Some interesting math about the Mercury Field Gun.

[Captain Smollett]

Well the gun would still do a very small amount of perma damage if the shatter modifier were removed.  Though I really don't think it's necessary to have the gun do permahull damage to encourage a team to move. 

Having all your guns, engines and armor knocked down over and over again should provide plenty of encouragement.  Should the enemy decide to stay and take the pummeling, an ally could simply approach and provide explosive damage at a relatively safe range to finish it off.

Also as Sunder stated the gun has so many other functions and abilities; losing the capability of providing across the map perma damage would still leave it tons of other uses.

[RearAdmiralZill]

You guys are taking my post too literally...

Can the merc stand to do a little less perm hull damage? Sure. Can it stand to do absolutely none? No. The acceptable amount between the current damage vs 0 is obviously debatable.

You do not need to match the other team's amount of mercs to remain in a position to win a match, Sunderland. I've proven it too many times for myself for anyone to tell me you have to. Sniping matches are inherently long not only because of the lower hit % but also because of extremely cautious positioning, and the guns effective at those ranges require very particular situations to get kills.

[N-Sunderland]

I never said they're a necessity. It's just the most conservative option, and so that's what a lot of people end up bringing.

[awkm]

I'd like to bring everyone's attention to this quote:

This is not to say that there aren't other issues like map design and skills that may mitigate line of sight problems.  These will slowly be worked into the game as we move along.

[Serenum]

Echoez, most of your complaints seemed centered around the "OMG GOLDFISH IS USELESS AGAINST A MERCURY" argument and the fact that it can disable components too well.
Please tell me how is changing its ability do do permahull damage going to fix that? I can still snipe your Goldfish or Galleon or wathever and by the time you get close I'll just finish you off with something that deals explosive damage while keeping your guns disabled 100% of the times, at least this seems to be your opinion.

It seems to me that your opinion is heavly biased against this gun, meanwhile the few people that support the idea of changes to the Mercury do so because they play in the competitive scene where apparently long range spamming is an issue.
An issue with the players, in my opinion, not the guns, but I've already voiced my opinion on the matter in other threads.

I never had the impression that the Mercury can absolutely dominate a game, it's a strong weapon no doubt, but you are basically denying all its flaws and pointing at your math as your only argument, which in the complex reality of a real match I'm sorry to say but isn't as important as you make it seem.
You are also totally convinced that brawling isn't a viable solution unless the enemy captain has the piloting skills of a tomato, something which I find  simply false. Even in Dunes there are dust clouds, wreckages and uneven terrain that can be used to move undetected and to provide cover against long range fire, in addition to good old piloting skills that is.
And I know this from experience, having been on both sides of the issue and having found ways around it.
Theorycrafting can deal some serious damage to the game balance.

Finally, I don't think that every ship and every weapon loadout should be equally viable in every map and against every opponent. There should be some tactics involved in choosing your loadout and ship, if you take a Galleon in Canyons you are at an objective disasvantage because it will take you a long time to navigate and there are many narrow passages. Same thing for the weapons, brawling in an open map is doable but risky unless you pick a fast ship that can quickly close the distance. I don't see the problem with that.

Anyway, I agree that baby steps is the best way to fix any balance concern, radically changing how an entire category of damage works or taking away any kill power the Mercury has will absolutely wreck this game and make it even more frustrating for new players.
I'm happy to see the devs taking the reasonable approach.

[N-Sunderland]

Also, allow me to use your math against you. You are saying that the Mercury with default ammo takes 2 shots to kill a heavy weapon. Ok.
Last time I checked the Mercury had only 2 shots and a slow reload time. So what you are saying is that even a simple gunner with a rubber mallet can simply keep its heavy gun perfectly operational even under constant mercury fire.
THe mercury shoots, the gun takes damage, immediatly the gunner hits it with his mallet, second shot comes, the gun is still alive, mercury reloads, gunner finishes bringing the gun back to full health.
And if you use 2 Mercs to disable a single component I'm sorry but not only this isn't doable on many ships but you are basically committing all your firepower to disable a single weapon. This doesn't seem like a smart strategy.

