacks or longer duration of smoke stack emission as I feel utility weapons that occupy the Piloting Blind spot disability are a neat idea.

36

Feedback and Suggestions / Re: A few silly (?) ideas.

« on: September 12, 2015, 10:30:32 am »

I know that this is "Your" forum

But will you let the postings of other silly ideas

37

Gameplay / Re: A Suggestion for the Echidna Light Flak Cannon

« on: September 12, 2015, 06:23:42 am »

Okay after using the Flak for a long period of time, I have found that most of your builds that incorporate the Flak are the same as mine, have the same problems of mine, and even though I knew that from the beginning, I did it anyway. Now I am Disillusioned and I hate being Disillusioned.

I just want to say that I'm fine with the Flak being a PVE weapon for the new Alliance mode.
I, however, still have problems with the Flak that I don't think have been addressed and I want to lay down my thoughts in order to close this topic for good.

For one,
I don't like you guys comparing the Banshee and the Artemis to the Flak.
While the Flak does have more killing potential, these guns have uses in disabling which means that they have uses for outside the armour break.
As such, I don't think it is very nice to compare it to the light carronade either. Light Carronade can pop balloons in two clips but I think it still isn't fair to compare it to the light Flak. Mainly because popping balloons can disrupt arcs, make a ship vulnerable to Terrain, make the Hull more exposed, and separate enemy ships.. Even damaging balloons can cause a decrease in vertical mobility. The Flak can only kill and there is plenty of time for an enemy to incapacitate/ disable you in the time of that second clip.

I will now keep the comparisons between guns that are Explosive Explosive damage.
Mortar and Heavy Flak.
The Light Flak has more Dps than the Mortar but the greased un-buffed Mortar can kill any ship in one clip.
The Light Flak has a higher rate of fire and projectile speed than the Heavy Flak but the charged un-buffed Heavy Flak can kill a ship in one clip even faster than the mortar.
The light Flak is only useful at short-mid to long-mid range. Where as the Mortar has uses for short to short-mid range and the Heavy Flak has uses for long-mid to long range. I don't know about you all, but I tend to find that most of my engagements where I used the Light Flak ended up around the ranges of either the Mortar and Heavy Flak due to the prevalence of disable centric ships.

I don't think I like the idea that a gun that is only useful for when the armor is broken can't kill a ship in one clip when we have two guns that have that ability. It means that we have a gun that is only good for killing ships and can't do it faster than two other guns. I find it annoying that a gun that is useless for a vitally important portion of a fight will have to have the help of other guns that speed up the killing process.
You have a gun that is useless until the short window of opportunity in the armour break, only useful at the small window of mid-range where engagements are less common, and you can't kill a ship faster than other guns that are useless until armour break.

I wish you would stop bringing up Dps as a pro because not many ships have ridiculous hull health to utilise Dps on an Explosive Explosive weapon. Also most ships I tend to find, have their armour up around 80% of the time. I think damage per armour break is a much more accurate statistic for the potential of a kill centric weapon in PVP. Alliance mode isn't even out yet (Where enemy ships and structures will have more health to utilise the Dps of the Flak) and even then armour will be brought back up.

If we didn't have the Mortar or the Heavy Flak then I wouldn't have made this discussion. Now that we have Alliance mode coming, I think we will see a lot more Light Flak usage. I kinda wish Muse would get rid of the gun in skirmish because It would save me the trouble of describing how to use the Flak effectively on their Pyramidion for inexperienced players. When I tell them that using it on ships that have other guns that will help the process of wearing the health down, I tell them they can't use it up close or too far, and that they can't line up the Arcs to pair up with other weapons very well; they take it off the ship. It makes farming for those ridiculous Flak achievements that much more aggarivating.

I will say that I have used the Flak and it works but I would still much rather incorporate other weapons that kill faster or have utility purposes. I'm still not sure what you people see special about this thing but I accept it as it is because you all seem to agree that it has found it's place.


We live in the Era where the Meta is multi-range disable. People still bring Brawler ships and win with them because there are plenty of maps that provide wonderful ambush strategies. It is also still easy to ambush a ship and render the Flak ineffective due to arming time. Not to mention, the Flak is also still pretty hard to shoot at max range as mentioned by a few people in the forum. It is a "mid range" weapon not "Long range" which means you will be closer to the ship and have more opportunities to render it useless.



I like the idea that the Flak that is outclassed at killing can be used for a utility purpose such as creating smoke. I would like it so that the impact shots would eject smoke for a longer period of time to utilise this function to a greater extent. I think then, I would be much happier using the Flak in pvp as it would have a place in my torture/ mine builds.

38

The Lounge / Re: The game you mostly play

« on: September 09, 2015, 06:15:05 am »

OMG OMG

http://www.capcom-unity.com/gregaman/blog/2015/09/08/dragons-dogma-dark-arisen-coming-to-pc

God does exist,

Hey guys, seriously check out this game if you didn't want to play it because it was on Consoles. It is way too much fun for it's own good and more producers need to understand that fun gameplay = smart business decision.

