Author Topic: Another gunner fix proposal - multi-tiered approach needed.  (Read 14334 times)

Offline obliviondoll

  • Member
  • Salutes: 26
    • [BSky]
    • 7
    • View Profile
    • obliviondoll's blog (barely-maintained)
Another gunner fix proposal - multi-tiered approach needed.
« on: November 29, 2014, 11:05:24 pm »
So... I've been thinking about this off and on, while playing the game, and while not playing.

As a pilot, you will be the only player adequately equipped to fulfill the role of pilot. You need your 3 piloting tool slots for the ability to vary your ship's performance profile. Only one person may be on the helm at any time, so more than one pilot is a waste of those extra tools, which can mostly only be used when the player is on the helm. As a non-pilot, there's a very limited set of piloting tools to choose from and use effectively (Basically only Spyglass, but technically Rangfinder SHOULD be an option too).

As an Engineer, you will be able to fill multiple support roles on board the ship. Firefighting and damage control are both key aspects of an Engineer's role, and buffing components is sometimes a primary function as well, depending on the Engineer's build. As a non-Engineer, you're almost required to take a repair tool (Spanner/Mallet/Wrench) because keeping the ship alive is everyone's job.

As a Gunner, your primary role is to fire guns. This role can be fairly efficiently filled by any crew member. Gunners are "more effective" in the sense that they can man a variety of guns effectively, or they can use those rare guns where multiple ammo types are viable more effectively than any other single crew member. Any player moving about on a ship with mostly-similar weapons can perform competently as a Gunner without actually BEING a Gunner. Any crew member with an assigned area and only one or two weapon types in their designated zone can fill the role of Gunner with only one ammo type.

So, what's causing this disparity between classes? There are several problems. Lets look at each in turn, and address them. Some of the problems are relatively complex, and so are my solutions. I also have a tendency to overdo things, so please bear with my walls of text.

1. Problem.
Lets look at the difference in timing between buffing a gun and loading specialist ammo into a gun. An Engineer can buff a gun, then pre-buff until it only needs one more hit to be buffed a second time. If the Engineer is 0.1s late returning to the gun, the damage output is only reduced for that 0.1s window. If they're late by a whole second, the damage output is still only reduced for that 1s window where the gun is firing without a buff. If the buff wears off during a reload, this loss of damage is somewhat mitigated.

On the other hand, when a GUNNER is late, the gun has finished reloading. It doesn't matter if you're late by a whole second, or just a tenth of one. When you get back, your options are to fire AN ENTIRE CLIP with a loss of firepower, or to RELOAD THE GUN AGAIN AND TRY TO GET THE RIGHT TIMING. Not only have you lost whatever time you spent away from the already-loaded gun, but you're also either sacrificing ALL of the gun's potential firepower for the time it takes to reload, or firing at reduced capability until your next reload.

1. Solution.
Let the Gunner* change ammo types ANY TIME DURING THE RELOAD. Every time a gun is reloaded - EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. Manned or unmanned, manned by someone with the current ammo type or not - the gun should load standard ammo. When a Gunner selects an ammo type, a timer is begun. When the reload OR that timer completes - whichever comes first - the new ammo type is locked in. Abandoning the weapon or switchng to a new ammo type will reset the timer.

*Gunner as in "player manning the gun and loading ammo", not necessarily a player with the Gunner class selected

With this proposed change, the current routines of players will remain entirely viable. A gunner can leave their gun as it starts reloading, let it reload on standard ammo up to the last 0.1s of the reload time, then suddenly throw Lochnagar or Burst Ammo in at the last second. BUT they can ALSO now lock that ammo type in at the BEGINNING of the reload, and walk off to do something else WITHOUT losing an entire reload plus more for missing their window. Switching ammo type on a loaded gun will reload the gun, much like it already does. Once you've waited out the ammo select timer, you don't have to stay on the gun to make sure it loads. And again, you can do what people already do and use the ammo switch to initiate a reload, leave the gun, then return at the last second to set your chosen ammo type just before the reload completes. You can ALSO switch ammo type, lock that ammo in, then walk away and be free to come back in your own time, knowing the right ammo will be there waiting when you get back.

