29 replies to this topic

[hashinshin]

Might actually make them playable. Would also be a direct answer to PPCs which every light/medium pilot are begging to get.

Just try them out at 1.0 DPS before launch and see what happens. WORST case scenario? Mediums start terrorizing heavies/assaults using PPCs.

And for all the people who will inevitably say "FLAMERS DON'T HURT MECHS" please consider the flamer weights a TON and taps in to nuclear reactor to release a plasma stream.

Edited by hashinshin, 31 August 2013 - 02:53 AM.

[Aceramic]

^This. So very much this. Flamers need to do *something* useful.

As amusing as my 6 Flamer Stalker was, it was totally useless other than the humor factor.

If we can't have Flamers that actually do a noticable amount of damage, can we have Flamers that... I dunno... Actually light things on fire and/or make them overheat, or something? >.>

[hashinshin]

Aceramic, on 31 August 2013 - 03:08 AM, said:

^This. So very much this. Flamers need to do *something* useful.

As amusing as my 6 Flamer Stalker was, it was totally useless other than the humor factor.

If we can't have Flamers that actually do a noticable amount of damage, can we have Flamers that... I dunno... Actually light things on fire and/or make them overheat, or something? >.>

Flamers that were overheating people were very frustrating to face, since once they locked you down you were done. However, flamers that CAN'T overheat need to at least do a noticeable amount of damage to be useful. It's literally THE shortest ranged weapon in the game.

[Alistair Winter]

I forgot they were still in the game.

[Aceramic]

hashinshin, on 31 August 2013 - 03:14 AM, said:

Flamers that were overheating people were very frustrating to face, since once they locked you down you were done. However, flamers that CAN'T overheat need to at least do a noticeable amount of damage to be useful. It's literally THE shortest ranged weapon in the game.

I'm not saying a single-Flamer Jenner should be able to overheat you instantly, but when a Stalker with SIX Flamers is completely useless... Something is wrong.

Mind you, I'm not saying six-Flamer Stalkers *should* necessarily be useful, but you get my drift. lol

[Khobai]

Lets do a simple comparison:

A medium laser weighs 1 ton, has a range of 270m, and does 1.25 dps

So a flamer, which also weighs 1 ton, and has a range of 64m, should actually do more dps than a medium laser. Because lets face it, the heat generation ability is fairly weak.

I would actually say flamers need to do 1.5 dps.

[General Taskeen]

Well like I've said in the past, that's really only going to work if they turn the flamer into a "burst" weapon - basically a flame burst with a flamer graphic like MW3.

Otherwise they need to raise the hps on it, heat per second on target.

And like the MG from Battle Tech, per the 'rules' the Flamer actually does do damage (2) to a Mech for the duration it is used during a turn. A Heavy Flamer even does 4 Damage to a Mech.

Edited by General Taskeen, 31 August 2013 - 05:47 AM.

[FireSlade]

The damage should stay about the same otherwise you'll end up with an energy machinegun that has unlimited ammo. It needs to stay a specialty weapon that can overheat a mech. As for what it does the amount of heat that it adds to a mech should be bumped up some more and the heat that it adds to your mech should be reduced. The heat cap is not a bad idea and prevents it from being abused and keeping an enemy perma-locked.

[Deathlike]

TBH, I don't know how the crit changes have affected the Flamers as it has for the MGs.. someone needs to churn the numbers for the Flamers. It should be semi-viable like MGs to hurt internal armor... but right now range is the #1 problem with it, in addition to the poor heat application.

[XANi]

Upping the damage just makes it "energy machinegun", which seems kinda boring. Upping heat however would make it viable for light/medium to pack 2, sneak up to that PPC boat and warm it up enougth that it can't use it's main weapons and have to fall back to backup (if it have any).

[CyberRage]

hashinshin, on 31 August 2013 - 03:14 AM, said:

Flamers that were overheating people were very frustrating to face, since once they locked you down you were done. However, flamers that CAN'T overheat need to at least do a noticeable amount of damage to be useful. It's literally THE shortest ranged weapon in the game.

But flamers without heat are pretty much useless, flamers shouldn't be damage dealers. They should be support weapons against heat based mechs. Directly applying heat to a mech is indeed too frustrating, so how about an alternative. When a mech has received flame damage in the last ~5 seconds their weapons generate an extra 2-3 heat when fired ( numbers are just a throw out ). This removes the lock down effect and still adds the heat to make the weapon useful as a side against laser and ppc boats.

Edited by CyberRage, 31 August 2013 - 09:26 AM.

[aniviron]

FireSlade, on 31 August 2013 - 05:54 AM, said:

The damage should stay about the same otherwise you'll end up with an energy machinegun that has unlimited ammo. It needs to stay a specialty weapon that can overheat a mech. As for what it does the amount of heat that it adds to a mech should be bumped up some more and the heat that it adds to your mech should be reduced. The heat cap is not a bad idea and prevents it from being abused and keeping an enemy perma-locked.

Except that, unlike a machine gun, even one of them will overheat your mech with alarming rapidity; they also weigh twice as much, and don't get a range extension bonus.

I'm not really sure what's wrong with having similar functions. The PPC and ac10 are fast projectile weapons that deal ten damage to one component at similar ranges (450 v 540); one has ammo and the other generates much more heat. Yet there seems to be room for both of them in the game.

I guess I would rather the flamer duplicate the mg's function than have none at all like it currently does.

[FireSlade]

aniviron, on 31 August 2013 - 09:36 AM, said:

Except that, unlike a machine gun, even one of them will overheat your mech with alarming rapidity; they also weigh twice as much, and don't get a range extension bonus.

