41 replies to this topic

[Ambuscade]

Greetings fellow mechwarriors! After a long break I've decided to poke my head around again to see whats up (can't get in the cockpit quite yet, waiting on more reliable internet ). Since CW seems to be up and running to an extent, I'd thought it appropriate to revisit an old problem, the infamous flamer. Before I begin, I would like to make a special request to fellow mechwarrior FupDup. Your legendary single flamer stalker video is a great addition to any flamer thread. A picture is worth a 1000 words and your video 10000+.

In consideration of the complexity of the issue, I will be breaking up my major opinions up into several posts. They will follow a certain order and be titled for ease of reference. They will be as follows:

Topic #1: Major Issues
Topic #2: Strengths and Battlefield Role
Topic #3: Checks and Counters
Topic #4: FLD, DOT, or Both?
Topic #5: My Take on the Flamer

I will try to keep each post as generalized as possible. In other words, I will not be examining the case of FLD or DOT mechanics until Topic #4. These will ultimately be my opinions and I am more than happy to debate and discuss (its a forum after all lol). I will be spacing the major posts out time wise to give time for feedback/discussion. In the meantime, stay tuned for Topic #1: Major Issues!

Regards Mechwarriors,
Ambuscade

[Ambuscade]

Topic #1: Major Issues

The flamer, as simple a concept for a weapon that it is, has several major issues standing in its way of viability. I will touch on each one in turn, though many if not all are related.

The Heat System - The MWO heat system offers only two consequences fo high heat: decreased fire rate and shutdown. This offers little tactical value for increasing an adversary's heat bar at close range (since the flamer, atm, is the only way to do this). High thresholds and dissipation hamper current flamer attacks from gaining any real traction. Make no mistake, this is not a "the heat system needs to be fixed" rant. Its simple fact, a fact that must be considered for a balanced flamer to be implemented in a viable manner. The heat system is a battle for another thread.

The 90% Heat Cap - the ultimate goal of a flamer attack, the psuedo-shutdown. A measure that severely hinders firing rate and highly threatens shutdown while denying stunlock. A fair balance between keeping the purpose of the flamer and preventing undesirable stunlocks. This is perfectly fine. However, is the current reward worth all the effort of reaching it? Not at the moment. Bare minimum the goal should be easier to reach. A flamer attack needs to pose a real threat to a mech's combat capability. If reaching the cap quicker and easier isn't enough, perhaps more benefits are required. Maybe bump the cap up to say 95%? Or perhaps add debuffs to the enemy mech that are only achievable with the flamer once the enemy has hit the cap (and only when the cap is hit). Measures need to be taken to turn high risk, no reward to high risk, high reward.

The SHS vs. DHS Gap - there is a reason the phrase "DHS tax" exists. The performance level between the two is quite wide. A known issue, again one for another thread to solve, but it has a suble but drastic impact on flamer performance. If we design an effective flamer, it will need to be strong against the most common heatsink type: DHS. However, an effective flamer against DHS will be devastating to SHS builds. This widens the gap further and makes the new pilot experience that much more sour.

Lack of Information - The weapon stats for the flamer paint a very limited picture of its functionality. There is no mention about the exponential heat gain on target or oneself. Nor is there mention of a one sec deviation off target resets the exponential heat gain on target. Furthermore, there is no tell-tale visible sign in combat of the flamer's effectiveness. The only ways to find out is through the forums and to try it out. Both methods generally come to the same conclusion: It sucks. The amount of info ingame from the UI and the combat HUD need to be expanded upon. The flamer's viablitiy (buffed or not) would improve if Mechwarriors had a better idea of the weapon system they are looking at.

Skill Difficulty - One would think it simple, point and spray, and the flamer does its job. However, add in all the issues above and you have a weapon that is deceptively difficult to use. Whether its the serious min-maxer or the casual pilot, the flamer needs some level of skill to be effective. That is the way it should be. In my opinion, its use should be simple: point and spray. The skill should come in on its application in the heat of battle. When, where, and how are the choices that will rely on skill and experience to properly bring the flamer to bear.

