27 replies to this topic

[Sleeping Bear]

In TT battletech, you are able to set mech mounted flamers to inflict heat on a mech instead of damage. I would love if this were an option. I would so strip down a Jenner, mount 4 flamers and roast an Atlas alive as I torched it's backside. I'd also rock an SRM2 and load Infernoes and watch kick back for my barbeque.

Edited by Sleeping Bear, 01 June 2012 - 02:12 AM.

[Tarskin]

you forgot to add:

.... and laugh maniacally as all his internal ammo explodes due to the heat

[Stormeris]

Or you could make it so that it both damages and rises the heat of the mech, and maybe overheating would make targets ammo explode
MUAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAH

[John Clavell]

I think this is a case where translating TT strait over to a game maybe does not work well. Consideration should be made so the weapon is balanced. 4+ Jenners running around just overheating mechs and making them shut down constantly or even causing ammo explosion deaths is something we maybe want to avoid.

[DerMaulwurf]

I voted "Yes" on inflicting heat on target, but actually I meant "Both". As I disagree with the "instead" in the question, because Flamer damage is low both per ton and per heat created.

Also the heat inflicted wasn't that much, if I recall the rules correctly (stowed my rulebook at my parent's place). Making cooking of a Mech that has DHCs pretty much impossible unless the pilot insisted on continuing to fire his energy weapons. So its more like a crowd control device, limiting energy weapon use.

Flamers would be good to punish pure energy weapon builds and reward balanced ones. In case you fear ammo explosions, I suggest dumping said ammo into the Jenner. And in case of 4 Jenners piling on a single mech, I'm sure the rest of the lance will be able to exploit the opportunity to waste light mechs that are silly enough to voluntarily limit their movement.

[Youngblood]

It is quite a bit easier to overheat 'Mechs now that Inferno rounds can be launched from SRM-4s and SRM-6s.

[Roland]

I think that the devs actually listed flamers in the list of equipment that will be available at release.

I don't think they'll have multiple "settings" though.

They have one setting.... OMG IT BURNS.

It's a good setting though.

Edited by Roland, 01 June 2012 - 05:13 AM.

[PirateNixon]

The idea of grabbing the smallest fastest mech I can find and packing it full of flamers and heat sinks sounds wonderful. Sure I'll be annoying as hell, but an organized opposing force would simply have other mechs fire on me while I stood behind my target to cook him.

[Ktooosiek]

And how would it be technically achieved?
No, let's just let flamers flame and inflict little damage with overheating, while plasma flamers would do more damage and less heat than thing like large flamer. Plasma seems more damaging than just flame.

PLASMAAAA~

[Yeach]

What I don't like about the flamer is the cummulative heat that it can cause.
So 1 Jenner with 4 flamers (2 heat each) = 8 heat per turn (2x4)
So a lance of Jenners (4) = 32 heat to target

Most mechs that have ammunition have 10 heatsinks.
One coordinated attack on a mech (with 10 heatsinks) will cause 22 overheat to the target.

From the Battletech Ammo explosion avoid table
10 heat = 4+
14 heat = 6+
19 heat =8+
23 heat = 10+
28 heat = 12

That means approximately 11% chance to avoid an ammo explosion or 89% chance that you will get an ammo explosion.
(using 23 heat table 10+ dice roll is 4 /36 = 11% chance)

Combine this with no CASE and most ammo-laden mechs will go boom almost with no chance of retaliation.

What is to prevent this game from being a Jenner zerg rush to force ammo explosions on mechs with ammo?

This defeats the purpose of mounting ammo weapons if this is an issue and ironically mechs with energy weapons tend to have extra heatsinks which will be able to mitigate some of this heat generated.

Edited by Yeach, 01 June 2012 - 07:14 PM.

[Roland]

Yeach, on 01 June 2012 - 07:12 PM, said:

What is to prevent this game from being a Jenner zerg rush to force ammo explosions on mechs with ammo?

Shooting them.

[PANZERBUNNY]

Focus fire on jenners will evaporate them fairly quickly I would assume.

You are in trouble if you are all attacking different targets and they manage to start shutting you guys down.

Legging them on approach or whenever possible and backing away will probably be match.

Sort of a one trick pony with FlameJenners.

Edited by PANZERBUNNY, 01 June 2012 - 10:18 PM.

[Squigles]

Yeach, on 01 June 2012 - 07:12 PM, said:

What I don't like about the flamer is the cummulative heat that it can cause.
So 1 Jenner with 4 flamers (2 heat each) = 8 heat per turn (2x4)
So a lance of Jenners (4) = 32 heat to target

Most mechs that have ammunition have 10 heatsinks.
One coordinated attack on a mech (with 10 heatsinks) will cause 22 overheat to the target.

