Author Topic: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2  (Read 242331 times)

Offline awkm

  • Muse Games
  • Salutes: 77
    • [Muse]
    • 16 
    • 45
    • 28 
    • View Profile
    • Notes for Next Century—n4n100
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #150 on: May 21, 2013, 03:18:25 pm »
Would it be possible to make it so the Carronade can only aim down, but not farther than it used to?

Then the Artemis must only aim up!

I'm still trying to see if this is really a big deal or it's just taking some time for everyone to figure it out.  I want people to use some Chute Vent.  Or how about I increase the downward angle slightly... currently I can still be above someone and fire, just need to be further away.  Still deadly when paired with Heavy.

Offline Kestril

  • Community Ambassador
  • Salutes: 24
    • [Sass]
    • 33 
    • 36
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #151 on: May 21, 2013, 03:25:49 pm »
As a newer player who hasn't used the older cannonades, I can say that I don't have much of a problem (as a pilot) positioning the light, side-mounted cannonade on the squid into firing position.  The lowest you have to be is level with their balloon. 

But then again, that's about the only time I use the cannonade.


Offline Squash

  • Member
  • Salutes: 71
    • [Duck]
    • 11
    • 10 
    • View Profile
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #152 on: May 21, 2013, 04:14:28 pm »
Guess I'm the only one that likes that the carronade can't aim down now, and hell, I use one on my Galleon. Before the nerf the carronade is the only gun that could kill enemies without any other guns. Think about that.

Offline RearAdmiralZill

  • CA Mod
  • Salutes: 144
    • [MM]
    • 31 
    • 44
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #153 on: May 21, 2013, 04:33:21 pm »
Guess I'm the only one that likes that the carronade can't aim down now, and hell, I use one on my Galleon. Before the nerf the carronade is the only gun that could kill enemies without any other guns. Think about that.

If you couldn't kill something with a lone lumberjack or hwacha, you need new gunners. Knowing yours though, I'm not quite sure how you came to that assumption? Balloon lock kills are never that fast.

Offline Queso

  • Muse Games
  • Salutes: 126
    • [Muse]
    • 13
    • 25 
    • View Profile
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #154 on: May 21, 2013, 05:20:15 pm »
Carronades now are a way to force people down when they hang high, rather than "let's die a slow painful death!" I like the change. Livens the game up.

Offline NikolaiLev

  • Member
  • Salutes: 4
    • [Fur]
    • 2
    • View Profile
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #155 on: May 21, 2013, 05:28:10 pm »
Lumberjack OPness

Okay, so some people think the LJ is OP.  Some even said that it takes very few hits to destroy the hull with damage overflow.  I just did isolated tests.  Number of hits required to destroy any ship with or without balloon is in accordance with my calculations.  Although Flechette against Hull is 20% effective... an LJ shot against Hull is a total of 65 dmg (50 Shatter * 0.1 + 300 Flechette * 0.2 = 65). 

Players who have claimed that it takes less hits must be attacking a damaged ship... or there is a more serious bug at play but it doesn't seem to be the case.


http://gunsoficarus.com/gameplay/weapons/

This claims the Flechette modifier against Hull is .3.

Do you now see why you need to offer your community numbers?  Do you, awkm!?   >:(  We can't have accurate discussion about weapons without numbers, man!  The system just breaks down, man!  We need information, man!

Offline awkm

  • Muse Games
  • Salutes: 77
    • [Muse]
    • 16 
    • 45
    • 28 
    • View Profile
    • Notes for Next Century—n4n100
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #156 on: May 21, 2013, 07:44:20 pm »

http://gunsoficarus.com/gameplay/weapons/

This claims the Flechette modifier against Hull is .3.

Do you now see why you need to offer your community numbers?  Do you, awkm!?   >:(  We can't have accurate discussion about weapons without numbers, man!  The system just breaks down, man!  We need information, man!