2. Problem.
Most weapons only benefit from one ammo type. It's not entirely true, but it's close enough to be worth saying. Lumberjacks are good with a lot of different ammo types, each filling a different purpose. Hwachas gain different advantages from Heavy Clip or Burst Ammo. But with a lot of guns, you want to be relying heavily on one ammo type in almost every situation. Some guns might benefit from multiple ammo types, but in such similar ways that it doesn't really matter which you choose. Also, many weapons simply don't benefit ENOUGH from a change of ammo to be concerned if you don't have the right type to load.

2. Solution.
One part of this problem can be addressed by using the same mechanic proposed for problem 1. Add in a recognition of manual vs. automatic loading. At the moment, guns all have a fixed reload speed depending on the weapon. Once reloading is initiated, the gun will automatically reload by itself, with no input from a player. What if locking in an ammo type gave a small (10 - 20%) reduction to the weapon's reload time?

NOTE: I'd lean towards 10% in an "absolute" reduction where the timer is shortened based on the total reload time. If it's only shortening the reload time by X% of remaining time, I'd want the bonus to be larger, at least 15%

How does this fix things? This proposed change adds an extra incentive to using specialist ammo over the default ammo type. If you're not carrying ammo that suits a gun, you won't want to be manning that gun when it reloads, because you'll have to choose between loading a poor choice of ammo or waiting longer before firing.

In order to not overly penalise players who aren't gunners, reload speed could be improved by simply being on the gun for the required duration to lock in an ammo type even if using standard ammo. This could open the door for specialist ammo types to have a reload speed buff as one of their benefits over standard ammo.

3. Problem.
Buff tools. Simply put, the benefit of using a buff tool on a gun is too large in comparison to using the right ammo type for the situation. Additionally, a buff tool is a guaranteed improvement, where ammo types have the potential to make some guns less effective (Flamethrower + Lochnagar, for an extreme example). We've already addressed the lack of penalty when mistiming a buff, but that's a weakness of ammo types, not an undeserved strength of the buff tool.

3. Solution.
The buff tool's effectiveness on weapons needs to be rethought in some manner. The best solution I can think of is to quite thoroughly change how the buff tool works on a gun. Instead of buffing the weapon itself for a limited time, buffing the gun could buff the ammo inside it. This would be an indefinite buff, not timed. When the buff is completed, the bar wouldn't be a timer, but an ammo count. As shots are fired, it decreases, until the gun is empty. If you reload, the buff is reset (neither emptying nor reloading should remove pre-buffing, however, only an active buff).

Another alternative would be to straight-up nerf (again) the effectiveness of the buff tool on weapons, but for obvious reasons, I'm not a big fan of this idea. Buff tools need to benefit weapons in order to maintain damage output at a sensible level. It could also be used to buff reload speed, turn speed or rate of fire instead of raw damage output. Again, with the game being balanced how it is, I favour other proposals more.

Another, also less ideal, but possibly slightly more viable alternative, would be to buff all weapons to deal more damage (at least half the buff currently given by the buff hammer), and to make the buff tool provide guns with additional HP instead of a damage increase. While not as bad as nerfing the buff hammer, I still favour changing the mechanics of weapon buffs.

Obviously, while I've put a lot of thought into this post, I haven't addressed how difficult it would be to implement my proposal. I am suggesting quite significant alterations to core mechanics in the game, and while I believe these changes would benefit the game, it's entirely possible they would be impractical to actually put into effect. I hope for these suggestions to be considered by all (and picked apart by anyone who sees any significant holes in my logic). As much as I personally like the suggestions I've made, at the end of the day, even if the ideas are sound, it's down to whether Muse (and the Unity engine) can actually make it happen. It might be a terrible idea purely on the basis of impracticality from a programming perspective. I would hope not, but I don't know the inner workings of the game's code, so I can't say for sure either way.

Offline Crafeksterty

  • Member
  • Salutes: 73
    • [GwTh]
    • 17 
    • 28
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Another gunner fix proposal - multi-tiered approach needed.
« Reply #1 on: November 30, 2014, 02:15:19 am »
You need to play the game more because

Quote
Let the Gunner* change ammo types ANY TIME DURING THE RELOAD. Every time a gun is reloaded - EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. Manned or unmanned, manned by someone with the current ammo type or not - the gun should load standard ammo. When a Gunner selects an ammo type, a timer is begun. When the reload OR that timer completes - whichever comes first - the new ammo type is locked in. Abandoning the weapon or switchng to a new ammo type will reset the timer.

