Author Topic: Junker viability and builds  (Read 78238 times)

Offline Alistair MacBain

  • Member
  • Salutes: 23
    • [GwTh]
    • 22 
    • 45
    • 19 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #45 on: November 28, 2014, 03:54:11 pm »
The maxrange of the gat flak is the same as the gat mortar.
Once youre out of gatrange you wont deal sufficient damage on anything except permahull which you cant damage due to missing dmg on armor.

Offline obliviondoll

  • Member
  • Salutes: 26
    • [BSky]
    • 7
    • View Profile
    • obliviondoll's blog (barely-maintained)
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #46 on: November 29, 2014, 01:46:42 am »
Not sure if it's been talked of, but has anyone tried Gunker? (full gat Junker?) I've used quite a bit in the matches I've piloted in, and from my experience it works very nicely if you have good comms with your ally. Get 3 gats on one ship, strip the hull in seconds, and slowly but surely you wear the hull down too.

It was in a relatively low-level match (highest-level player on either team was lvl 7) back before matchmaking happened. Also, it was primarily with players who should really have been in novice matches at the time, so not exactly the ideal testing ground for viable strategies.

That said... it DID work out unreasonably well considering the team I was in was the lower-level group and had most of the novice players in the match.

2 vs. 2

Enemy had a Hwachafish and Metamidion.
We had a Gat Junker and a quad-Hwacha Galleon with Banshees (my Fireworks Display).

Gats nearly insta-stripped armour, while the Galleon's Hwachas nearly instakilled targets once the armour was down.

Offline Kestril

  • Community Ambassador
  • Salutes: 24
    • [Sass]
    • 33 
    • 36
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #47 on: December 01, 2014, 02:21:21 am »
The maxrange of the gat flak is the same as the gat mortar.
Once youre out of gatrange you wont deal sufficient damage on anything except permahull which you cant damage due to missing dmg on armor.

Then have your gunner grab some lesmok for the gatling, or an engie bring some heatsink for the flak.

 I just find that the flak hits more punishing more often. I ran another gat/flak junker to train some level 1's this evening and with minimal effort we decimated.

 I guess I perfer short-medium versatility (on the junker) over raw killing power.


Offline Alistair MacBain

  • Member
  • Salutes: 23
    • [GwTh]
    • 22 
    • 45
    • 19 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #48 on: December 01, 2014, 10:41:12 am »
Mortar does more overall damage in a similiar amoutn of time.
Lesmok gat cant strip armor in one clip and heatsink reduces flakarming not to much.
30% or 20% (not sure bout the correct number) of 150m just isnt much.

Offline Kestril

  • Community Ambassador
  • Salutes: 24
    • [Sass]
    • 33 
    • 36
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #49 on: December 01, 2014, 11:55:26 am »
Mortar does more overall damage in a similiar amoutn of time.
Lesmok gat cant strip armor in one clip and heatsink reduces flakarming not to much.
30% or 20% (not sure bout the correct number) of 150m just isnt much.

I know, I know, and I know. Stating facts doesn't refute my point unless you direct those facts towards a conclusion. I'd like to discuss this and topics like: does the flak's arcs, speed, and ease make up for the lack of damage, or is it possible to position a ship correctly for the narrow gat/flak bad, but it seems you're being dismissive or just matter of fact? It's hard to tell on the internet.

In any case, I'm not eye-to-eye with my junker, and I'm often strafing at a range just outside of the mortar but still well within the gatling range. Heatsink and lesmok are for the extreme cases of both weapons.

I think we're going in circles at this point.

Offline Dementio

  • Member
  • Salutes: 135
    • [Rydr]
    • 43 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #50 on: December 01, 2014, 12:08:13 pm »
I suppose it usually goes like this, when you need lesmok gatling you should probably turn your long range side to the enemy instead. Only when the enemy is really getting close to you, you would have to turn to the gat/mortar side and in this range the mortar beats the flak.
With a certain amount of piloting and engineering you shouldn't have too much trouble keeping the close range side to the enemy.

That only applies, if you have both, long range and close range sides though, which many Junker pilots do advice.

