Author Topic: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2  (Read 242630 times)

Offline Captain Smollett

  • Member
  • Salutes: 122
    • [Duck]
    • 11
    • 14 
    • View Profile
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #105 on: May 19, 2013, 12:04:45 pm »
I actually agree that the Flak could use a slight reduction in arming times, but like a really really small reduction. 

I like the fact that you can't just go nose to nose with a Heavy Flak any more but I think the gun would benefit from an ever so slightly smaller arming time.

Offline Sammy B. T.

  • Member
  • Salutes: 154
    • [Duck]
    • 23 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #106 on: May 19, 2013, 01:49:09 pm »
The artemis used to be a good counter to the lumberjack but then they buffed it which made them kill it.

Offline Veyka

  • Member
  • Salutes: 12
    • [Duck]
    • 10 
    • 39
    • 41 
    • View Profile
    • Just a site
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #107 on: May 19, 2013, 02:03:15 pm »
I dont feel the lumber is OP, you can't run head first at one with a good gunner behind it and expect things to go well is all. It is also at its most viable on a galleon and that brings with it a lot of issues (slow turning, blah blah blah) also being a heavy gun it is a pretty good target to be shot out with a gattling, merc, etc.

Before we get anymore heavy nerf's (carronades anyone?) I would like to see some of the underused guns adjusted to make them a bit more viable. (new art, carousel, etc)

Offline Ofiach

  • Member
  • Salutes: 25
    • [FALC]
    • 5
    • 10 
    • View Profile
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #108 on: May 19, 2013, 02:06:28 pm »
Any gun that requires you to use 2 ships working perfectly together to effectively counter needs to be looked at.

That is really the only point that needs to be made. The artemis was crushed for being great at disabling, the carronade was hammered for, god knows why, that didn't even require great team comms. Mediocre positioning in the hands of a gunner that had been playing for 4 hours last night absolutely crushed 2 enemy ships and they could not get out from under the gun because they were always on the ground.

I'm not saying a radical reduction in anything here either, leave almost everything the same but shave a bullet or two off the clip, if my math is right,  the gun does ~600 damage a shot to a balloon. So it has a damage potential of 3k per clip. Is there a gun that even comes close to doing this much damage against such a major ship component? Simple answer is no. The merc field gun is great against hull armor but has only 2 shots. The carronade requires spitting distance.

As for trying to disable a lumberjack well that isn't a viable option against opponents who are awake. The Artemis isn't going to get the job done anymore, the only real disable would be 2 mercs cycling fire and not missing any shots. Now you have a ship that has to be completely dedicated to disabling a single gun. That really doesn't make sense to me from a balance standpoint. 

I repeat there is no other gun that can cripple a ship with less than a single clip. That is really the only issue.


Offline Captain Smollett

  • Member
  • Salutes: 122
    • [Duck]
    • 11
    • 14 
    • View Profile
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #109 on: May 19, 2013, 02:30:12 pm »
Well, it seems like we're treading over similar points here, so I think it's just best to agree to disagree.  There's obviously people who think the gun is OP and people who think it is not.

But (I think) we all agree that it'd be nice to see some of the underutilized weapons get brought into the fray.

Offline Mattilald Anguisad

  • Community Ambassador
  • Salutes: 12
    • [GwTh]
    • 12 
    • 45
    • 30 
    • View Profile
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #110 on: May 19, 2013, 03:05:06 pm »
I think a good flamer Squid can keep flaming you and keep you locked down. Takes longer for weapons to be dissabled than before (where it was effectively instantly), but 2 flamers can still very effectively dissable all your components. It won't kill you (well not fast enough, eventually you'll die of ground I guess), but it's still a resonably good dissable. But it's upward battle (ie you need a good captain and good crew to pull ie off) but it works -well 1on1 anyways.

As for "Any gun that requires you to use 2 ships working perfectly together to effectively counter needs to be looked at." I'll just say that no weapon can kill in itself. You need to combine it with another weapon. Besides all you need to dissable a lumberjack is a merc. It take much longer to rebuild a heavy gun than it takes to rebuild a light gun.