Is how it is currently. Just simple.

In another note, all classes are equal, the only thing different is how many slots they have. So no exclusive functions for each class.
The real fix should stay on either a change in the tools or a new tool type for the gunner. Pilots have 2 tool types. Engineers have 3. Gunners only have one. Which is the real problem.

Offline Sprayer

  • Member
  • Salutes: 14
    • [SPQR]
    • 45 
    • 45
    • 27 
    • View Profile
Re: Another gunner fix proposal - multi-tiered approach needed.
« Reply #2 on: November 30, 2014, 10:14:18 am »
By reading her text past that paragraph it becomes clear that she didn't mean what she literally wrote. (assuming female cuz "obliviondoll" seems a female name to me) She suggested a mechanic that allows to change the ammo type whithout the need to man the gun at the time of reload completion by adding an option to change the ammo at the start of the reload.

I didn't exactly get how the 2nd solution is supposed to impact on the 2nd problem - are you suggesting "changing the ammo type should reduce reload times" or "staying on the gun long enough for the lock in timer should reduce reload time"?

On the 3rd thing: buffing the clip instead of the gun for a fixed timer is a new suggestion as far as I know. However, it'd make the buff tool viability very inconsistent among all guns. Buffing a gatling would yield a bigger gain per invested time than buffing any lower ammo gun. Of course, that is assuming you still would need 8 buff hammer hits to buff any gun. Also this would probably break another of muses paradigms and muse loves their paradims to the grave.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2014, 10:16:01 am by Sprayer »

Offline obliviondoll

  • Member
  • Salutes: 26
    • [BSky]
    • 7
    • View Profile
    • obliviondoll's blog (barely-maintained)
Re: Another gunner fix proposal - multi-tiered approach needed.
« Reply #3 on: November 30, 2014, 02:26:19 pm »
You need to play the game more because

Quote
Let the Gunner* change ammo types ANY TIME DURING THE RELOAD. Every time a gun is reloaded - EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. Manned or unmanned, manned by someone with the current ammo type or not - the gun should load standard ammo. When a Gunner selects an ammo type, a timer is begun. When the reload OR that timer completes - whichever comes first - the new ammo type is locked in. Abandoning the weapon or switchng to a new ammo type will reset the timer.

Is how it is currently. Just simple.

No, that isn't how it works. At the moment, unless you're manning that gun RIGHT AT THE MOMENT THE RELOAD ENDS, NO MATTER HOW LONG YOU SPEND ON THE GUN BEFORE THAT POINT, it won't load your selected ammo.

If your gun has a 5 minute reload timer, and you're manning the gun for the first 4 minutes and 59.9 seconds with burst ammo loaded, then leave right in the last 0.1s before the reload completes, it loads standard ammo. If you leave the gun the instant you've fired the last shot from the clip, and come back 0.1s before the reload completes, you can get your selected ammo to load. I'm suggesting to change the former, but also to keep the latter.

Obviously the 5 minutes is exaggerated for effect, but you can see the point, right?

Also, when you have burst ammo selected, and empty a clip (or manually reload), as long as you're manning the gun, it will show burst clip as the loaded ammo type.

I'm proposing a SECONDARY TIMER, shorter than the reload time. At any time during a reload, you can select an ammo type to initiate the timer, and if that timer completes with you still manning the gun, your selected ammo type will be locked in EVEN IF YOU LEAVE THE GUN BEFORE THE RELOAD FINISHES. When you reload, the ammo should automatically revert to standard shot, so if you have your ammo type selected, it will have to be locked in again for the new clip that's being loaded.

Unless they changed it in an update after I made the original post, what I'm proposing is definitely not how the game works.

Quote
In another note, all classes are equal, the only thing different is how many slots they have. So no exclusive functions for each class.

