Major and Minor Playstyles

[Mod Josie]

My favourite Play style (as a pilot) is almost certainly [C]. I am a big sucker for old-fashioned naval tactics mixed with dogfights and other aeronautical nonsense.
I like steering my enemies into tight spots and I like having my enemies push me into similar situations so that I can try to counter and escape. If I fail to escape then I learn. It makes the chase so much more interesting and keeps the heat of battle alight with variety.

I am definitely not an Agressive DPS man, I just can't be bothered with waving a big cumbersome hammer - it's not my style. Thankfully, I am versed enough at Reactive play to out-think aggressive enemies for the most-part.

Of course, all of this means very little in competitive matches - I am a poor pilot against people who know what they're doing

[AbbyTheRat]

My playstyle is for sure A-S. I've noticed that I'm really aggressive and often work best spilt engagement.  And R is totally my counter, specially long range.

I'm sure others could pipe in about my playstyle.

Anddd.. I love it, it's a great way to categorise pilots and teams and even tactic while being reasonable flexible.

[HamsterIV]

I like to think I am flexible enough to fly with any style, but I prefer the Reactive style. My most enjoyable moments in the game come from sticking my ship in very difficult situations and somehow pulling through. Aggressive and Control seems to be an all or nothing affairs. Either you dominate the game or spend the game being dominated. Reactive gives closer battles and cuts down on rage quits.

[Nidh]

I definitely prefer the control-style of flying, heck my guns don't even have to be firing as long as I have control of the situation; If I'm being focused I have a smile on my face as my ally comes up from behind the distracted enemy and wrecks him. Anything that locks down or zones out the enemy makes me happy. Unfortunately this often requires an experienced and aggressive ally to make work well so playing with pubs isn't as fun and I lose a lot more when my ally doesn't take advantage of the, well, advantages I try to give them. If i'm forced to be aggressive than my ally isn't doing his job, and If i'm forced to play reactive then I haven't done my job correctly.

[redria]

Some further thought food into it, and I expect these to be much more debated. Weapons can be "classified" just like ships, but it all depends on the way you fly them. A junker flown aggressively is completely different from a junker flown passively, even if the loadout is the same. Guns are completely different beasts depending on how they are used. My goal is to identify the classification of the weapon while pointing towards strengths it may have in other classes. Also, more generalizations about the classes, because it is fun. As always, feel free to discuss. 

ARCs

[A] tends to be perfected by timing. Guns and ships are coordinated to deal the exact type of damage needed at the exact time it is needed. Everything is optimized for quick kills where everything fires in perfect coordination.

[R] tends to be perfected by gunner skill and coordination. Reactive depends on the ships and guns reacting to the situation properly and making every shot count. Coordination is necessary for the ships to be able to support each other when needed.

[C] tends to be perfected by piloting skill. Control ships tend to have much lower killing power and lower skill weapons. They depend on the pilot knowing exactly how to handle the ship to stay in control of the engagement.

Guns

Gatling - AR-C
The gatling gun shines as a DPS weapon, highlighted most often on [A] and [R] ships as an assistant to dealing rapid massive amount of damage. It depends on other weapons to deliver finishing blows, and so works best as a weapon on a ship with easy arcs to fire secondary weapons.
It has an additional point towards control due to incendiary ammo and component damage. The gatling gun can be loaded with incendiary ammo to cause chaos on another ship to increase your control over it, and it can be used to disable specific components, also assisting in control.

Mortar - AR
The natural mate to the gatling gun, the mortar shines as a DPS finishing weapon. It is a natural fit on [A] and [R] ships as a close range damage dealing weapon when properly supported. However, it does need piercing support, making it a poor choice for [C] ships. While it can damage components on its own, this ability is insufficient to gain proper control.

Carronade - C
The carronade is a pure control weapon. It rapidly shreds balloons, and can be combined with heavy clip to destroy individual components. It is a key weapon when playing with vertical control, allowing a ship to gain the high ground and maintain absolute control over the remainder of the engagement. However, it does not deal sufficient armor or hull damage to be appropriate as either an [A] or [R] weapon.

Flamethrower - C
The (current) flamethrower is also pure control. With the ability to hit every component it passes through (and even multiple ships at once), along with the chance to set fire stacks on everything it hits, the flamethrower slowly takes control away from an enemy as they are forced to leave guns to maintain their ship. However, it currently does not deal enough pure damage to qualify as either an [A] or [R] weapon.

Flare gun - C
The flare gun is a control weapon. The hit damage with 10 stacks of fire are reminiscent of the flamethrower: low damage and high chaos. This alone points it towards being control. However, the primary use of the gun is the ability to light up clouds, which does 2 things. First, it alerts you to the presence of enemies. This is critical in controlling an engagement. Not knowing where an enemy is can quickly lose the control. Second, it pushes the enemy towards where you want them to be. An ambushing team is less likely to attack through a flared area to avoid being spotted. This means that with flares you can (in theory) funnel the enemy into a location of your choosing for the engagement.

