29 replies to this topic

[Nothing Whatsoever]

The heat generated to the user needs to be tweaked due to how it fires.

The user's heat jumps high faster than it can dissipate with it's heat of 1.00.

I'd say lower it to 0.70 or even lower and see how they work with a tweak to heat generated, then improve the flamer as needed from there.

[Khobai]

Quote

The damage should stay about the same otherwise you'll end up with an energy machinegun that has unlimited ammo

Not really since flamers generate heat and machine guns dont. Plus machine guns have twice the range.

Flamers need to do 1.5 dps to be balanced in the current weapon environment.

[Foxfire]

They really need to make them more effective at what Flamers do... increase heat on enemy mechs.

Along with this, they should also revert the changes to thermal sensors to show heat of other mechs again.

[Khobai]

Quote

They really need to make them more effective at what Flamers do... increase heat on enemy mechs.

The problem is mechs run a lot hotter in MWO compared to tabletop... so making flamers increase heat on enemy mechs is potentially very strong. The only reason its balanced now is that it makes your mech generate even more heat than it puts on the enemy mech.

Edited by Khobai, 31 August 2013 - 06:40 PM.

[Foxfire]

Khobai, on 31 August 2013 - 06:38 PM, said:

The problem is mechs run a lot hotter in MWO compared to tabletop... so making flamers increase heat on enemy mechs is potentially very strong. The only reason its balanced now is that it makes your mech generate even more heat than it puts on the enemy mech.

You either have to increase the damage significantly to justify the limited range and heat generation OR you have to allow it to function in it's intended purposes.

[TheMadTypist]

I like the idea of having a reason to put a flamer onto my 'mechs. I don't like the idea of a "soft" heat-based stun. I really don't want to see a return of the Mechwarrior 2: GBL flamer, which could be equpped onto a firemoth and used to cheese your way through the entire campaign (there's a youtube play-through out there where some guy does this, the problem came from the fact that flamers transmitted more heat than they generated, fired in a burst, every 'mech had the same heat capacity, and died if exceeding a certain heat level, so ~three flamers fired to just short of overheat destruction was always a guaranteed kill on everything).

So, a flamer that actually does damage, with the minor side benefit of increasing heat retention in the enemy the way it does now is something I would like to see in the game. Might get me to mount some on my Cicada, or Victor, as they're usually close enough to their targets to use them anyway.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

The correct answer (as is frequently the case) is more TT.

Flamers need a heat mode which is the constant stream of flame and a damage mode which is a laser like burst.

[JP Josh]

i think that they should keep it a low dmg weapon but make it so that they can overheat a enimy mech..... but then again thier are people that say "thats over powered!!!!" when a enimy uses tactics aka me and my little bro in small scouts sneaking up and taking out snipers one by one by causeing them to self destruct via overheating.

people really need to stop crying and focus on getting around the weapon the flamer could be beat by a machien gun or by another scout. or the snipers could have covered eachother and caused me and rabid to simply play distractions.

also the amount of heat your mech can handle should be based on how many heatsinks ya got. and your moter.

Edited by JP Josh, 31 August 2013 - 09:07 PM.

[Kanatta Jing]

I'd suggest the increase of the Flamer bloom size to allow it to become an anti-grouping weapon as well as a drop in damage to 0.3 DPS as it would then damage all panels, across possibly several mechs.

[Troutmonkey]

Flamer needs a buff. The first thing is to make it generate less heat on you. Then you either make it deal more heat with no cap (allowing stun locks with multiple flamers) or make it deal at least as much as an MG, if not more. The reason I'm for stun locks is that they can only keep you locked for as long they're firing, which will eventually cause the user to over heat as well. That and while they're locking you (which means they have to stay close for an extended amount of time) your buddies should hopefully be able to kill your assailant.