Offline Ofiach

  • Member
  • Salutes: 25
    • [FALC]
    • 5
    • 10 
    • View Profile
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #111 on: May 19, 2013, 04:06:18 pm »
I agree it would be nice to have some disabling weapons that were good at the job without being ridiculous. The Pre 1.2 artemis v the post 1.2 artemis. It seems anything that's really good at disabling at range gets whacked hard. I just don't see MUSE ever letting a disabling weapon besides the lumberjack stick around for long.

Offline NikolaiLev

  • Member
  • Salutes: 4
    • [Fur]
    • 2
    • View Profile
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #112 on: May 19, 2013, 04:23:31 pm »
Before we get anymore heavy nerf's (carronades anyone?) I would like to see some of the underused guns adjusted to make them a bit more viable. (new art, carousel, etc)

Please be conscious of power creep.  This is something a lot of people don't realize the importance of, but it's very, very important.

It's far better to preserve the average level of power than to just "buff old things."  Because that's exactly what power creep is; the general power level creeps upwards and upwards and the game changes radically as a result, generally for the worse.

Also, I'm really baffled at how much people are panning the new Artemis.  It's still great, its DPS hasn't dropped significantly and it now takes skill to use.  It's not bad in any way, it's just harder to use.  It's perfectly fine as a counter to the Lumberjack, and so is Mercury.

That's something else I'm confused about.  The Lumberjack is really good at popping balloons at range, and... nothing else.  Sure, your balloon is being popped, and you're taking flechette and shatter damage to your armor.  That's pretty pitiful.  It does need to be combined with other weapons to be useful, which means it's never going to be useful on a Goldfish.
« Last Edit: May 19, 2013, 04:26:10 pm by NikolaiLev »

Offline Veyka

  • Member
  • Salutes: 12
    • [Duck]
    • 10 
    • 39
    • 41 
    • View Profile
    • Just a site
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #113 on: May 19, 2013, 04:36:26 pm »
Before we get anymore heavy nerf's (carronades anyone?) I would like to see some of the underused guns adjusted to make them a bit more viable. (new art, carousel, etc)

Please be conscious of power creep.  This is something a lot of people don't realize the importance of, but it's very, very important.

It's far better to preserve the average level of power than to just "buff old things."  Because that's exactly what power creep is; the general power level creeps upwards and upwards and the game changes radically as a result, generally for the worse.

I am well aware of power creep, but if we just have nerfs without other adjustments we are going to end up with a very narrow allotment of weapons which are viable (one might say we do already). Balance is understandably hard of cause.

As I was saying to Ofiach in game, the Lumberjack is dependant on Pilot, gunner, and foe, and when you are on a ship with someone who is very much used to flying with a lumber, then yes it will seem easy to use and far more powerful.

Muse don't balance for cogs, and I don't see the lumberjack being a problem at all in general games at the moment, if anything it is weak as hell in the hands of a new or mid exp gunner with a new/mid exp pilot.

Offline Mattilald Anguisad

  • Community Ambassador
  • Salutes: 12
    • [GwTh]
    • 12 
    • 45
    • 30 
    • View Profile
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #114 on: May 19, 2013, 05:01:49 pm »
TBH Hawacha with heavy clip can dissable ship at nearly 1000m away, while mercury and artemis can dissable specific components at even longer ranges (merc has about 3km range)

Offline NikolaiLev

  • Member
  • Salutes: 4
    • [Fur]
    • 2
    • View Profile
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #115 on: May 20, 2013, 05:04:40 am »
I am well aware of power creep, but if we just have nerfs without other adjustments we are going to end up with a very narrow allotment of weapons which are viable (one might say we do already). Balance is understandably hard of cause.

Well, then it's just a matter of nerfing the weapons that are too powerful.  It can be easier to just buff what few weapons are too weak, but it highly depends.  A lot of weapons can be overpowered because of a mechanic they have in common.