Harpoon - C
The (broken) harpoon is pure control. With low damage it does not fit either [A] or [R]. It can be used to pull the enemy into a position more favorable for yourself and less favorable for the enemy.

Mine launcher - C
The mine launcher is a control weapon. While it deals large quantities of damage, the most important factor of the mines is that they alter the location and momentum of the enemy. This allows a ship to take absolute control over an enemy, knocking off their arcs and preventing them from taking part in a fight.

Artemis - CR
The artemis, with its slow turn speed and high disable power, is good for controlling fights through key disables and for assisting in reactive dps. Less effective in aggressive builds due to its less than optimal explosive damage, it offers respectable power for reactive builds that intend to deploy more guns at once.

Hades - AR-C
The hades is a wonderful mix of DPS and control, offering the desired piercing damage along with the potential for fires and balloon damage. The piercing damage is effective for both [A] and [R] builds, and the fires help give control.

Mercury - (CR)
The mercury is confusing beast. My best bet would be to classify it as control and reactive, though that is mostly based on gut feeling. The disabling ability of the gun along with the long range accuracy make it a good weapon for setting up reaction traps and controlling fights through disables of key components.

Banshee - (C-AR)
I honestly don't know the home territory of the banshee yet. My best guess is as a harassment killing weapon, such as a gat-banshee squid. This would fit in as a C-AR style weapon I guess, though the explosive damage indicates it should be used as a DPS weapon. The fire it can cause is definitely [C] style with a hand towards actual damage potential.

Light flak - AR
DPS kill oriented weapon. The light flak's only purpose is to deliver explosive damage for killing blows. It currently fits as a mid-range finishing weapon on [A] and [R] ships.

Heavy flak - AR
DPS kill oriented weapon. The heavy flak's only purpose is to deliver explosive damage for killing blows. It currently fits as a mid/long-range finishing weapon on [A] and [R] ships.

Lumberjack - C-R
A control based weapon for popping balloons, the lumberjack has the unique property of having several times more ammo per clip than is needed to pop a balloon. This allows it to continue dealing damage even after its primary function has been served, making it a respectable reactive weapon: react to the opponent and retake control.

Heavy carronade - C
Similar to its light sibling, the heavy carronade it built for control. While it has hull shredding potential, well used carronades will help maintain constant control of close range vertical gameplay.

Hwacha - C-AR
The hwacha is a control weapon with a taste for damage. The primary function of the hwacha is to disable the components of an enemy ship. Proper use will take all physical control and power from an enemy, giving you the opportunity to position yourself as desired for a continuation of the fight. Additionally, the explosive damage potential of the gun allows you to deal killing blows at opportune moments.

[Omniraptor]

Flare gun is mostly used by reactive ships with extra gun slots, such as galleon, spire or mobula, or by pyramidions where the pilot is going easy on tools and the main engi has too much free time.

I would also say the hwacha is a universalist weapon which can perform in pretty much any role, leaning slightly towards C and A, but also quite capable as R. However it suffers from slow projectile speed making it easy to dodge at long range.

Same goes for lumberjack/hades, they're 2 sides of the same coin- can deal tons of damage and perform in any role, but only at a certain range.

[Dutch Vanya]

Flare gun is mostly used by reactive ships with extra gun slots, such as galleon, spire or mobula, or by pyramidions where the pilot is going easy on tools and the main engi has too much free time.

I would also say the hwacha is a universalist weapon which can perform in pretty much any role, leaning slightly towards C and A, but also quite capable as R. However it suffers from slow projectile speed making it easy to dodge at long range.

Same goes for lumberjack/hades, they're 2 sides of the same coin- can deal tons of damage and perform in any role, but only at a certain range.

Extra gun slots on a spire? Not if you use it to it's full potential.

[macmacnick]

Hey, Flares work excellently on a hwachafish (or on a lumberfish with a decent ally to support and a decent Lumberjack gunner), but always, always bring heatsink for the flares. Extra control is beautiful.

[Piemanlives]

Going by both the original post the recently posted weapons list, my play style (at least going by my standard build) Is built around an AC combo of Banshees, Light Carronades, and a singular Howitzer.

The Howitzer is good for setting up close in engagements when used correctly on the approach, singling out dangerous weapons allowing you to get in more or less unaccosted, it can also be used to deter enemy vessels from a distance or support an allied ship.

The Carronade is more or less obvious in its use, disabling components and taking out their balloon forces them to prioritize either keeping their ship afloat or being able to deal damage and hopefully taking out the Carronade that's keeping them down, either choice is a valid option, if the carronade is out of action it gives you a few moments of breathing room to either strike back or link up with an ally, however prioritizing the balloon hands you survivability because you're not sliding around on the ground taking damage, giving your ally time to move in and assist you. 