You might want to re-read what you think you're arguing against. I specified this proposal to work for ANYONE manning a gun, NOT exclusively for the Gunner class. At one point I made an ambiguous use of the word "gunner" and explicitly labeled and clarified that I DIDN'T mean the suggested effects would be limited by class, but that they would be available to anyone manning a gun.

By reading her text past that paragraph it becomes clear that she didn't mean what she literally wrote. (assuming female cuz "obliviondoll" seems a female name to me) She suggested a mechanic that allows to change the ammo type whithout the need to man the gun at the time of reload completion by adding an option to change the ammo at the start of the reload.

Thank you for trying to "defend" me, but you're wrong about what I wrote not matching what I meant. I wrote exactly what I meant to write, Crafeksterty misread my post. Apparently, in spite of somehow understanding it correctly, so did you. But you're right about what I "meant to" write, which, funnily enough, is ALSO what I actually wrote. You man the gun for a short period at the beginning (or in the middle) of the reload, and don't have to be there when the reload ends. Also, I'm a guy, not a girl, although I'm not surprised you got the opposite impression from my name.

Quote
I didn't exactly get how the 2nd solution is supposed to impact on the 2nd problem - are you suggesting "changing the ammo type should reduce reload times" or "staying on the gun long enough for the lock in timer should reduce reload time"?

Both. I'm suggesting that different ammo types could have different modifiers to your reload time. But the reload time modifier wouldn't be applied until the ammo type is locked in.

Quote
On the 3rd thing: buffing the clip instead of the gun for a fixed timer is a new suggestion as far as I know. However, it'd make the buff tool viability very inconsistent among all guns. Buffing a gatling would yield a bigger gain per invested time than buffing any lower ammo gun. Of course, that is assuming you still would need 8 buff hammer hits to buff any gun. Also this would probably break another of muses paradigms and muse loves their paradims to the grave.

Redesigning the mechanics of weapon buffs would obviously require changes to how buffing weapons works. Maybe more or less hits could be required to buff a weapon based on the ammo count. Maybe more or less of a damage bonus could be applied per shot depending on the ammo count. Maybe it would need to be rebalanced some other way.

And maybe, as I said in my first post, it isn't viable for Muse to implement as a change anyway.

Offline Sprayer

  • Member
  • Salutes: 14
    • [SPQR]
    • 45 
    • 45
    • 27 
    • View Profile
Re: Another gunner fix proposal - multi-tiered approach needed.
« Reply #4 on: December 02, 2014, 01:50:25 am »
[...]
Thank you for trying to "defend" me, but you're wrong about what I wrote not matching what I meant. I wrote exactly what I meant to write, Crafeksterty misread my post. Apparently, in spite of somehow understanding it correctly, so did you. But you're right about what I "meant to" write, which, funnily enough, is ALSO what I actually wrote. You man the gun for a short period at the beginning (or in the middle) of the reload, and don't have to be there when the reload ends.
[...]

Two individuals who couldn't be more different from eachother in their views and thought processesses read it in the same way and differently than you meant it, believe me, you didn't write it clear enough.

Well, I do like the timer idea even though I don't think it would change my gunner/gungineer routine. That is, unless that timer is set to "instant" in which case I would switch the ammo right after the reload on some guns. (more like go to normal and back to the ammo I had before to exploit it) This would actually buff gungineers as well since there wouldn't be any misloads anymore when you jump off the gun to whack it with the buffhammer.

The second poposal would only buff the dpsr (fancy huh? that's how I call dps with reload) but on most if not all guns on which gunners are not viable right now the dpsc (dps per clip duh) or damage per shot (no acronym wtf) matters much more.

Offline obliviondoll

  • Member
  • Salutes: 26
    • [BSky]
    • 7
    • View Profile
    • obliviondoll's blog (barely-maintained)
Re: Another gunner fix proposal - multi-tiered approach needed.
« Reply #5 on: December 03, 2014, 07:56:16 am »
Two individuals who couldn't be more different from eachother in their views and thought processesses read it in the same way and differently than you meant it, believe me, you didn't write it clear enough.