These are the most important issues I believe the flamer faces. Any attempt at a flamer buff needs to take these issues into account. Only then will we have a truly useful weapon system. Stay tuned for the next big topic: Topic #2: Strengths and Battlefield Role!

Regards Mechwarriors,
Ambuscade

[FupDup]

Ambuscade, on 17 February 2015 - 07:05 AM, said:

-
Before I begin, I would like to make a special request to fellow mechwarrior FupDup. Your legendary single flamer stalker video is a great addition to any flamer thread. A picture is worth a 1000 words and your video 10000+.
-

Ask and ye shall receive:

[Ambuscade]

Much obliged FupDup, glad you could pop in and add the video. For those interested in the thread, I am penning the next topic atm. Trying to say what I want and not get a wall of text. Likely will hit the thread tomorrow before I head off to work. Again, much thanks to FupDup for contributing the video.

Regards Mechwarriors,
Ambuscade

[Lily from animove]

yeah make flamers be no heat emmiting, and they would be an option, hy a single one even causes this heat emchanic? No idea utterly broken.

and then brace yourselves the era of 14flamer Novas xD

OMG

sony music entergayment blocked the vid in germany.

Edited by Lily from animove, 18 February 2015 - 11:31 AM.

[Kassatsu]

Shouldn't even have an exponential increase, unless it ONLY adds that exponential gain if its actively hitting a target. The 'cooldown' is also much longer for the user than it is for someone being hit by one.

What it should do is add X heat to you, and X +0.2 (or more, or less - quirk it up baby) heat to your target for each flamer. Leave the 90% cap as it is, less skilled (and intelligent) people will panic when their heat increases more than expected and likely override and start firing away, only to explode. I'm positive there's a way to track such an accidental suicide and give a flamer kill credit to the person hitting them with the flamer(s).

Maybe the Hellslinger would actually see some use because people wouldn't like the fact that flamers are an actual option now (Hellslinger would actually get less heat than the user of the flamers). Some builds on other mechs would not even be affected (i.e. dual gauss), others would effectively be shut down until they can get away or their teammates can get the flamer off of them, which is the point I think.

[Ambuscade]

To be honest, I will be touching on this more in Topic #3 and even more #5, I definitely want to curb flamer heat on self down. Removing the exponential heat gain I think is a must. They make an already underpowered weapon incredibly unwieldy. As long as the 90% heat cap remains in place the fear of stunlock is unfounded.

Even at 90% heat you can still fire certain weapons (varies depending on thresholds I imagine) and machine guns/guass rifles can always be fired. Bare mininum you can still run away to your allies for help (more so now with voip and whatnot). Complete elimination of heat is going too far I think. Energy weapons have infinite ammo, so there should be something there to counter balance that and the inevitable boating of the weapon.

Your 14 flamer Nova is a perfect example (should still be viable, but should come with some serious drawbacks to it as well).

Kassatsu is hitting the point quite well.

Regards Mechwarriors,
Ambuscade

[JediPanther]

It would also help if certain mechs had flamer buffs as when their stock build is almost nothing but flammers and machine guns. Firestarter with four flamers? The pilot probabily hasn't gotten around to removing them yet and putting on lasers.

[Ambuscade]

Topic #2: Strengths and Battlefield Role

In today's topic I will be going over what I believe are the flamer's strengths and possible roles on the battlefield. First, I would like to note that I will be speaking more to the strengths of a buffed flamer, rather than the one currently implemented. With that being said I will now start with the flamer's strengths.

************************************************************************

Strengths

The flamer has a few strengths that once buffed can make the flamer an effective weapon. Rather then simply listing them, I will categorize each as a "goal." Every weapon has certain goals its trying to achieve. For most weapons in MWO that goal is to deal damage (lasers, srms, etc). Other weapons are designed for support instead (TAG, Narc, etc). The flamer is unique in that its strengths allow it to serve both as a damage dealer and a support weapon at the same time. To elaborate on this, I will list each strength as a goal in order of importance. They are as follows:

Raising an Enemy's Heat Level - Of all the weapons in MWO, the flamer is the only one capable of this feat. Therefore, it should be the highest priority to focus on above all others.

