56 replies to this topic

[FDJustin]

I think it's.. Semi-useful right now. But it might still have the bug where it will keep burning server side, not client side, even after it forces you to shut down... Then you explode.

They might be more useful than they appear, there's really no feedback for how hot you're making an enemy mech, and it's pretty hard to gauge the actual damage being done.

I think they would be a great weapon if there were things to set on fire with them. Just don't stand on top of the fuel tank you're setting off....

[Xarian]

Joseph Mallan, on 11 September 2014 - 04:46 AM, said:

That's actually a good answer Russ. But to make it a useful weapon would make it terribly exploitable. We already have a effective 1 ton 1 crit energy weapon.

You're actually of the opinion that Flamers are supposed to be useless? There's a huge difference between "useful" and "overpowered", and it's a reasonable goal that someone, somewhere would want to use a Flamer.

Here's how it would look if it were useful:
- Compared to a Small Laser or Small Pulse Laser, it would have less damage and less range
- Compared to a Medium Laser, it would have significantly less damage and significantly less range
- Compared to both types of lasers, it would induce overheating in the target without crippling the mech firing the Flamer (lasers don't do this)

It has one intended purpose: slowing down hot mechs and inducing heat penalties. It's not supposed to replace any other weapons, because it's a unique type of weapon.

[Joseph Mallan]

Xarian, on 11 September 2014 - 06:04 AM, said:

You're actually of the opinion that Flamers are supposed to be useless? There's a huge difference between "useful" and "overpowered", and it's a reasonable goal that someone, somewhere would want to use a Flamer.

Here's how it would look if it were useful:
- Compared to a Small Laser or Small Pulse Laser, it would have less damage and less range
- Compared to a Medium Laser, it would have significantly less damage and significantly less range
- Compared to both types of lasers, it would induce overheating in the target without crippling the mech firing the Flamer (lasers don't do this)

It has one intended purpose: slowing down hot mechs and inducing heat penalties. It's not supposed to replace any other weapons, because it's a unique type of weapon.

30 years of Flamers being for Roasted Marshmallows will do that to you. I honestly have NEVER used a flamer. Inferno SRMs and Plasma Canons(IS version) yes Flamers and MGs... Not really needed. EVER!

[Cyborne Elemental]

bump, just because

[Varik Ronain]

I has zee flamers and sometimes even use them! They are not terrible on knife fighting stabby mechs who practically have to hug the enemy to do damage anyways. They do not seem to do much damage at all period but they do blind, disorient and keep the enemy mech toasty warm. (and yourself)



A weapon does not have to be great to be used if you are just having fun.

[kesuga7]

make them cost .50 tons

[Mcgral18]

FDJustin, on 11 September 2014 - 05:06 AM, said:

I think it's.. Semi-useful right now. But it might still have the bug where it will keep burning server side, not client side, even after it forces you to shut down... Then you explode.

They might be more useful than they appear, there's really no feedback for how hot you're making an enemy mech, and it's pretty hard to gauge the actual damage being done.

I think they would be a great weapon if there were things to set on fire with them. Just don't stand on top of the fuel tank you're setting off....

Impossible to kill someone with overheating...or even to make them overheat. It caps at 90% heat.

Damage is dealt the same way as machine guns, hitscan, but without the CoF. It has .7 DPS VS the 0.8 DPS of the MG.

It also has half the range, twice the tonnage, and generates exponential heat. Heat transfer seems to also be exponential.


With my limited testing, the difference between 4 and 12 flamers was minimal for heat transfer. On a 35 DHS Dire Whale, on Tourmeline, it took 12 seconds with 12 Flamers, and 16 seconds with 4 Flamers to bring it to 90% heat.

It seems there might be a cap for heat transfer, or that's just the exponential heat at work.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Honestly, I'd like to see these become energy versions of MGs while the devs/community think of something that makes the heat transfer system more balanced (Flamers got nerfed hard thanks to the HBK-4P early in CB).

Remove the heat 'damage', bring the DPS inline with the MGs, and reduce the overall heat. Possibly double the damage to account for halved range it suffers from compared to the MGs not to mention make sure the crit boost matches the MGs as well.
Or you could make the flamers opposite to that of the MGs, good at melting armor, not so good at melting internals, either way, forget the heat transfer gimmick for now.