My explanation was clear and correct. Two people's failure to understand basic English doesn't negate that. Linguistics is not a democracy. I've gone back over the paragraph in question to make sure, and while there was an omission which could potentially have impacted the clarity of my explanation, I don't believe it should be possible for this to cause a misunderstanding without both a diversion of attention and a lack of basic reading comprehension skills. As such, in spite of two people disagreeing with me, I'm confident that it is, in fact, both of you who are misunderstanding what I wrote, rather than any inaccuracy on my part.

You're welcome to PM me with either an explanation of what you think I said wrong or an apology if you wish. I'm quite careful about my use of English, and consider it an insult to be incorrectly told that I have misused the language. I'd rather not further derail the thread, but I will reply in private and I'm quite happy to dissect my own writing and explain why it makes sense for anyone who is having any trouble with it.

Quote
Well, I do like the timer idea even though I don't think it would change my gunner/gungineer routine. That is, unless that timer is set to "instant" in which case I would switch the ammo right after the reload on some guns. (more like go to normal and back to the ammo I had before to exploit it) This would actually buff gungineers as well since there wouldn't be any misloads anymore when you jump off the gun to whack it with the buffhammer.

A significant part of the reason for this proposal is to resolve the problem of misloads. And yes, both Gunners and Gungineers would benefit from the change. Gunners moreso, but anyone who mans a gun will see some benefit in terms of this mechanic simplifying their jobs. Even with a timer longer than instant, a 1s or less timer would be a great buff to players who could stay on the gun for that extra second then abandon it without sacrificing the desired ammo selection when they run off to help put out fires, or whatever else the player chooses to do. People whose primary role is to man a gun would benefit the most because they could be more free about when they return to the gun rather than having that very specific tiny window at the end of the reload in which they HAVE to be there to avoid dps and dpc (damage per clip) loss.

Quote
The second poposal would only buff the dpsr (fancy huh? that's how I call dps with reload) but on most if not all guns on which gunners are not viable right now the dpsc (dps per clip duh) or damage per shot (no acronym wtf) matters much more.

Buffing dpsr (yes, it's a nice term, although I'd be tempted to call it dps/r or dps-r personally) might not be as crucial, but while the damage per clip (more sensible than damage per second per clip) is often more relevant, a noticeable reload buff can make weapons more effective in multi-target situations, as well as benefitting ships with lighter weapons against "hard" targets like Galleons which can soak a lot of damage.

Offline Crafeksterty

  • Member
  • Salutes: 73
    • [GwTh]
    • 17 
    • 28
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Another gunner fix proposal - multi-tiered approach needed.
« Reply #6 on: December 03, 2014, 09:43:58 am »
If you cant explain it simply, then you dont understand it yourself.

Gunners reload mechanic is simple, why complicate to fix it? Cus im readin it again and again and i really dont know what you are talking about.
Two seperate timers? The first one you call is reload. what is the other one? Whats its purpose and how does one understand it during gameplay? Is there an icon showing it? Or does one just have to know?

Are you insisting in another reload? Like a one second reload when the gun is allready reloaded with default?

Quote
Let the Gunner* change ammo types ANY TIME DURING THE RELOAD.
This allready exists
Quote
Every time a gun is reloaded - EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. Manned or unmanned, manned by someone with the current ammo type or not - the gun should load standard ammo.
Then what happened with the ammo switching during reload?!
Quote
When a Gunner selects an ammo type, a timer is begun.
What timer. What does it do.
Quote
When the reload OR that timer completes - whichever comes first - the new ammo type is locked in. Abandoning the weapon or switchng to a new ammo type will reset the timer.
What is this timer, where does it come in. Are they in at the same time? What?


Quote
With this proposed change, the current routines of players will remain entirely viable. A gunner can leave their gun as it starts reloading, let it reload on standard ammo up to the last 0.1s of the reload time, then suddenly throw Lochnagar or Burst Ammo in at the last second. BUT they can ALSO now lock that ammo type in at the BEGINNING of the reload, and walk off to do something else WITHOUT losing an entire reload plus more for missing their window. Switching ammo type on a loaded gun will reload the gun, much like it already does. Once you've waited out the ammo select timer, you don't have to stay on the gun to make sure it loads. And again, you can do what people already do and use the ammo switch to initiate a reload, leave the gun, then return at the last second to set your chosen ammo type just before the reload completes. You can ALSO switch ammo type, lock that ammo in, then walk away and be free to come back in your own time, knowing the right ammo will be there waiting when you get back.