What do you mean it's 0.3?  It's 0.2!!! Get some glasses!

lulz

There are a lot of charts, spreadsheets, and other crap to update.  It's a pain in the ass.  But 0.2 is the number that's live right now on the servers so I changed mine to reflect what you're experiencing.  AND NOT PUSHING 0.3 TO THE SERVERS INSTEAD hahahahaha.

The numbers available are the numbers available.  The rest you'll have to do by feel.

The only numbers you're missing are hard pitch and yaw degrees, pitch and yaw speeds, rate of fire, and related gravity/drop stuff.  I'd like you to know them by feel, not by charts like I know them.  To me, omniscience takes away a part of the experience that makes games interesting—mystery and cracking the designers' secrets.  Other games make this simple by creating a barrier between player and designer.  However, you have access to me here so it feels like you should have all the information but I won't open Pandora's Box because it will take away from that enjoyment from figuring out what's going on beneath the hood.  A visceral mastery vs. a mental one.

There are many things that I do that you will not immediately understand.  You will think that it's stupid, ridiculous, unneeded.  This is fine, I expect you to think these things.  At some point though, I hope, these changes will slowly evolve and shape the meta gameplay in an organic fashion.  The moment of discovery and getting to know a mechanic is maintained.  If I come out explaining why I do things all of the time then I think the experience will be very sterile.  At some point, though, I hope an understanding will be reached.  If not, then I try again.

Ultimately, game design is a conversation between player and designer except that I communicate to you with mechanics and not words.  I want to preserve that if possible.  At the end of the day, I hope everyone entertains some of my more bizarre changes.  It's true that some might be very strange or even broken—mistakes happen all the time—but the intent is to never make the experience worse.

I could do that easily by making flames disable everything instantly again :P

I hope everyone keeps this idea in mind.

Offline Mattilald Anguisad

  • Community Ambassador
  • Salutes: 12
    • [GwTh]
    • 12 
    • 45
    • 30 
    • View Profile
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #157 on: May 21, 2013, 08:23:02 pm »
LoL so many people wuold like the so called flamer "op"ness back ^^ (for many reasone - one of them giving the gunner a place on the ship again).

Would help at least of the damage matrix would be kept up to date (so we can poin newbies to an accurate sorce of information to witch weapon is how effective against what thing a.k.a what witch weapon is generaly good at).

Offline Queso

  • Muse Games
  • Salutes: 126
    • [Muse]
    • 13
    • 25 
    • View Profile
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #158 on: May 21, 2013, 09:01:53 pm »
I would like to see something that hurts up close for a squid. The flame used to fill that role, but now it takes too long for a hit and run and isn't reliable enough for a sustained chase.

Offline Machiavelliest

  • Member
  • Salutes: 35
    • 21 
    • 31
    • 29 
    • View Profile
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #159 on: May 21, 2013, 09:34:15 pm »
Okay, so some people think the LJ is OP.  Some even said that it takes very few hits to destroy the hull with damage overflow.  I just did isolated tests.  Number of hits required to destroy any ship with or without balloon is in accordance with my calculations.  Although Flechette against Hull is 20% effective... an LJ shot against Hull is a total of 65 dmg (50 Shatter * 0.1 + 300 Flechette * 0.2 = 65).
Initial and continuous ground impact damage would shorten that.

Projectiles inherit the linear velocity of their gun's mount point.  That is all. (or, at least, that should be all...)
I am absolutely sure that this isn't modeled right.  Even a slight left turn while firing a gatling gun on an opponent causes you to have to lag your aim to the right a relatively large amount.  Since the guns are castering, a slight rotation should be mostly unnoticeable because the castering removes any need for angular modeling on the gun, and the slight turn imparts negligible linear velocity to the emplacement's position.

If it's only the emplacement's linear velocity (presumably converted from angular velocity with the emplacement's horizontal distance from the center of rotation multiplied by the angular velocity) inherited, maybe the lever arm is too long?  Or maybe the acceleration is inherited to the projectile, rather than just the velocity?  Since the projectile leaves the barrel ~instantaneously, there's no acceleration applied to it by the ship's motion.