Critseeking - The LBX, the machine gun, and the flamer are the only weapons to possess bonuses to critical hits. As such, this should be the second most focus of the flamer. Its ability to strip components and destory internals should be on par or better than the machine gun.

Damage - All of the weapons in the energy weapon type outclass the flamer in damage. Rather than trying to compete with them, the flamer should priortize damage the least of all its attributes and strengths.

Other Goals - One of the most interesting side effects of the current flamer's implementation is its ability to blind the target when directed at the cockpit. An effect that can panic the pilot, decrease accuracy, and make outmaneavering the mech easier. The flamethrower has always been a psychological weapon as much as its been a killing weapon. This quality is something we should retain for the MWO version as well. Not just for flavor, but for a potent ingame effect as well.

Edit: After watching a NGNG podcast that came out 2/19/15, I have retracted this statement. Details in the post farther below (#13).

*******************************************************************

Battlefield Roles

With the above strengths and goals in mind, the flamer has several useful applications on the MWO battlefield, even in a PvP environment. They are as follows:

Debilitating the Enemy Heavy and Assault Mechs - The most obvious application of the flamer is its heat inducing qualities. Of the mech weight classes, the heavy and assault mechs make the most effective targets. They are slower and less maneuverable, making them more vulnerable to a flamer attack. More importantly, they also generally carry the most firepower of the all the weight classes. By raising their heat levels immensely it prevents them from using the bulk of their firepower on you and your team. This allows allies to coordinate with the flamer mech(s) to eliminate the heavier elements of the enemy and increase the chances of victory. (the most team oriented role of the flamer)

Distractions - Anyone who has been on the recieving end of light mech harassment knows how annoying they can be. This is even more so when machine guns are used, the plinking sound can be especially grating on your sanity. Now slap on some flamers on said light mech (Ever seen the flamer's visual effect? Quite spectacular, and extremely visable from a distance) with the effective ability to raise your heat levels. Just imagine the chaos they can induce, maybe even drawing some to "chase the squirrel." Such distractions leave others vulnerable to attack, as they fend off or chase the flamer mech away. These types of distractions I believe are what the flamer can excel at. (the second most team oriented role of the flamer)

Vulture - The flamer's critseeking abilties (especially if buffed) alone makes it adept at stripping components and wrecking internals. Couple it with some machine guns and/or some srms and you have a nasty finisher build going. This brings us the to flamer's final role, the remorseless vulture. You hunt vulnerable, weakened, or crippled mechs in the hopes of picking them off rapidly and effectively. Whether its the lone lrm boat, or a crippled mech you don't hestiate if the opportunity is there. The hapless victim is doomed to a grisly burning death. (this is the most solo oriented role of the flamer)

*****************************************************************

These are the strengths and roles I believe can make the flamer a valuable additon to a Mechwarrior's arsenal. Even in the PvP environment, I think flamers can pull their weight and contribute favorably to the team. All they need is the chance to shine. Stay tuned for my next big topic of discussion - Topic #3: Checks and Counters.

Regards Mechwarriors,
Ambuscade

Edited by Ambuscade, 20 February 2015 - 01:17 PM.

[Lily from animove]

Ambuscade, on 18 February 2015 - 11:44 AM, said:

To be honest, I will be touching on this more in Topic #3 and even more #5, I definitely want to curb flamer heat on self down. Removing the exponential heat gain I think is a must. They make an already underpowered weapon incredibly unwieldy. As long as the 90% heat cap remains in place the fear of stunlock is unfounded.

Even at 90% heat you can still fire certain weapons (varies depending on thresholds I imagine) and machine guns/guass rifles can always be fired. Bare mininum you can still run away to your allies for help (more so now with voip and whatnot). Complete elimination of heat is going too far I think. Energy weapons have infinite ammo, so there should be something there to counter balance that and the inevitable boating of the weapon.

Your 14 flamer Nova is a perfect example (should still be viable, but should come with some serious drawbacks to it as well).