Ok, so the ammo is in the gun after being selected during a reload. He can jump out of it and the ammo will still load the selected ammo while he is away.
It wont choose itself the ammo until the player jumps back on, and maybe select another ammo instead of his initial decision which then takes 1 second to switch ammo instead of a full reload. Is that 1 extra second the timer?
So this "timer" is a minor reload that happens only if you change ammo when you jump back into the gun? Am i getting it right?

Offline Sprayer

  • Member
  • Salutes: 14
    • [SPQR]
    • 45 
    • 45
    • 27 
    • View Profile
Re: Another gunner fix proposal - multi-tiered approach needed.
« Reply #7 on: December 03, 2014, 03:49:06 pm »
[...]
but while the damage per clip (more sensible than damage per second per clip) is often more relevant
[...]

It's actually damage per second in a single clip so yes it is damage per second per clip. In competetive matches it's often considered a failure to not oneclip enemy armor with a single gatling clip. This is dependant on the damage output over time as well as the damage per clip.

Also I think I will just follow your example and continue derailing the thread without the use of pms. The ability to express ones own thoughts in a way that others can easily understand it using language is a skill associated with any language. As you have seen, I was able to express your suggestion in an easier way than you did, therefore there were and are simpler ways. Failure to use them is in the one who does the statement.

Offline Caprontos

  • Member
  • Salutes: 17
    • [Rydr]
    • 37 
    • 45
    • 13 
    • View Profile
Re: Another gunner fix proposal - multi-tiered approach needed.
« Reply #8 on: December 03, 2014, 07:02:47 pm »
For reloading guns it should just be.. Player gets on gun - selects ammo type.. and regardless if the player leaves the gun or not the gun will load that ammo type... If a player who doesn't have that ammo is on the gun when the clip ends, it will revert back to default ammo. No need for extra timers or any of that nonsense.

This would remove the issues with trying to time repairs, using multiple guns, etc while still getting the benefit of ammo. Basically just makes reloading more user-friendly.

This was actually a thing at one time for a few weeks awhile ago (like a year probably).. Only differences was if AI or another player who didn't have the ammo the gun was loading, got on the gun.. The gun reverted to normal while it was reloading - which was annoying in the case of AI. So my only change is to make it not care about AI being on the gun (pretend they have every ammo type).. In the case of players that's just a communication thing and is fine if it reverts.... So it's possible they just chose to return to how it is now.. Why they opted for the less user friendly option- I don't know exactly..


--
My opinion on the buff hammer is to just make it not buff damage of guns, and instead make the buff an anti-snip buff(be that, an hp buff or a new buff that mitigates some % of the damage). Let ammo increase damage - let engineer tools repair/protect the ship.



Offline Kestril

  • Community Ambassador
  • Salutes: 24
    • [Sass]
    • 33 
    • 36
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Another gunner fix proposal - multi-tiered approach needed.
« Reply #9 on: December 03, 2014, 08:33:26 pm »

--
My opinion on the buff hammer is to just make it not buff damage of guns, and instead make the buff an anti-snip buff(be that, an hp buff or a new buff that mitigates some % of the damage). Let ammo increase damage - let engineer tools repair/protect the ship.

That's the best gunner fix idea I've heard ever.

Offline obliviondoll

  • Member
  • Salutes: 26
    • [BSky]
    • 7
    • View Profile
    • obliviondoll's blog (barely-maintained)
Re: Another gunner fix proposal - multi-tiered approach needed.
« Reply #10 on: December 03, 2014, 10:01:43 pm »
Fine then.

You want your English lesson to be public, go right ahead.

Here's the paragraph you seem to need me to dissect for you.

Let the Gunner* change ammo types ANY TIME DURING THE RELOAD. Every time a gun is reloaded - EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. Manned or unmanned, manned by someone with the current ammo type or not - the gun should load standard ammo. When a Gunner selects an ammo type, a timer is begun. When the reload OR that timer completes - whichever comes first - the new ammo type is locked in. Abandoning the weapon or switchng to a new ammo type will reset the timer.