This bit's a little moot seeing as it only takes one shot to disable a heavy gun.

[Serenum]

Yeah I got distracted, I had it deleted right after posting, but you ninja'd me.
Anyway it's irrelevant.

[Echoez]

Echoez, most of your complaints seemed centered around the "OMG GOLDFISH IS USELESS AGAINST A MERCURY" argument and the fact that it can disable components too well.
Please tell me how is changing its ability do do permahull damage going to fix that? I can still snipe your Goldfish or Galleon or wathever and by the time you get close I'll just finish you off with something that deals explosive damage while keeping your guns disabled 100% of the times, at least this seems to be your opinion.

Both the Goldfish and the Spire have very low armor, penetratably by 2-3 Merc shots, unlike most ships though if those shots hit consecutively you have no chance to repair armor, so unlike most ships, the permahull damage it does harms them way more due to a fast armor destruction. You can disable my gun but you do not get an unfail permahull advantage as well. Especially seeing as how a ship like the Spire can be destroyed by 2 full volleys from 4 Mercs, something not so uncommon.

It seems to me that your opinion is heavly biased against this gun, meanwhile the few people that support the idea of changes to the Mercury do so because they play in the competitive scene where apparently long range spamming is an issue.
An issue with the players, in my opinion, not the guns, but I've already voiced my opinion on the matter in other threads.

If it can be abused, it is an issue with the gun, the players just want to win, can you blame them for that and say that "You guys are the real problem of this game for spamming a broken weapon" are you serious?

I never had the impression that the Mercury can absolutely dominate a game, it's a strong weapon no doubt, but you are basically denying all its flaws and pointing at your math as your only argument, which in the complex reality of a real match I'm sorry to say but isn't as important as you make it seem.

I actually pointed out some of the weaknesses it had, something you failed to do and see apparently, but its negatives are negligible, seeing how easy it is to use and how much damage it packs even against permahull.

You are also totally convinced that brawling isn't a viable solution unless the enemy captain has the piloting skills of a tomato, something which I find  simply false. Even in Dunes there are dust clouds, wreckages and uneven terrain that can be used to move undetected and to provide cover against long range fire, in addition to good old piloting skills that is.
And I know this from experience, having been on both sides of the issue and having found ways around it.
Theorycrafting can deal some serious damage to the game balance.

If you are talking about pubs with low level of competitiveness, sure, everything is viable. Against even remotely serious snipers, winning as a brawling team is almost impossible in Dunes, there is too much space and clouds aren't hard cover. Anyone even won against good snipers in Dunes?

I am not saying the map is bad by itself for the game in general, it is a very good beginner map that as usual, can be extremely exploited by advanced players and I did state I didn't want any more map discussion in this thread, so don't bring that up again.

Finally, I don't think that every ship and every weapon loadout should be equally viable in every map and against every opponent. There should be some tactics involved in choosing your loadout and ship, if you take a Galleon in Canyons you are at an objective disasvantage because it will take you a long time to navigate and there are many narrow passages. Same thing for the weapons, brawling in an open map is doable but risky unless you pick a fast ship that can quickly close the distance. I don't see the problem with that.

No you actually just camp your spawn. You are forgetting that people usually do not fly Galleons, it's 80% parking and 20% piloting, seeing as how the Galleon is a positioning ship more than a manuvering ship cause well.. it can't realy manuver that well.

Anyway, I agree that baby steps is the best way to fix any balance concern, radically changing how an entire category of damage works or taking away any kill power the Mercury has will absolutely wreck this game and make it even more frustrating for new players.
I'm happy to see the devs taking the reasonable approach.

Wreck the game because one weapon that is not supposed to be dealing sufficient permahull damage in the first place will actually not due to and be properly specialized?..