Kassatsu is hitting the point quite well.

Regards Mechwarriors,
Ambuscade

well, actually, try to magine, 14 flamers have what? 9,8dps. Given that even you perfectly stay on a single location (which is impossible with the template mechanics it has and even further on a moving target) you would need like 10+ seconds to flame through a 50t medium CT. And this would require you to get REALLY close to said mech and stay on it the entire time. So even with 0 heat creation fo the user of flamers, a 14 flamers mech by this mechanic already has a huge drawback by its own.

[Metus regem]

Lily from animove, on 18 February 2015 - 11:29 AM, said:

yeah make flamers be no heat emmiting, and they would be an option, hy a single one even causes this heat emchanic? No idea utterly broken.

and then brace yourselves the era of 14flamer Novas xD

OMG

sony music entergayment blocked the vid in germany.

I've had one of my Kit Foxes killed by an 8 cFlamer Dire Wolf, I still find that very embarrassing....

[Ambuscade]

In regards to Lily's previous post:

Its not so much as the damage I am concerned about, rather the amount of heat (assuming a buffed flamer that actually effectively raisies the heat of the enemy) your pumping into the enemy mech. My idea of balance for flamers and boating is this.

1 Flamer - > Cannot rapidly heat up a mech, but you can hold the trigger down for a long time before heat on self becomes a problem (throw on some exponential heat on target mech and a single flamer is still servicable).

4-6 Flamers - > Can quickly raise the heat of an enemy mech, but still requires time to work. The heat on self is a lot more of an issue but still managable.

7+ Flamers - > Creates an intense burst of heat that rapidly hits the opponents 90% heat cap. However, with so many flamers the heat allows only short bursts before potential shutdown (i.e you can quickly burst the opponent to 90% but you get pretty hot yourself and its a more difficult heat management challenge.

To simplify the above even more, imagine a standard bell curve. The X-axis is number of flamers and the Y-axis is flamer effectiveness. The top of the bell represents the 4-6 flamer range, you get the most bang for you buck here. On either side you have fewer or greater number of flamers but diminishing returns on performance (this being due to slow heat inducement on target with less then 4, or difficult heat management at 7 and up).

As I say in Topic #2, the flamer's focus should not be on damage (every weapon in the game (tag and narc excluded) deals damage better), but rather on its heat inducing qualities against the target.

Hope that clears it up a bit for you.

Regards Mechwarriors,
Ambuscade

[Ambuscade]

Yesterday, 2/19/15, I found out about a NGNG podcast "Mechs, Devs, and Beer #17: Paul Inouye." In between the 40 - 50 minute period, the discussion turns to the flamer (much to my utter elation).

Paul said that they were seeking to remove the blinding aspect of the flamer (calling it a form of stunlock). At the moment, tasked to the art guys, this was the primary focus. After that issue had been fixed, Paul would then turn to buffing the flamer. He emphasized cranking up the enemies heat over damage would be the focus (but a little damage improvement).

Although I personally love the blinding aspect of the flamer, I am willing to lose that if it means a better flamer later on. Also, his stance on heat inducing functionality of over damage made me quite happy (as it is my stance). At the moment I am working on a suggestion for the blinding issue to be posted in Feature Suggestions. In the meantime, Topic #3: Checks and Counter will be coming tomorrow.

Regards Mechwarriors,
Ambuscade

[Ambuscade]

Topic #3: Checks and Counters

It is just as important to highlight the weaknesses of the flamer as its strengths. Additionally, I will be explaining possible measures to ensure its not overly broken when it is buffed. So, without further adieu lets dive in.

*********************************************

Weaknesses:

• Range - this is the most glaring weakness of the flamer, with a base range of 90m. As long as the enemy flamer mech can't close the gap, then the flamer's threat is negated. Even though the enemy may outspeed you (i.e. light mechs), simply legging the attacker (the best solution for knocking out lights to begin with) denies this advantage. Whether crippling a leg or simply outspeeding the attacker yourself, you can ensure the flamer is out of range.