*Gunner as in "player manning the gun and loading ammo", not necessarily a player with the Gunner class selected

Point 1:
"Gunner*"
"*Gunner as in "player manning the gun and loading ammo", not necessarily a player with the Gunner class selected"

The * after the word indicates to check the subscript labeled with the same character. This clarifies that in the context of this paragraph, the word "Gunner" is not referrring to the role, but to anyone manning a gun on the ship.

That negates this argument:

In another note, all classes are equal, the only thing different is how many slots they have. So no exclusive functions for each class.

Because the above quote is working on the (clearly disproven) assumption that I meant these changes to only apply to the Gunner class, and not to all players.

Point 2:
"Let the Gunner change ammo types ANY TIME DURING THE RELOAD." - when taken as a standalone phrase, this could also be used in a description of how the current system works. In context, while it conveys that this aspect is the same as how the system always worked, it doesn't tell the whole story for either system, so it shouldn't be viewed on its own as an explanation of the system. Because this sentence doesn't give YOU new information, as a person with basic understanding of the English language, you should move on.

Point 3:
"Every time a gun is reloaded the gun should load standard ammo." - there was an insert in this sentence, but it doesn't affect the meaning of the sentence, being purely for emphasis. Saying that the gun loads standard ammo suggests that this is what will happen BY DEFAULT IF THE PLAYER DOESN'T ACT. This is a deviation from the current mechanics, and in this paragraph, is the first deviation I've referenced. The emphatic insert was because this is where I begin to propose changes. It isn't saying that standard ammo will be loaded no matter what, it's saying this will be the default setting selected whenever a reload occurs. If I had been explicitly proposing a removal of ammo types, assuming this was the only result for a reload would make sense. If it were a standalone sentence, it might also be reasonable to assume that. Within the context of the rest of the paragraph, and of my overall proposal, that assumption is completely senseless and demonstrates not a normal and understandable ignorance based on confusion, but WILLFUL and DELIBERATE ignorance.

Point 4:
"When a Gunner selects an ammo type, a timer is begun." - once again, it's possible to look at this sentence as a standalone sentence and find plausible grounds for a misunderstanding. The timer being referenced could be assumed to be the normal reload timer. The sentence following this one negates that assumption, but it isn't the only reason why the assumption is out of place in context. The entire framework of the paragraph implies that everything after the first sentence is me discussing NEW mechanics, not rehashing those which already exist. Reloading a gun is a concept which already exists in most modern games, and one which almost all gamers, and in particular those who have played GoIO, are familiar with. It doesn't need defining in generic terms like this, so assuming this is a reference to that timer betrays a lack of basic reading comprehension or further willful ignorance.

Point 5:
"When the reload OR that timer completes the new ammo type is locked in." - as mentioned, this negates any possible idea of the previous sentence referring to the reload timer, by specifically referencing this timer as being a separate timer running concurrently with the reload. It defines that BOTH timers are able to apply the effect of locking in the select ammo type, where the current mechanics only have one condition under which that will happen. This is also the point at which the already-negated-by-logic stupid assumption about point 3 is explicitly negated by the explanation that an alternative ammo type may be locked in, replacing the default setting of standard ammo.

Point 6:
"whichever comes first" - this is an insert to the sentence from point 5. It further clarifies that you don't need to remain on the gun until the reload completes if you simply man the gun for the shorter ammo lock-in timer. I didn't explicitly state this timer to be shorter than the reload timer, but everything about the proposal has implied such, so stating it outright would have been redundant, although I'm starting to suspect a little redundancy might be worth having if you people really are struggling this much with basic English.

Point 7:
"Abandoning the weapon or switchng to a new ammo type will reset the timer." - here, we have 2 interesting things. Firstly, a basic typo on the word "switching" - NOBODY CARES, MOVING ON. The actually interesting part is that this is the only point where I will actually concede to not being 100% clear. Even here, I was accurate in what I said, but there is room - even taking this sentence in context - for confusion. Everything else about the paragraph upto this point implies the correct meaning, but there is enough uncertainty for someone who isn't paying attention to maybe misunderstand at this stage. To be truly clear, it should have read "Abandoning the weapon before the selected ammo type is locked in or switching..." instead. Even without that clarification, it should be perfectly reasonable for someone who actually paid attention and understood basic English while reading it to realise that was the intent behind the suggestion.