[Plasmarobo]

Echo I hardly think the game is "wrecked".

I haven't really used my Mercs in the last few games I've played.
I think everyone is aware of, and attempting to fix, the balance with this gun.
Now is the time for patience.

You also have to recognize that balance is a careful ecosystem. Fixing one issue may result in creating several more. Not that it will, but it might. Additionally the competitive scene is the minority (as has been pointed out) even if we are the most vocal/passionate about it.

Sniping should be a very valid tactic. I agree: It should not be the only tactic, but you can't simply make it unviable.
I think we should all take a deep breath and realize that there is weight to both sides of this argument. Again, (as I seem to be saying a lot lately) nobody is "right".

Maybe I like playing Guns of Sniperus.
Maybe I like playing Guns of Brawlicus.
I happen to actually like both.

[Serenum]

Fine Echoez, you win an Internet argument. Mercury will doom us all. Run for the hills!
I'm done with this thread, you are not even trying to be objective and you are willingly misinterpreting anything that can jeopardize your argument.

[Zenark]

I went up against some level 5+ pilots yesterday on dunes using a Blender fish, ally using a Squid, and the enemy having a gat/flak junker and a merc/mortar Pyramidion. My ship has two level twos and one level three, and we still won. It was a close battle, but me and the Squid found it stupid easy to fly around the clouds to get to the Pyra. He's be able to shoot at us all but ten seconds before we were on top of him, hammering him into a pulp. He'd take out our main gun, but we'd repair it back up easily enough and get those two shots to take out his balloon, easy kill from then on. It only got tough when they started working together at  close range at the edge of the clouds.

He was screwed out in the open, even with his sniper. There's just not enough time for him to get enough shots out to disable us. If he would have brought dual mercs, we  would have rolled them. After that match and a few more against the same guy using the same ship, and us trying different ships, including a flamer/banshee pyra, I'm no longer intimidated by a merc. Teamwork and soft cover is the counter.

[Captain Smollett]

That was 1 merc on dunes on a ship that needs to be close to get a kill.  I'm not sure that's what this thread is discussing.

[Chrinus]

I think that's where the issue lies Zenark. It's not the single Merc but the multi-merc loadouts, especially over two ships, that cause these issues with the gun. A single merc on you is quite manageable though you may take some hull damage here and there, it's often negligible. However, due to there being no mainstream alternatives due to competitive viability, this gun usually appears in pairs and sometimes across two ships.

You'll see some people here and there run Merc/Arty but usually realize they benefit more by bringing their 2nd merc, and that should not be the case - where a piercing weapon outclasses a weapon with explosive on the hull.. even if it's the secondary damage. If we want to balance this gun up, I would suggest looking more towards finding a way to make this gun need a complimenting pair the same as brawling needs a gat/flak or gat/mortar. Merc/Merc should be classified the same as Gat/Gat, etc. Knocking its permahull damage down a notch is absolutely a step in the right direction to help push explosive compliments on the merc side of a ship.

[Echoez]

Fine Echoez, you win an Internet argument. Mercury will doom us all. Run for the hills!
I'm done with this thread, you are not even trying to be objective and you are willingly misinterpreting anything that can jeopardize your argument.

I never said the Mercury will doom us all, I am saying the pressure it puts on many vessels is not justified. Aleviating the permahull damage it does will not harm what the weapon is designed to do, which is disable and armor pierce, meaning you will actually have to pair it with an (Here it comes!) explosive to have killing power over range as well just like in a close range loadout, the Mercury is the only gun that can get away with it by just spamming it twice.
 I made a post for the sake of argument, my original post is clearly not correct and an over reaction, but it did spark a discussion and we did reach a point of slight agreement which I want tested, not sure how that will hurt the game. I am trying to make it more fun, a thread just sparked up as well on how this gun is probably the most detrimental to gameplay exprience, so it's not just about competative play.

[Zenark]

If  more than one merc is so overpowered, make it so you can't have two mercs on one ship.