Author Topic: Another way to balanced an apparent gunner issue..  (Read 12627 times)

Offline Sarabelle Marlowe

  • Member
  • Salutes: 25
    • [DAGZ]
    • 45 
    • 23
    • View Profile
Re: Another way to balanced an apparent gunner issue..
« Reply #15 on: March 08, 2015, 10:39:37 pm »
I don't deny there would be a lot of.. changes.. The builds would still be usable, they'd just be less efficient..

Weather the changes would be to many and the viable gunner not worth it as a result.. Could be the case.

As said though, just a random thought. I didn't actually think it through entirely, so idk if I am for it myself.. Just sounded interesting to me..

Oh, I agree that it does sound interesting, and I love seeing suggestions and topics in regards to my favorite class. If I sounded irate I certainly didn't mean to, apologies if I did.

Offline MidnightWonko

  • Member
  • Salutes: 5
    • [FIRE]
    • 29 
    • 32
    • 14 
    • View Profile
Re: Another way to balanced an apparent gunner issue..
« Reply #16 on: March 09, 2015, 04:50:13 pm »
I was under the impression that gunners were in a reasonably good place.  On many ships, they are useful, be it for making each individual gun more versatile or for having the personal versatility to maximize the potential of each of the ship's diverse guns.

To that end, I don't really feel like gunners need a buff.  I wouldn't recommend a gunner on a Squid, as they tend to use fairly simple guns that can be adequately used by gungineers, though most other ships are best complimented with a single gunner.

Most problems encountered by a crew in this game are best solved with violence anyway.

Offline Crafeksterty

  • Member
  • Salutes: 73
    • [GwTh]
    • 17 
    • 28
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Another way to balanced an apparent gunner issue..
« Reply #17 on: March 09, 2015, 05:16:48 pm »
We all know that something has to be done to make gunners more usefull.
Gunners current line of options is 4 types of ammo.

Il agree with making the wrench being a standard tool type but only when the engineer gets more tools that will likely happen in the future.
The variation of engineers will be tad bit too much with more tools, and they are essential to be repairing the ship. So give them the option for flexability when more choices of conflict enters the fray.
Currently, engineers dont need to think when choosing and thus we need the wrench to be a selectable tool purely for the sake of keeping them in check with choices of conflict. Specialy buff engineers.

However this then arises the conflict in the class of the pilot being the least that can help with in running action. But in a way the reasoning blows right back when you consider that every ship needs only 1 pilot to be flying the ship, and a ship only needs 1 person to be flown. That way simply being the only pilot in a ship allready gives alot of balance for them.


So, yay to pipe wrench being sstandard, but only when engineers get 1 or 2 more tools... ?

Offline MidnightWonko

  • Member
  • Salutes: 5
    • [FIRE]
    • 29 
    • 32
    • 14 
    • View Profile
Re: Another way to balanced an apparent gunner issue..
« Reply #18 on: March 09, 2015, 06:32:38 pm »
While I continue to disagree that gunners need anything to make them a more viable option on a ship, I will still offer a suggestion (even while contending that it is unnecessary).

My idea is very simple in principle: remove the pilot and engie item slots, and replace them with wildcard slots that can be from any of the three classes.  This would allow gunners to take, for example, a repair tool and a fire suppression tool, at the expense of leaving behind a spyglass.  The caveat to this might be that it could also allow engies the ability to also trade off their spyglass for a second ammo, so even if I thought gunners needed a buff, I would still be conflicted about this change.

I dunno, maybe one of you who find gunners lacking can bat that idea around until inspiration conceives a better one.

Offline Caprontos

  • Member
  • Salutes: 17
    • [Rydr]
    • 37 
    • 45
    • 13 
    • View Profile
Re: Another way to balanced an apparent gunner issue..
« Reply #19 on: March 09, 2015, 07:17:29 pm »
While I continue to disagree that gunners need anything to make them a more viable option on a ship, I will still offer a suggestion (even while contending that it is unnecessary).