A big thing to consider is how long we want the average time-to-kill to be.  Also relevant is how much skill investment should be needed to achieve that average time, as well as the general threshold for failure.

So we can't just nerf everything over and over, that'll result in the opposite of power creep (which is not named, because it almost Never Happens).  A balance must be found.  Hence, balance.  :P

Offline Morblitz

  • Community Ambassador
  • Salutes: 35
    • [Duck]
    • 8
    • View Profile
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #116 on: May 20, 2013, 05:37:30 am »
Any gun that requires you to use 2 ships working perfectly together to effectively counter needs to be looked at.


As for trying to disable a lumberjack well that isn't a viable option against opponents who are awake. The Artemis isn't going to get the job done anymore, the only real disable would be 2 mercs cycling fire and not missing any shots. Now you have a ship that has to be completely dedicated to disabling a single gun. That really doesn't make sense to me from a balance standpoint. 



I get my lumberjack shot out all the time by mercs and artemis's and gats. It's really frustrating. The thing that lets me get it back up and viable again is great piloting by Squash, and accurate counter component breaking by someone on a merc, usually Applesauce but recently amazingly well done by Charon. Not to mention that the crew on the Dirty Duck are amazing at destroying guns with their own gatlings.

It's usually a team effort to get the Galleon firing at full strength.
What I'm saying is I play with one of the best teams in the game and I am continuously fucking frustrated with how often my lumberjack gets disabled :p usually while being charged by a ship, but sometimes by snipers (even in public games). I don't believe it needs an entire ship devoted to disabling it.
« Last Edit: May 20, 2013, 05:50:03 am by Morblitz »

Offline Ofiach

  • Member
  • Salutes: 25
    • [FALC]
    • 5
    • 10 
    • View Profile
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #117 on: May 20, 2013, 05:43:03 am »
One more question, what other gun can you miss half the clip and still achieve the guns primary function?

If half a gat clip misses, the armor is fine, if half a flak clip misses the perma hull is fine. etc etc etc.

Another little experience I had today was with a guy who has never shot the LumberJack before, didn't even have lesmok as an ammo type. He was sinking two enemy galleons permanently. Oh he was also tagging a moving squid. The second match he put lesmok in and laughed. We weren't fighting scrubs or noobies during these games either. The gun is just supremely forgiving, as long as the cap and gunner share the same language. Left, Rght, Up, Down, moving forward, moving backward. Proving a noobie could use the gun caused alot of people to just quit the match afterward.

You give me a weapon that can reliably disable a single gun from 3km and I won't have anything to complain about.

I know I'm harping on this but it seriously does need a look. Alot of guns need a second look IMO because any game where competitive play whittles the choices down to two or three weapons...... well that's a problem.

Also I like how you use the argument "you can't balance off of competitive play" but when that same argument was used for the artemis it was considered invalid.

Offline Morblitz

  • Community Ambassador
  • Salutes: 35
    • [Duck]
    • 8
    • View Profile
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #118 on: May 20, 2013, 05:49:13 am »
Shooting a squid with the lumberjack is really hard. How sure are you that he was new?

Offline Ofiach

  • Member
  • Salutes: 25
    • [FALC]
    • 5
    • 10 
    • View Profile
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #119 on: May 20, 2013, 06:06:03 am »
I've been playing with him since he started just over a week ago, and he never does anything but beat on the hull. He missed 2 shots of 6 firing on the squid and with the help of a single merc shot put the squid to sleep. The second time around he hit all 6 and insta gibbed the squid.(I think the squid may have taken a little gat fire from a passing friendly) when he got lesmok rounds the second game it was over he was giggling like a school girl over chat.

@ Nikolai you're dead wrong about it ONLY being useful against balloons. The Lumber still does ~115 damage to hull armor for every hit goes through a dead balloon, and ~95 to permahull. Not to mention its aoe can hurt guns pretty well if the gunner misses a tad low of the balloon.

Now unless the newest numbers posted are completely wrong I think that math is spot on.