Установить Steam
войти
|
язык
简体中文 (упрощенный китайский)
繁體中文 (традиционный китайский)
日本語 (японский)
한국어 (корейский)
ไทย (тайский)
Български (болгарский)
Čeština (чешский)
Dansk (датский)
Deutsch (немецкий)
English (английский)
Español - España (испанский)
Español - Latinoamérica (испанский Лат. Ам.)
Ελληνικά (греческий)
Français (французский)
Italiano (итальянский)
Bahasa Indonesia (индонезийский)
Magyar (венгерский)
Nederlands (нидерландский)
Norsk (норвежский)
Polski (польский)
Português (португальский)
Português-Brasil (бразильский португальский)
Română (румынский)
Suomi (финский)
Svenska (шведский)
Türkçe (турецкий)
Tiếng Việt (вьетнамский)
Українська (украинский)
Сообщить о проблеме с переводом
Правила обсуждений
Пожаловаться
Sorry to hear that you've become frustrated enough to quit the game.
I do thank you for listing out the reasons though, not because I can say "nah nah, you're wrong," but I can say "We should really fix that."
1. Capture points have been the least preferred match time since their introduction. Our chief designer has the some massive changes specced out for them. Unfortunately the team hasn't had time for them yet.
2. I can see Ambush being a little campy, but we haven't seen it happening on other matches as much. Can you elaborate what you're seeing, ship, weapon, and other maps?
3. Are you seeing FPS drops or MS spikes?
4. Ah, newbies. They're not as dumb as you think, it's really our fault for not explaining the game well enough. Every gatling that is fired into a balloon is us not explaining the mechanics well enough. It shouldn't have to be your job as a captain to have to explain how the game is played all the time, it should be our job as designers.
Unsurprisingly we have a meeting over thrying to fix that tomorrow. With the last influx of players we've seen people not understanding how the hull works or what to rebuild with.
We're also building a match making system so you get matched up with players of your skill level which should hopefully help the constant teacher frustration.
Despite saying you won't be, you will be missed. The fact you explained the issues well and even calmly despite the fact you're frustrated makes you as a good player in my book.
We'll do our best to improve the game to bring you back!
It's pretty hard to get a handle on it, because of all the confounding factors at work that can turn a game around. But the main culprits aside from Canyon are Battle on the Dunes and Fjords; and the main circumstances where it becomes really noticeable is where everyone goes gats+mortar brawler.
A typical example would be 4xPyramidions on Dunes; say blue gets fed up of the face-off and decides to charge. Even if they focus fire and get an early kill (sustaining significant damage in the process); they have the enemy respawning battle-ready right on top of them, whereas if their team-mate dies he's the other side of the map, which means it's an easy 2vs1 for red against the remaining blue.
Part of the problem is that "knowing the respawn locations" is a very obscure part of the meta-game and there's very little rhyme-or-reason to their layout across maps; and as such it's a bit like "gaming the system" so-to-speak.
Compare the "one side of the map vs another" dynamic in Fjord and Dunes vs the "one in each corner and one in the middle" layout of spawnpoints in Duel at Dawn; completely different philosophies for their placement.
I think strategising the best way to exploit dying detracts from strategising the best way to engage the enemy in aerial combat.
Ideally I'd like to see the choice of spawnpoints generated dynamically: So they are deactivated (not offered to you as a choice of spawn location) if the enemy is within a set radius off them; with at least one dynamic spawn-point activated (selectable) near to friendly team-ships irrespective of where they are on the map.
I think hunting down sneaky squids to stop enemies spawning behind you is a far more interesting sort of spawn-related meta-game than manouvreing in such a way to exploit the static positions of spawn-locations one way or another.
It's neither IIRC: The incoming datastream dries up until it's just a handful of incoming bytes. They're on time, there's just not enough of them. Could be packet loss I guess, but it's been a while since I was tracking it down so have forgotten what I had established. If I return to the game in the future and it is still an issue I'll keep you posted.
To be honest, just the option to be anti-social and fly without a crew (or be able to set a minimum rank level and class restrictions on the slots) would let me get on and play some matches without the constant pressure on me to be a role model or otherwise try to carry.
I realise it's not what you are aiming for with the game; but I've had a lot of fun in a 4-player match with us each just going straight captain and setting to with AI crews; just like I've spent most of my LoL hours practising in co-op mode vs bots, even though I'm pretty sure that's not what the devs originally had in mind.
I've always appreciated the work you guys have done on this game; it's a first-rate title that deserves to do well. I look forward to seeing what you guys do with it; and hopefully it won't be me viewing it from the touchlines in the future.
Solution: ZOMG CLOUDS!!!11!!11!1! The problem is, the person in charge of clouds went waaaaaay overboard. In theory the idea is sound: use clouds to obscure line of sight to all the middle ground entrances of the canyon. This will allow either team to break out, or flank. However, in reality the vast amounts of clouds created an entirely new, and equally frustrating problem. Now no one can find anyone, anywhere. I cannot recall how many times I've watched a casual or competitive match and seen both teams fly right past each other. This tends to lead to camping, because it's easier to find your opponent by sitting still (and hoping they are not doing the same thing), in the very few clear areas. If the clouds were strategically used to a moderate amount, most maps would be engaging and fun. But as it stands, canyon is now the most frustrating 2v2 map to play on.
Right now, I have screenshots I can consult in a pinch, but they're not as convenient as pressing a single key to see where the enemy might pop into existense.
Also, chaingunning the balloon makes perfect sense. In all the good steampunk airship novels I've read, attackers alway target the balloon with gatlings.
I recently made a rush through the maze and attacked the enemy's spawn area, by a side entrance. We opened fire on the ships and slipped back into the maze. We then flew to the other side, and flanked them from the other entrance.
There are also lots of short cuts and "hidden" paths on that map which can help you flank the enemy, although not all ships are nimple enough to get through those(which might be a design oversight).
Chaingunning the balloon makes perfect sense, if you have Incendiary ammo. :)
Actually, that could be quite cool; Incendiary ammo converts 30% of the projectiles damage into fire damage.
With extinguisher and chem sprays on every ship, and the fire ammo's relative big drawbacks, I think that would actually be a nice addition.
Here is a link to the GOIO forums, it lists active clans: https://gunsoficarus.com/community/forum/index.php/topic,295.0.html
no, it just adds a chance to inflict fire stacks, no pure fire damage... Basically completely useless if the enemy is halfway competent and can use chemspray.
I'm always glad to help, byron :)
I was suggesting a change to the Incendiary ammo, because compared to all it's drawbacks(Lower rate of fire, lower clip size, lower projectile speed/range), occassionally adding a fire stack is not a big deal compared to other ammo types(especially since it can easily be negated by chemspray/extinguisher).
If the Incendiary ammo actually did a bit of fire damage, it's role would be more clear, and the ammo type picked more often.