My idea is very simple in principle: remove the pilot and engie item slots, and replace them with wildcard slots that can be from any of the three classes.  This would allow gunners to take, for example, a repair tool and a fire suppression tool, at the expense of leaving behind a spyglass.  The caveat to this might be that it could also allow engies the ability to also trade off their spyglass for a second ammo, so even if I thought gunners needed a buff, I would still be conflicted about this change.

I dunno, maybe one of you who find gunners lacking can bat that idea around until inspiration conceives a better one.


A better way to achieve this is.. to allow gunner to select either 3 ammo and 1 engi tool or.. 2 of each - so a gunner can full-fill the role of "gungineers" but be a more offensive type.. (while engineers are the defensive type).. As well as their current role..

I have suggested this directly.. and they say:

Quote
We've looked at this idea before.  We feel like it hurts the distinct flavors of the classes.  The big issue right now is a weakness of gunners and hopefully the new stamina system will make them a lot more interesting.

So yeah. More or less they want to make gunner more interesting by making ammo more interesting (idk what happened to the ammo tests though.. they were doing that for a bit.. a bit ago).. and through stamina..

Offline MidnightWonko

  • Member
  • Salutes: 5
    • [FIRE]
    • 29 
    • 32
    • 14 
    • View Profile
Re: Another way to balanced an apparent gunner issue..
« Reply #20 on: March 09, 2015, 08:21:34 pm »
Any word on what stamina does or doesn't do?

Offline Caprontos

  • Member
  • Salutes: 17
    • [Rydr]
    • 37 
    • 45
    • 13 
    • View Profile
Re: Another way to balanced an apparent gunner issue..
« Reply #21 on: March 09, 2015, 09:50:53 pm »
Any word on what stamina does or doesn't do?

It maybe in the dev for testing again (Idk I didn't check.. but I think read it was.... err).. If not it will be eventually..

Basically it makes engineer run faster and jump higher..

Pilot can make the ship move around faster

Gunner can turn a gun more to the sides then normal(I think they said they removed the up and down ark changes) and reload a gun quicker.

Stamina recharges overtime.. Kinda slowly + when you get a ship kill everyone gets some back.. When an engineer rebuilds something they get some back.. when a gunner breaks a part they get some.. and I have no idea for pilot.

Offline Dementio

  • Member
  • Salutes: 134
    • [Rydr]
    • 43 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Another way to balanced an apparent gunner issue..
« Reply #22 on: March 10, 2015, 04:33:01 am »
It's not like anything in the Dev App is subject to change and is not guaranteed to make it into the game, but hey, why not tell everybody about it?

Regardless, I once did suggest having a default engineer tool, which would mean that the gunner could take a buff hammer and outdo every 3rd engineer with the exception of mallet- and spannering. Helm has a default option and guns have a default ammo type, but the engineer has only whatever you have in your engineering equipment, no exception.

Offline BlackenedPies

  • Member
  • Salutes: 134
    • [Duck]
    • 30 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Another way to balanced an apparent gunner issue..
« Reply #23 on: March 10, 2015, 08:35:57 am »
I think the classes are balanced. Disallowing the other classes to use default ammo would be a major nerf to armtime weapons. If anything just nerf the buff hammer's effect on guns because that's what the argument is.

Giving gunners an extra tool would make them much more useful, but a buff engi is still better in many circumstances. The problem isn't the classes, it's the gun buff that allows engineers to significantly outperform gunners. There wouldn't be an issue if the gun buff didn't exist.

Offline RearAdmiralZill

  • CA Mod
  • Salutes: 144
    • [MM]
    • 31 
    • 44
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Another way to balanced an apparent gunner issue..
« Reply #24 on: March 10, 2015, 09:03:06 am »
Quote
If anything just nerf the buff hammer's effect on guns

I'm kinda glad to see that I'm not the only one who still thinks this is the issue. It's my biggest complaint in the "gunner vs engie" debate.