If English is a second (or later) language for you, AND you were distracted by something else at the time, I'm willing to concede to the possibility that the last sentence in this paragraph could have led to a flawed understanding of my proposal. If you only have one of those as an excuse, I don't believe that is sufficient to explain the continued misunderstanding. Since both of you have gone back and tried to defend your mistakes, one by quoting me and the other by claiming to have re-read it, the only option I can see to explain your confusion at this stage in proceedings is that you're intentionally forcing yourself to misunderstand what I wrote to try and make yourselves feel better about the initial misunderstanding.

Also, including an off-topic aside along with an on-topic post ISN'T derailing the thread. Including an off-topic request for a side topic to be taken to PMs is MOST DEFINITELY NOT derailing the thread. This post, in spite of my intent to finish with an on-topic point, has enough off-topic to probably qualify as helping you two in your efforts to derail the thread. At this point, however, you've both made it clear you want me to clarify where you went wrong in public, so I'm happy to oblige. After this post, I will be happy to leave this whole incident in the past, or to continue the discussion (whether with counter-arguments or apologies on your part) in PM. Any further discussion of this particular off-topic rant in the thread will be disregarded or responded to with PMs.

And now that all that silliness is done with, lets move on and get back to the reason we're here...

--
My opinion on the buff hammer is to just make it not buff damage of guns, and instead make the buff an anti-snip buff(be that, an hp buff or a new buff that mitigates some % of the damage). Let ammo increase damage - let engineer tools repair/protect the ship.

That's the best gunner fix idea I've heard ever.

Did you also think it was the best idea you'd heard ever when I proposed it in the OP? Because that one of the alternatives to part of my proposed fix.

Another, also less ideal, but possibly slightly more viable alternative, would be to buff all weapons to deal more damage (at least half the buff currently given by the buff hammer), and to make the buff tool provide guns with additional HP instead of a damage increase. While not as bad as nerfing the buff hammer, I still favour changing the mechanics of weapon buffs.

As you can tell, while I think the idea has merit, I don't personally think of this as the "best" Gunner fix. I also don't think the change to HP buff would be a complete fix for the problem on its own. It would definitely be a good step in the right direction, however, and seems like something that should be comparatively easy to implement when balancing it against the rest of my proposal (or many of the other solutions offered in the past).
« Last Edit: December 03, 2014, 10:10:29 pm by obliviondoll »

Offline Kestril

  • Community Ambassador
  • Salutes: 24
    • [Sass]
    • 33 
    • 36
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Another gunner fix proposal - multi-tiered approach needed.
« Reply #11 on: December 04, 2014, 12:04:21 am »
Quote
Did you also think it was the best idea you'd heard ever when I proposed it in the OP? Because that one of the alternatives to part of my proposed fix.

Well, for reasons other posters mentioned above, I didn't understand most of the OP, so I skipped down to read some of the responses. I probably just missed it.

In any case, your lesson reads as a thinly veiled personal attack in may places rather than an honest clarification. I don't know if that was your intention. I just thought I should let you know.

In any case, It's okay for people to ask for clarification. Confusion happens on the internet. It's what text-based communication does.

Offline Crafeksterty

  • Member
  • Salutes: 73
    • [GwTh]
    • 17 
    • 28
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Another gunner fix proposal - multi-tiered approach needed.
« Reply #12 on: December 04, 2014, 03:22:35 am »
Seriously? Are you real?

You are explaining your explenation instead of Rephrasing it for a better understanding.
And spent alot of time in it aswell.

If you wont get that im communicating english with you, but still didnt understand what you did say, you could atleast communicate differently, not downright talk about english and HOW you communicated... Calm down and take the time to make us visualise or realise what your proposal is. If you have played the game, you should know not everyone speaks english, and its obvious its not their first language. But even so it is still possible to communicate and transfer ideas like how you are understanding this right now.


If you think our/my replies was personal attack against you, and seeing how much time youve spent making a lesson... you are an idiot.