39

Gameplay / Re: The Current Meta.

« on: September 07, 2015, 08:37:06 am »

I think you hit the nail on the head when you said that there is an influx of Mobulas and that seems to be basically the new Meta for Competitive. (Almost no game without one MetaMobula of Hades, double art)
It has very good strengths and noticeable weaknesses.

You missed out the infamous Lumberjack/ Hades combo on a Galleon, probably the only ship with the sheer disable potential of a lumberjack and Hades combination.

I don't even need to mention a squid with a side banshee as it seems to counter the slow mobility of the mobula's turn acceleration

We did have a good few mine launchers on junkers a good while ago and stood fairly well against Blenderfishes, though now they tend to have the standard MetaMob Hades, and Double Art. You tend to see Banshees replace Arts more (probably due to it's versatility in arcs and fast turn speed compensating for the junker's lack of vertical mobility and Art's poor up arcs)

There's a reasonable amount of Hwatchafish w/ Side Carronade and Blenderfish, though you tend to not see Blenderfishes dominate as much as they did previously.

We do get the occasional Pyra and they seem to always have a Hades on it, since you have fairly easy distancing potential with it's forward guns and acceleration.

That's about all I can think of off the top of my head.

40

The Pit / Re: A legitimate Boarding suggestion!

« on: September 07, 2015, 07:46:23 am »

Back on track..

You should all join my Club dedicated to hunting those who suggest boarding

Once we find a list of the most common games played by those who suggest boarding, we will gather in front of the main head quarters of the developers who's games had the most players that suggest boarding.
We will shout in protest that there be more airships while throwing Molotov cocktails hung with "Blimp-like" helium Balloons.
We will tear down their gates with Boarding hooks.
We will also shout promotional content for Guns of Icarus so that the Devs will allow this

41

The Pit / Re: A legitimate Boarding suggestion!

« on: September 07, 2015, 07:11:12 am »

Sorry, this is extremely off topic but I have to know

Can you still illegitimately board another ship by jumping on to it or did they patch it out?

Because I've been meaning to try an experiment where you fit as many people as you possibly could onto one single ship.
Like I'm talking, a 4v4 map and every single one of the 32 players try to fit onto one ship (I think mobula would be the easiest).

You could add a few flares and pretend it's a mile high rave

42

Gameplay / Ship design concept: Aircraft Carrier

« on: September 06, 2015, 11:42:08 pm »

Somebody thought that an Aircraft Carrier ship would be a cool idea for the game and so I thought about how it might work

Okay, I'm not sure if this is the proper place to put this (Since adding a ship like this would radically change the mechanics of the game)
but since I've posted shenanigans here before...


I'll separate my idea of ship designs into two parts (the Carrier, and the Aircraft)

The Carrier

My idea was to have a ship that is a tank, slow as hell (but enough top speed to be able to capture a point in crazy king), able to kill a ship on it's own, and able to run with only 3 crew members.

The ship would start with a broken component and the engineer would have to rebuild it in order to "Make" the aircraft. I would want the component to take a relatively long time to rebuild (I'm talking 1.5 the time of a Galleon hull rebuild).
{There would be lore about when the carrier is taken into zones and maps, the aircraft would be too fragile and so would be disassembled and built in combat}

Now that all the tough stuff is out of the way, here is the descriptions

Ship design
---I would have three decks one at the top for the aircraft construction component and runway, the other in the middle for the guns, balloon, engines, and hull components, and the last one at the very bottom for the piloting compartment.
---Piloting cockpit be at the bottom so that the only blind spot would be at the top (Sort of like a blimp) and it would allow a lot of situational awareness for the pilot as it would have to coordinate with the Aircraft (Would be horrifying if you have Vertigo).
---Balloon exposure I was thinking of having at the sides of the top deck (flight deck) so that it wouldn't get in the way of the runway. Also make the engines under the balloons to make them at least a little harder to hit (Since you're gonna need the turning accel).

Component Design
---On the main deck, I would want to have all the components cramped together in order to make it easier to engineer on since you would have to work with a 3 man crew.
---In terms of guns, I was thinking having a heavy gun and light gun on each side. You would have a goldfish Difecta since it is certainly reasonable at killing ships. Would also allow sniping potential with lumberjack and Hades for long range artillery assist.

Further Aircraft & Carrier descriptions
---In order to build or construct the aircraft, the engineers would have to run up to the top flight deck and rebuild the broken component. In this time, the component would be exposed from enemy fire and you run the risk of the aircraft getting damaged or destroyed before it has taken off.
---You could only fit only one aircraft on the runway and so you could have another aircraft as backup (You however run the risk of it being destroyed and so it might only be a valid strategy if you plan to hide your carrier and provide artillery fire.)
---When the Carrier dies, the plane also dies.
---Only one Aircraft able to be in the air so that there will be no Everyone jumping on an Aircraft and leaving the Carrier in the invisible no clip zone of nothingness.