Offline MightyKeb

  • Member
  • Salutes: 78
    • [GwTh]
    • 38 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Another way to balanced an apparent gunner issue..
« Reply #25 on: March 10, 2015, 09:15:24 am »
Quote
If anything just nerf the buff hammer's effect on guns

I'm kinda glad to see that I'm not the only one who still thinks this is the issue. It's my biggest complaint in the "gunner vs engie" debate.
Im thinking buffed guns could provide features that you wouldnt find in other ammos instead of making charged underpowered. Faster reloads? Perhaps even wider arcs? Food for thought, but Im leaning more towards reload

Offline ShadedExalt

  • Member
  • Salutes: 76
    • [♫]
    • 10 
    • 17
    • 12 
    • View Profile
Re: Another way to balanced an apparent gunner issue..
« Reply #26 on: March 10, 2015, 10:55:25 am »
Quote
If anything just nerf the buff hammer's effect on guns

I'm kinda glad to see that I'm not the only one who still thinks this is the issue. It's my biggest complaint in the "gunner vs engie" debate.
Im thinking buffed guns could provide features that you wouldnt find in other ammos instead of making charged underpowered. Faster reloads? Perhaps even wider arcs? Food for thought, but Im leaning more towards reload
,

I think the buffkit should buff the GUN, not the ammo.  Buffing the ammo would be the only way to increase damage.  I think buffkit should increase turn speed, reload speed, reduce recoil a little, and increase fire rate.

Offline Kamoba

  • Member
  • Salutes: 175
    • [♫]
    • 30 
    • 34
    • 45 
    • View Profile
    • Robin and Magpie Leather
Re: Another way to balanced an apparent gunner issue..
« Reply #27 on: March 10, 2015, 11:13:49 am »
Quote
If anything just nerf the buff hammer's effect on guns

I'm kinda glad to see that I'm not the only one who still thinks this is the issue. It's my biggest complaint in the "gunner vs engie" debate.
Im thinking buffed guns could provide features that you wouldnt find in other ammos instead of making charged underpowered. Faster reloads? Perhaps even wider arcs? Food for thought, but Im leaning more towards reload
,

I think the buffkit should buff the GUN, not the ammo.  Buffing the ammo would be the only way to increase damage.  I think buffkit should increase turn speed, reload speed, reduce recoil a little, and increase fire rate.

Except the fire rate (because that increases DPS, thus being a huge buff to greased ammo) I like the idea that buff effects everything except power/dps

Offline RearAdmiralZill

  • CA Mod
  • Salutes: 144
    • [MM]
    • 31 
    • 44
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: Another way to balanced an apparent gunner issue..
« Reply #28 on: March 10, 2015, 01:56:43 pm »
If that were to change, then either the buff dmg % needs to simply get decreased, or the buff does something no ammo can do.

Quote
I think buffkit should increase turn speed, reload speed, reduce recoil a little, and increase fire rate.

This all is stuff ammo can do, but it also has a down side, so it's balanced. For buff, its whack and you're done until you reload, then repeat. No good.

Maybe a buff lets a damaged gun work as undamaged? Perhaps just gives it more hp? Random thoughts but you get the idea. I'll admit my previous post was too straightforward. If people (and muse) are insisting that gunners are in need of a buff, I'd first look at buffing before adding a bunch of mechanics to the game.

Hopefully this isn't derailing the thread too bad.

Offline Lanliss

  • Member
  • Salutes: 24
    • 14 
    • 16
    • 16 
    • View Profile
Re: Another way to balanced an apparent gunner issue..
« Reply #29 on: March 10, 2015, 02:10:32 pm »
The buff damage does seems a bit more than is needed, though I do not see it abused too much. Maybe it is just in comp games, or I just have not been on long enough to run into it as often. Most crews I see have a gunner, so I do not understand where people get that gunner is not used. The only times I don't see a gunner are on specific builds or ships, like the mobula or squid, where a gunner is not needed too much. Really just like anything that is class based, sometimes you will not need certain classes. Does not mean that a class needs buffs, or is unloved. Adding more damage to gunner, or removing the buff effects on buff engines, will not make a gunner more useful on a ship that needs three engines. Nothing wrong with it in my opinion.