Offline Kestril

  • Community Ambassador
  • Salutes: 24
    • [Sass]
    • 33 
    • 36
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #51 on: December 01, 2014, 01:59:51 pm »
I suppose it usually goes like this, when you need lesmok gatling you should probably turn your long range side to the enemy instead. Only when the enemy is really getting close to you, you would have to turn to the gat/mortar side and in this range the mortar beats the flak.
With a certain amount of piloting and engineering you shouldn't have too much trouble keeping the close range side to the enemy.

That only applies, if you have both, long range and close range sides though, which many Junker pilots do advice.

In general, and on most maps, that's the way to go. I run asymmetry when I need the range more open maps like dunes and water hazard.

But, on the other hand, I think there is something to be said for being able to react very quickly with the wide turn arcs, fast rotation speed either side in constricting maps like canyon ambush, where the junker's fast acceleration make it a very responsive vessel. IMO symmetrical mortars give up too much because of their lack of range.

Basically, I'm trading side specialization for a "jack of medium-close range". There's many more options available, maneuvering wise in the thick of things. In turn, it makes it simpler to position and punish vessels that are not as nimble in that odd border of medium-long range.

Still, there's the problem of having a reactionary style instead of a proactive playstyle. I.E. you have to bank on and cause your opponent to make a mistake, but I think that's an issue more inherent to the junker itself.

Perhaps more disabling power would promote that. I could look into banshees as a replacement for the flak.

hmmm.

Offline PixelatedVolume

  • Member
  • Salutes: 2
    • [PIEπ]
    • 19
    • 17 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #52 on: December 17, 2014, 05:37:22 pm »

Basically, I'm trading side specialization for a "jack of medium-close range". There's many more options available, maneuvering wise in the thick of things. In turn, it makes it simpler to position and punish vessels that are not as nimble in that odd border of medium-long range.

Still, there's the problem of having a reactionary style instead of a proactive playstyle. I.E. you have to bank on and cause your opponent to make a mistake, but I think that's an issue more inherent to the junker itself.

Perhaps more disabling power would promote that. I could look into banshees as a replacement for the flak.

hmmm.

Totally agree.  There's nothing better than surprising a nimble pilot trying to escape your gat with a quick side-change.  I put an artemis on the front because trifectas are overrated, so I have a little range too, but in my experience the gat-mortar will reliably stop brawling pyras and squids and. . . almost everything but blenderfish. 

Anyone have any good junker counters for blenderfish?  A full sniper could do it, I guess. . .

Offline DrTentacles

  • Member
  • Salutes: 30
    • [GSR]
    • 19 
    • 25
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #53 on: December 17, 2014, 06:11:19 pm »
Triple carro/double Artemis works pretty well.

Offline Kamoba

  • Member
  • Salutes: 175
    • [♫]
    • 30 
    • 34
    • 45 
    • View Profile
    • Robin and Magpie Leather
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #54 on: December 18, 2014, 05:41:04 am »
Double merc works well along side any ship packing heavy weapons (Specifically Flak :) )

Although I like artemis on the front, I don't use artemis on front with a pub group, otherwise you find the lowest level will sit on the Artemis and only use that one gun, and if its your gunner who you need below deck, you'll soon find yourself in trouble :(


Offline Destroyer Bravo

  • Member
  • Salutes: 0
    • [AI]
    • 7
    • 11 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #55 on: January 29, 2015, 08:03:30 am »
This is an old piloting tactic that I used to use against things.

Upon approach, begin rising.

Stay at the enemies' balloon height.

Rain down gat/mort hell.

This put morts in such an arc that the drop was irrelevant due to positioning.

Actually, are you not already doing this? Mortar drop can be accounted for by altitude for even the worst pug.

« Last Edit: January 29, 2015, 08:06:19 am by Destroyer Bravo »

Offline BlackenedPies

  • Member
  • Salutes: 134
    • [Duck]
    • 30 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #56 on: January 29, 2015, 03:28:30 pm »
Being above your opponent is almost always an advantage, however with a junker you can use your greatest weakness as a powerful asset.

The junker has a giant balloon and is very vulnerable to having it popped, however you can use that big balloon as a shield to protect your hull and components. If you need repairs duck below them and keep your balloon between you and their guns.