From the Battletech Ammo explosion avoid table
10 heat = 4+
14 heat = 6+
19 heat =8+
23 heat = 10+
28 heat = 12

That means approximately 11% chance to avoid an ammo explosion or 89% chance that you will get an ammo explosion.
(using 23 heat table 10+ dice roll is 4 /36 = 11% chance)

Combine this with no CASE and most ammo-laden mechs will go boom almost with no chance of retaliation.

What is to prevent this game from being a Jenner zerg rush to force ammo explosions on mechs with ammo?

This defeats the purpose of mounting ammo weapons if this is an issue and ironically mechs with energy weapons tend to have extra heatsinks which will be able to mitigate some of this heat generated.

The easiest method to prevent that eventuality, is doing the exact same thing that TT does to prevent it. I'm too lazy to get out the books and check right now, but it's something like a max of 12-16 heat that a battlemech can pick up in a turn from external sources. So, just take whatever time interval the dev's have set for a heatsink to dissipate a point of heat (e.g. MWO's turn unit), and set it up so any additional heat from external sources above the max allowable in that time frame has 0 effect. If that's still unbalanced on the too toasty side, they can tweak the allowable amount from the TT allowable amount.

[DerMaulwurf]

Squigles, on 01 June 2012 - 10:21 PM, said:

The easiest method to prevent that eventuality, is doing the exact same thing that TT does to prevent it. I'm too lazy to get out the books and check right now, but it's something like a max of 12-16 heat that a battlemech can pick up in a turn from external sources. So, just take whatever time interval the dev's have set for a heatsink to dissipate a point of heat (e.g. MWO's turn unit), and set it up so any additional heat from external sources above the max allowable in that time frame has 0 effect. If that's still unbalanced on the too toasty side, they can tweak the allowable amount from the TT allowable amount.

Total Warfare p.159

It's 15 heat points from external sources maximum.

[Sleeping Bear]

Muhahaha, you puny Jenner haters forget one thing. Inferno rounds inflict 10 heat on a hit. So a Jenner only mounting 2 x Medium Lasers, 2 x Flamers, and one SRM2 with Inferno rounds would inflict a crippling heat load in a very short time. Not to mention the annoyance factor when that nice huge assault mech stumbles past my shutdown and hull down Jenner to fire on my lance mates, only to suffer a load of fiery love to his backside when I go active and torch him.

[Squigles]

Not sure where you got those numbers from, I can't say for certain they never existed in 1 of the early editions, but certainly not in the last decade or so. Used to be an inferno did 6 heat per turn, for 3 turns. Extra inferno hits didn't do any extra heat, just increased the duration of the burn by another 3 turns.

Current rules are 2 heat per inferno, subject to the same 15 (thank you DerMaulwurf) heat maximum per turn from external sources. So with the fit you've described, that's a whole whopping 8 heat to target per salvo, and if someone decides to turn a flamer or 3 on you, your inferno ammo has a decent chance to cook off, which does the standard ammo boom damage, and gives you 30 heat max (2 per missile, not shot, in the bin)

[Tremor]

To me, a flamethrower is a flamethrower is a flamethrower.

It doesn't think about what kind of flames to throw before throwing them.

One flamer please. Mix the damage and the heat.

Edit: And please give me a Firestarter? Pretty Please?

Edited by Tremor, 02 June 2012 - 11:43 AM.

[Yeach]

DerMaulwurf, on 01 June 2012 - 11:14 PM, said:

Total Warfare p.159

It's 15 heat points from external sources maximum.

For how long? 10 seconds?

So instead of 4 Flamer Jenners you need 2 Flamer Jenners at a time.

round 1 15 - 10 HS = 5 overheat (OH) - the overheat makes the "victim" mech aiming at the flamer mechs much more difficult whereas the flamer mechs (even with aiming difficulties only need to hit "any" body part of the mech)
round 2 5 + 5 OH = 10 overheat (11% chance of risking an ammo explosion)
round 3 5 + 10 OH = 15 overheat (45% chance)
round 4 5 + 15 OH = 20 overheat (55% chance)
round 5 5 + 20 OH = 25 oveheat (90% chance)
and thats not doing anything (ie moving or firing weapons which would create more heat)

It might work for level 2 mechs with doubleheatsinks but with single heatsinks of level 1 technology you are still pigeoning hole those mechs with only 10 heatsinks standard to explode.

What I am saying is that flamer causing heat to target is too easy of a game mechanic.
It is much easier to shoot a mech with flamer (because it affects all parts of the mech) than it is to concentrate weapon damage onto ONE-part of a mech (well at least in TT terms).

I would really like them to test-out these flamer boat configs in beta to see if they are overpowering or not. (and to see if that 15 heat to target is being utilised)

[Roland]

They had flamers in mw4, and they were very situational weapons. They certainly weren't something you saw in every drop.

[SP3CTREnyc]

Roland, on 04 June 2012 - 06:26 PM, said:

They had flamers in mw4, and they were very situational weapons. They certainly weren't something you saw in every drop.

MW2 had flamers. They raised the target's heat level