EDIT:  Removed some horrible grammar/formatting.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2013, 10:05:58 pm by Machiavelliest »

Offline awkm

  • Muse Games
  • Salutes: 77
    • [Muse]
    • 16 
    • 45
    • 28 
    • View Profile
    • Notes for Next Century—n4n100
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #160 on: May 21, 2013, 09:59:07 pm »
I would like to see something that hurts up close for a squid. The flame used to fill that role, but now it takes too long for a hit and run and isn't reliable enough for a sustained chase.

Oh goodness, potential new gun ideas.

Offline Queso

  • Muse Games
  • Salutes: 126
    • [Muse]
    • 13
    • 25 
    • View Profile
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #161 on: May 21, 2013, 10:32:41 pm »
I want something that you can take on a squid, get up real nice and close to some vital component of theirs, and then run away for a reload after leaving a sizable hole in their component, their armor, and leave some flames around too while you are at it. The kind of gun that needs a pilot as crazy as I am to hit right. Barely able to turn, no range, suicidal at times.The kind of thing that would get a squid right up on the broad side of a Galleon and send the Galleon's crew crying home.

Offline Queso

  • Muse Games
  • Salutes: 126
    • [Muse]
    • 13
    • 25 
    • View Profile
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #162 on: May 21, 2013, 10:40:56 pm »
This would be the kind of weapon you would pair a harpoon with on the side of a junker. Draw them in and then absolutely cripple them once they get to about 3 meters away.

Offline awkm

  • Muse Games
  • Salutes: 77
    • [Muse]
    • 16 
    • 45
    • 28 
    • View Profile
    • Notes for Next Century—n4n100
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #163 on: May 21, 2013, 11:14:25 pm »
This would be the kind of weapon you would pair a harpoon with on the side of a junker. Draw them in and then absolutely cripple them once they get to about 3 meters away.

Yes... once harpoons actually behaving predictably.  Or at least more so.

Offline Ofiach

  • Member
  • Salutes: 25
    • [FALC]
    • 5
    • 10 
    • View Profile
Re: GUNS Balance Questions and Concerns v1.2
« Reply #164 on: May 21, 2013, 11:38:01 pm »
@ Zill IMO the heavy is the worst round for the slowing down of the projectile, I always ask people to bring incendiary for when they get inside the normal arming distance. Also in the context it was being suggest heavy was good for, long range accuracy, it is a useless round. 

Also what I had said awkm was it takes down ARMOR relatively easily, and once the balloon goes down it does take out armor
the merc field gun takes out ~172 armor hp a shot, and has 2 rounds, the LJ hits the armor for ~115 and has 6 shots. So a merc has potential hull damage of ~344 and the LJ has potential damage ~690. The reload on the merc is slow enough to not have to factor in a third shot by the time the LJ has fired 6 rounds.

Here's the thing that gets me, the LJ  is meant to pop balloons, the merc is meant to destroy components and armor. Getting hit by a lumber jack causes at least 2 engineers to go into tank mode on the hull and balloon but when a merc is shooting at you a single engineer can repair through it. yes one is a light and one is a heavy weapon but that discrepancy is huge, Not to mention alot of the other heavy guns don't even hold a candle to the LJ, the hwacha disables.... and that's it. The heavy flak is great once the armor is gone, the carronade requires up close fire and a long time ground bouncing to kill.

I'm not even going to talk about the weapons when you pair them with others or, god forbid, 2 LJ's are stomping a ship. I'm just pointing out the obvious superiority of this weapon to anything else. Also think about what you can do when under fire from the other weapons, a hwacha just time its barrages, a carronade stay away from it, heavy flak well you don't really worry about that until the armor is down. A LJ move up and down.... nope chute or hydrogen just leave your balloon easier to kill. Side to side sure show the biggest side of your balloon, yeah that's another no. get inside it's armoing time, great idea but only possible if the pilot and gunners aren't paying attention or position themselves badly.