[CN9 ACE PILOT]

Russ Bullock, on 09 September 2014 - 10:09 AM, said:

It's clear that if were going to make it a useful weapon in MWO we have to go back to the drawing board on it. I am just unwilling to distract any engineers atm to do so. We have some pretty big fish frying atm but as soon as I can we will look into it again.

Glad to hear from the main man.

I thought it would be interesting to see flamers behave more like "Thick Napalm Fuel Flame Throwers"



Where in you would not have to constantly hold the stream on them since the napalm would stick to them, changing the target's ambient temperature to something like Terra Therma with a very low damage over time for somewhere between 3~5 seconds with a stacking limit of 2.

[Sereglach]

It's interesting to see another topic up about Flamers, again. I put up a full write-up on Flamers over a year ago now, and it is still mostly valid today. If y'all are interested, go have a read. I even propose a possible way to balance them. I'm not saying it's perfect, but its a lot better than what we have.

Oh, and to this date (albeit my playtime has gotten far less), I've clocked a total approaching 70k damage with flamers (current and archived), and that's including the fact that up until we got the Blackjack flamers only did .4dps if held on target, and they only do .7dps now. I have them on over half of my mechs.

If you have questions about flamers, how to make them at least semi-useful in their current implementation (which is a bit of an art form), or more ideas on how to make them more useful, then by all means, go look at the post through my signature, or shoot me a PM.

[Ultimax]

Mcgral18, on 09 September 2014 - 10:12 AM, said:

In TT, they had two settings: Heat OR damage. If you can fit a toggle, perhaps for AMS as well, you could balance them separately around both features.

Heat OR Damage would be my vote.

I'd love a "fire machine gun" with no fear of the perma shut down monster.

[CocoaJin]

CN9 ACE PILOT, on 13 September 2014 - 09:23 AM, said:

Glad to hear from the main man.

I thought it would be interesting to see flamers behave more like "Thick Napalm Fuel Flame Throwers"



Where in you would not have to constantly hold the stream on them since the napalm would stick to them, changing the target's ambient temperature to something like Terra Therma with a very low damage over time for somewhere between 3~5 seconds with a stacking limit of 2.

If we did that, then flamers would need to carry ammo...which is vulnerable to exploding.

[CN9 ACE PILOT]

CocoaJin, on 14 September 2014 - 08:37 PM, said:

If we did that, then flamers would need to carry ammo...which is vulnerable to exploding.

Because all the current ammo we have isn't? Well, aside from Gauss ammo.

[Mcgral18]

CN9 ACE PILOT, on 15 September 2014 - 09:27 AM, said:

Because all the current ammo we have isn't? Well, aside from Gauss ammo.

Well, not really.

0.42*0.1*(1/crittable locations) is generally a very tiny %.

If you have two tons of ammo in Legs, the most easily crit/least padable slot, it comes to :

0.42*0.1*(2/6)=1.4% chance, if I didn't balls my math up.

That's a very small likelyhood of exploding.

Edited by Mcgral18, 15 September 2014 - 09:40 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

CyclonerM, on 10 September 2014 - 11:14 AM, said:

Well, a good start could be making them overheat the enemy before your 'Mech, and not the opposite..

That would go against many years of Canon. Flamer damage 2 heat 3!

The Changes in Total Warfare was a breath of fresh Napalm.

[Zyllos]

Flamers take coordination to work.

3 or 4 Flamers seem to make things shutdown (if they are firing weapons). If you can get a mech to shutdown, having a few along with you to fire on said mech while shutdown is how it's suppose to work. It's never meant to be a solo weapon.

The only issue I seem to have with Flamers is that they exponentially increase heat instead of add constant heat. But I understand they are afraid of having "infinite" time to flame due to having a heat neutral build.

[Garandos]

WM Quicksilver, on 13 September 2014 - 09:08 AM, said:

Honestly, I'd like to see these become energy versions of MGs while the devs/community think of something that makes the heat transfer system more balanced (Flamers got nerfed hard thanks to the HBK-4P early in CB).

Remove the heat 'damage', bring the DPS inline with the MGs, and reduce the overall heat. Possibly double the damage to account for halved range it suffers from compared to the MGs not to mention make sure the crit boost matches the MGs as well.
Or you could make the flamers opposite to that of the MGs, good at melting armor, not so good at melting internals, either way, forget the heat transfer gimmick for now.

Would turn Ember into the meanest killer on the field.