I'm not really sure what's wrong with having similar functions. The PPC and ac10 are fast projectile weapons that deal ten damage to one component at similar ranges (450 v 540); one has ammo and the other generates much more heat. Yet there seems to be room for both of them in the game.

I guess I would rather the flamer duplicate the mg's function than have none at all like it currently does.

The Flamer's function is to keep a mech running hot so that they cannot fire a heavy hitting/multiple energy weapons giving smaller mechs a chance to tank damage that would otherwise be directed at them. PGI has taken the slow approach to balancing this weapon because they do not really want to see people using assault mechs with 4-8 of them plus ballistics or missiles to basically lock the enemy from firing and they in turn can rip them apart. Now up the damage, when they have similar effects to the machine guns, and can keep the enemy locked at 90% heat will only invite abuse and you would be stupid to not have them on your mech. If you take the heat away to balance it then why have flamers when the machine guns have better range, less heat and can be slightly lighter.

[hashinshin]

PGI will NOT return the flamer to being a stunlock weapon, so it needs it's damage increased.

Basically, here's what you people are saying when you say "the damage is fine, just make it gen more heat!"

You: I want X.
PGI: X won't happen.
You: I want X or nothing.
PGI: Then you get nothing.
You: I want X.

[Liquid Leopard]

Aceramic, on 31 August 2013 - 03:08 AM, said:

...Flamers need to do *something* useful.

No, they don't. They were pretty damn useless in table top BattleTech. Why should you expect them to do anything here?
I could swear BTech had infantry just so flamers and MGs would have something to do. Otherwise, everybody used that tonnage for something else.

[Ryvucz]

They should generate less heat for sure.

[Donnie Silveray]

1DPS or slightly less IMO. No more. It's a support weapon meant to lock down high heat mechs. I can understand the need to allow it to do damage to be 'generally' useful. In that respect I suggest MG's have their cones reduced and range slightly extended to be a more attractive alternative to a flamer to prevent the flamer from basically becoming a free MG with unlimited ammo.

[hashinshin]

Donnie Silveray, on 31 August 2013 - 01:11 PM, said:

1DPS or slightly less IMO. No more. It's a support weapon meant to lock down high heat mechs. I can understand the need to allow it to do damage to be 'generally' useful. In that respect I suggest MG's have their cones reduced and range slightly extended to be a more attractive alternative to a flamer to prevent the flamer from basically becoming a free MG with unlimited ammo.

I think not generating (much) heat makes the MG a viable alternative to a 1 DPS flamer.

[aniviron]

FireSlade, on 31 August 2013 - 12:54 PM, said:

The Flamer's function is to keep a mech running hot so that they cannot fire a heavy hitting/multiple energy weapons giving smaller mechs a chance to tank damage that would otherwise be directed at them. PGI has taken the slow approach to balancing this weapon because they do not really want to see people using assault mechs with 4-8 of them plus ballistics or missiles to basically lock the enemy from firing and they in turn can rip them apart. Now up the damage, when they have similar effects to the machine guns, and can keep the enemy locked at 90% heat will only invite abuse and you would be stupid to not have them on your mech. If you take the heat away to balance it then why have flamers when the machine guns have better range, less heat and can be slightly lighter.

If you see a mech that has a 64m effective range with half of its hardpoints devoted to flamers and you let it run up to you, you deserve whatever happens to you. But I have to say, your nightmare scenario of oh noes heatlock is pretty far away right now. Every time they tweak flamers I throw nine of them on my hbk-4p to see if they do anything, anything at all. The answer is always no. As of the last time I tried them, they actually caused more heat buildup for my mech than for whomever I was targeting. Even 30 seconds of 9 flamers or close to a solid minute of continuous flamer usage, most of the people I was barbequeing had no trouble firing ppcs, llas, or really anything at all.

[FireSlade]

aniviron, on 31 August 2013 - 02:23 PM, said:

If you see a mech that has a 64m effective range with half of its hardpoints devoted to flamers and you let it run up to you, you deserve whatever happens to you. But I have to say, your nightmare scenario of oh noes heatlock is pretty far away right now. Every time they tweak flamers I throw nine of them on my hbk-4p to see if they do anything, anything at all. The answer is always no. As of the last time I tried them, they actually caused more heat buildup for my mech than for whomever I was targeting. Even 30 seconds of 9 flamers or close to a solid minute of continuous flamer usage, most of the people I was barbequeing had no trouble firing ppcs, llas, or really anything at all.

I have never been worried of heatlock and with PGI busy with everything else (balance, their screw up fix for balance, etc.) I doubt we will see any buff for them this year. What I am saying is that they need a buff to heat applied and reduction in heat generated on your mech. A damage increase to 1 DPS would be too much when you start stacking them with other buffs but if you just do a DPS increase you end up with a short range unlimited ammo machine gun that also adds heat to the enemy. Yes it would not be much but with most people running heat inefficient builds 2-4 flamers will keep people from firing or they will shut down and taking damage. Also I am not sure if you noticed but 4-6 MGs at 1.1 DPS will chew up an Assault mech very quickly. The only thing keeping them to joke builds is that MGs have limited range, ammo, spread and the Assault mech can shoot back; while the same scenario flamer version can get them to 90% and keep them there very quickly all while doing similar damage. I have done this with 2 flamers and kept an Atlas from shooting me by shutting him down when he did and while he was shutdown I moved behind him and cored him from behind.