Don't forget that your top deck engineer can't handle balloon/components and the hull. The front deck position is for repairing the hull (and help bottom deck if necessary). Stand right by the side post of the hull and look up. If you're not rebuilding a broken hull it's usually recommended to just jump up to hit it. Don't forget chem spray when your gun reloads.

As for junker builds, for exclusive close range builds I like a lesmok mine on the front.
I also enjoy heatsink light flak front (quick turning, high dmg per clip). Double banshee left, double gat or gat carro right.
Triple heavy clip carro!
Trifectas are very powerful.

Offline Destroyer Bravo

  • Member
  • Salutes: 0
    • [AI]
    • 7
    • 11 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #57 on: January 30, 2015, 07:29:44 am »
Being above your opponent is almost always an advantage, however with a junker you can use your greatest weakness as a powerful asset.

The junker has a giant balloon and is very vulnerable to having it popped, however you can use that big balloon as a shield to protect your hull and components. If you need repairs duck below them and keep your balloon between you and their guns.

Don't forget that your top deck engineer can't handle balloon/components and the hull. The front deck position is for repairing the hull (and help bottom deck if necessary). Stand right by the side post of the hull and look up. If you're not rebuilding a broken hull it's usually recommended to just jump up to hit it. Don't forget chem spray when your gun reloads.

As for junker builds, for exclusive close range builds I like a lesmok mine on the front.
I also enjoy heatsink light flak front (quick turning, high dmg per clip). Double banshee left, double gat or gat carro right.
Triple heavy clip carro!
Trifectas are very powerful.

If you're low map turtleing with the balloon as a shield you need drogue chute or you'll start scraping the floor.

Hull is handled by lower-deck engi/gunner, top deck handles back stuff, and a guy with buff/chem does rounds. At least that's how I ordered my crew.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2015, 07:32:21 am by Destroyer Bravo »

Offline BlackenedPies

  • Member
  • Salutes: 134
    • [Duck]
    • 30 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #58 on: January 30, 2015, 11:10:28 am »
Hydrogen is recommended as the third pilot tool (with kero and claw).

For example if you're fighting a gat mortar pyra you can use your superior maneuverability to dance under the pyra until you get to a good spot to use hydrogen. This is usually on their blind side or behind them. Going under is generally only for an emergency. A junker can easily out-position a pyra as is.

If you're fighting someone with a carronade this is not recommended. I'm a fan of using hydro as soon as the balloon is back up, assuming your balloon will just get repopped. I also like hydro drogue combo but you give up a tool. It's usually not a good idea to bring a junker against carronades.

The meta junker loadout is a wrench buff chem on top deck, spanner mallet chem on front, and spanner mallet buff on bottom. The left side is a double artemis hades trifecta and the right side is a gat mortar. This is the most efficient setup for repairs and buffs. The gun setup is very effective.

One of the junker's best assets is the ability to have trifectas. I recommend using this as often as possible. That's why  the front repairs hull, the gunner spot is the bottom, and one engi on top. This way the front and bottom can help eachother with repairs while the top focuses on the balloon (with the pilot) and engines. The pilot should usually be repairing and rebuilding the balloon. Bring a pipe wrench to repair damage while your engineer is occupied.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2015, 11:12:34 am by BlackenedPies »

Offline Kain Phalanx

  • Member
  • Salutes: 1
    • 31 
    • 45
    • 11 
    • View Profile
Re: Junker viability and builds
« Reply #59 on: January 30, 2015, 12:23:52 pm »
One of the junker's best assets is the ability to have trifectas. I recommend using this as often as possible. That's why  the front repairs hull, the gunner spot is the bottom, and one engi on top. This way the front and bottom can help eachother with repairs while the top focuses on the balloon (with the pilot) and engines. The pilot should usually be repairing and rebuilding the balloon. Bring a pipe wrench to repair damage while your engineer is occupied.
I loathe crewing junkers because of this mindset.  I do not automatically know what pilots expect me to do.  The trifecta puts people out of position and completely relies on that hull repair sweet spot trick.  And the gunner spot being below deck has a big fire problem.  It's just horribly inconvenient in practice.  I say if you want a trifecta, fly a Mobula.