The Banshee, with its radial fire setting can be used as a reactive weapon, a control weapon, or a DPS weapon, it's reactive in the way that you can use it to force crew members off guns when you find your self under attack, however coupled with its impressive firing speed it can deal a decent amount of damage against an unshielded hull making it a decent DPS weapon. If we look at it's fire starting ability however it can be used to take control of the field, throwing both explosive damage and setting down fire stacks is an effective way to disable a ship, with multiple components taking damage from both damage types they'd have to prioritize either making sure they can stay afloat or again, deal damage.

That might all be a grave misconception, it also reveals how I play but than again that's no secret either.

[Alistair MacBain]

Heavy flak - AR

While a HFlak is kill oriented i wouldnt call it an A weapon.
Thats just due to the fact which ships can utilize it.
That are Spires and Galleons. Not gonna count the fish as a viable option with a flak.
Those ships arent a DPS ships imo. You lean more towards a R style of game. See what the enemy does and pick him of on longrange.

[redria]

I think if this system lacks anywhere it is in [R].

I'm not really sure how to distinguish weapons and ships between [A] and [R] except the way they are flown, and even that doesn't answer everything. I guess the main distinction is whether you seek to engage the enemy in a location of their choosing or your choosing, which doesn't necessarily divide the 2 classes appropriately.

Thoughts? Am I crazy? Perhaps this classification system is appropriate for the way teams actually play, but not for the weapons and ships themselves? Some things, like mines, carronades, squids, and goldfish can be naturally qualified as [C] items, but a lot of the rest seem to depend entirely on the way they are used: the playstyle of the team itself.

In other words, the play-style of a weapon is more characterized by the play-style of the team using the weapon, rather than by the nature of the weapon itself. Because of this, attempting to identify the nature of the weapon serves no purpose as it does not take a broad enough view.

Looking at the overall theory here, I would think that perhaps there is a separate classification system for ships, and another for weapons, that would look deeper at the nature of the items in question as standalone pieces. Finally, there would be an overarching connection tying together the 3 classification systems identifying what classes mesh well together between the 3 major pivot points of battle: play-styles, ships, and guns.

Of course, there is the 4th category of crew loadout. For instance, drogue chute is an anti-control type tool. Moonshine is an aggressive DPS type tool. But perhaps there is a classification system inherent in the tools.

TL;DR: Games are science. Let's think too hard.

[Echoez]

TL;DR: Games are science. Let's think too hard.

Noted.

You can not categorize weapons by the same way you categorize playstyles as the playstyles themselves are a result of different weapon combinations as well as ship combinations.

Weapons are either focused on destroying the enemy ship or disabling it and most guns are adequate in doing both in some way or an other. You could categorize them in a way by the time it takes for the gun to accomplish its primary role, but you would still end up with combined categories.

e.g.

Carronades can easily be classified as a Control weapon, but their short range means you will have to be agressive and get yourself close in to deal with whatever problems you are dealing with, so you end up with a Agressive Control weapon.

The Hades on the other hand, due to its projectile nature and lack of power to strip armor in one go by itself, is definately a Reactive weapon that doesn't promote overly agressive playstyle as you want to keep some distance, but it still lights things on fire, which gives it some controlling power, its primary fire damage while not too effective, is still good against balloons as well.

The only weapons I can think of being purely agressive are pure explosive guns like the light Mortar and Flak, whose only purpose is to finish the enemy ship as they don't do much damage to anything else other than a naked blimp. The Heavy Flak would probably be the Passive Agressive weapon I guess

Basically, Passive Control, Agressive Control and pure Agression weapons.

[redria]

Hmm....

Basically, Passive Control, Agressive Control and pure Agression weapons.

I am sort of envisioning a quadrant style weapons classification from that. Basically, on the x-axis is control->killing, while on the y-axis is passive->aggressive. Each weapon would have their own data point on the quadrant.

		Aggressive
		|
Control	-	-----+-----	-	Killing
		|
		Passive

Using your examples..

Carronade would sit in the top left quadrant, a combination of control and aggressive. Heavy flak, with its arming time, would be somewhere in the bottom right quadrant, a combination of passive killing.
Artemis would be in the bottom half of the graph, definitively in the passive side of the graph, but close to the left/right center of the graph, probably slightly on the control side.

Intriguing? Totally wrong? Weapons are pretty linked to their range and their arcs, so a classification system is inherently going to reference the range. The passive and aggressive terms refer to whether you must move in aggressively to acquire range, or if you can play passively and still use the weapon to effect. Control vs killing relates to the particular use of a weapon.

We see similar themes to the play-style classification system, but the scaling and rating system is (kind of) completely different, allowing for much better classification of the inherent value of a weapon and its attributes, as opposed to how a team uses it.

I sort of like this idea.

[Echoez]

		Aggressive
		|
Control	-	-----+-----	-	Killing
		|
		Passive

I for one welcome our new Axis quadrant overlords.

But yes, this seems like the best way to classify weapons.

[Alistair MacBain]

We should really split this up at one point into a seperate post. MAybe even a thread in the guides part ^^
I really like that.
And that weapon classification is great.