Mobility
---Mobility I was thinking in only rough comparisons of Spire top speed, Galleon turning acceleration, Junker vertical acceleration, and Mobula forward acceleration.


The Aircraft

My idea was to have a ship that can be run with only one crew member, Easily repairable and easy to shoot by one crew member, very fast but extremely fragile, only one light gun spot, and work a bit like a flight simulator plane.

Prepare for lots of bad explanations
---In terms entering and leaving the craft, I was thinking you enter and exit the craft much like being locked into a gun or the wheel.

Flight Mechanic
---Work like flight simulator plane so no reverse throttle (Only stop to forward gears).
---I wanted to get rid of the balloon component since it would work like a plane (I know it would make three piloting tools ineffective but I think it's okay considering we still have the Rangefinder ).
---When you put the throttle at stop, the aircraft will start to drop due to gravity and so gun choices will be determined by how you fly.
---If you make the gun slot a gun with a large clip like a Gatling gun or a flamethrower, you will have to position the ship where it will fall or look up in order to have enough time to empty the clip without turning.
---If you bring a gun with a small clip such as a mercury or mine launcher, you will have to get one shot off and then re-position yourself for another shot.

Component design
---There would be only 4 components and they would be two engines, a gun, and hull (Everything would be in the cockpit).
---In terms of components I wanted everything to be close together (Basically if you are claustrophobic you are sh*t out of luck)
---When you get off the wheel and look up, you will be able to access/ repair the gun
---When you get off the wheel and look behind you, you will see a hull component and two engines either side of them.
---When you get off the wheel and look left you will see the hatch to leave the ship
---Windows would be in the Front and to your Right, in order to add to situational awareness for the aircraft pilot.

Take off
---You would only be able to leave the aircraft when the plane is on the runway. While in the plane, there would be a hatch that if you look at and press E you leave the Aircraft.
---Turning would be disabled on the runway and if you take off without enough momentum, you would have to gain it while in the air before you crash and respawn at the Carrier.
---You would not be able to land and so will have to keep circling in the air.

Tool mechanics
---Three Tar clicks would break the engines
---Pilots might bring a Spyglass for extra scouting capabilities
---No Chute Vent/ Hydro since no balloon and no Drogue Chute because you would end up looking down and falling really slowly but you would still be able to bring these.
---Could be a Buff engineer that uses the components buffed and has uses for fire fighting if you plan to make the ship less disposable.
---Gunner would be pretty useless, even for a mine launcher since you would never stay at a distance for long enough to get another round off.

I don't want Muse to implement this since they literally do not have the man power but I thought it would be a good thought experiment. What do you guys think?

43

The Lounge / Ship Build Personification

« on: September 05, 2015, 06:05:35 am »

There's a really popular Japanese game called Kantai Collection where the developers turned historical battle ships into school girls.

While I was rolling on the ground laughing, I thought about my favorite ship builds in the game and how they might think of me as a pilot if they had a personality.



My disable junker would probably be a sadistic freak who toys with any easy prey they can find. It would express extreme hatred that I use it's sibling the Munker more even though they themself are more versatile and effective at incapacitating enemies.

My Hwatchafish would be probably very insecure due to how it's sibling the Blenderfish used to dominate but slowly gaining self-confidence. They would be grateful that I use it often but try to be as modest about their ability as possible.

My Metamidion would probably be trying their best to act confident and arrogant, all the while secretly insecure about their small hull and armor. They would secretly be terrified of me because of how often I go for rams.

My Metasquid would be the most annoying, hyperactive brat that always needs to be taken care of because something is broken on it. It would hate me because I don't use it often but secretly blame themself because of it's lack of firepower.

My Metagalleon would always be serious and matter-of-fact about whatever it says without regard for others. It would be very open about my mistakes in piloting and be extremely annoyed by the fact that I'm always showering it with praise and admiration.

44

Gameplay / Re: Fire Extinguisher

« on: September 04, 2015, 01:07:44 pm »

*Swabbie looks at extinguisher*
"What's that big, red container for?"


"It's lightspeed, Kid"


In all seriousness, I was thinking the blast from the extinguisher would put out fires a little farther away. Maybe that might make it easier to put out multiple stacks of fires throughout the ship.

45

Gameplay / Re: Fire Extinguisher

« on: September 04, 2015, 04:49:39 am »

Hmm..
This is going out there.. (Just like everything that comes out of my head) and I'm sure Muse would never implement this

but what if you could use the extinguisher farther away from a component?
Like.. you could extinguish a component from a meter away and be in time to mallet it.

It would be sort of the lazy chem cycle.


Or I don't know... use it as a speed burst to jump from component to component faster so that you could do a rocket jump (Like in Wall-E or Gravity... Please don't take this one seriously)