• Heat - even though I am proposing curbing the flamer's heat generation on the user, it should remain a drawback of the weapon system. Heat determines the burn time of the flamer (continuous) or the number of allowable volleys (single shot, front-loaded). A very important balancing attribute. In particular, it should be a challenge(though not too difficult) in both mech design and pilot skill to balance heat on self and heat on target.

• Visibility - much like real world flamethrowers, flamers tend to attract a good deal of attention on the battlefield. The MWO flamer graphic, though visually spectacular, is extremely hard to miss. Couple this with a what should be a very potent threat of overheating targets and you have a weapon that draws aggro like nothing else. While this can be a boon for causing distractions it also draws a lot of fire to your mech as well. More incoming fire means more chances of taking serious damage, being crippled, or outright killed.

• Low Damage - every other weapon in MWO, excluding TAG and Narc, does more damage with better range than the flamer. Therefore, the choice to take the flamer will always be a sacrifice of damage for utility. In a damage centric environment in PvP, this is a tough choice. The utility has to be strong enough a gain to warrant the sacrifice. Even if it is, it requires the pilot to put that utility to effective use so that is worth the damage lost. Furthermore, the pilot must be wary of bad positioning that leaves them outgunned and likely outranged as well.

• Knowledge - information is a powerful tool, by simplying locking onto a target with "r" you gain insights on the enemy. One of those key insights is weapon loadout. By detecting the presence of a flamer armament, one can then take advantage of the above weaknesses. To quote W40k Dawn of War: "Knowledge is power, use it well."

*****************************************************

Balancing Measures

Now some may be concerned that with a buffed flamer the above may not be enough to keep it in check. Thankfully, MWO already has several mechanisms we can utilize. The Heat Cap is one of the most obvious. By raising or even lowering it, we can tweak the effectiveness of flamer attacks (I will go more in detail about this relation in Topic #5).

Though many do not like it, ghost heat can also be applied to help curb boating of the flamer.

Finally, simply tweaking the stats of the flamer can help raise or lower its effectiveness as well.

*******************************************************

These are the most important weaknesses of the flamer and but a few possible balancing mechanisms. Thanks for your continued support and stay tuned for Topic #4: FLD, DOT, or Both.

Regards Mechwarriors,
Ambuscade

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

PGI should take a page from MechCommander. Make the Flamer a very-short-range PPFLD energy option.

1 ton, 1 crit, 5 damage, 5 heat, 5s cooldown, 3 heat to target. Put the range at 90/180, or even leave it capped at a hard 90m.

The cFlamer is half the weight. PGI could leave it with the same stats otherwise, or bump the heat up one, or the cooldown up by a second, or whatever.

Doing this to the Flamer fills a large gap in the weapon roster, while changing a trash weapon that only trolls and people without choice (Puma drivers, for one) bring along into something that offers a real decision about whether or not to take it instead of a SL, SPL, or ML (its most direct competitors).

[NinjaTom]

Where did that heat build up come from o.0.....

cause from the video it only started overheating when you were doing damage?????

[jlawsl]

I had a discussion with my friend over the validity of machine guns and flamers in this game, and what their role was. He is a lifelong battletech fan and reminded me of something I didn't really think about. These weapons whole purpose in previous iterations of the game were as anti infantry/anti protomech/light vehicle weapons. In this game, if there were such npcs or enemies, flamers would be an asset as they are, but they do need changing in order to deal with the fact that they are almost ineffective against other mechs.

I think a scaled damage over time/heat over time shot that last a certain duration with a recharge would fit a flamer-
You fire a flamer, you can continue firing for, lets say, up to five seconds before it cuts off and has a recharge. The heat would be scaled to how long you hold down the fire button. EXAMPLE-hold fire for 1 second, 1 heat on target, 1 heat on you, 1 damage on target. For two seconds, 2 heat on target+1 for previous second(3), 1 heat on you+1 heat for previous second(2), 2 damage on target+1 damage for previous second(3). 3 seconds, 3 heat on target +2+1 for previous two seconds(6), 1+1+1 heat on you(3), 3+2+1 damage on target(6). And so on.

That is just an example. It could be done at .5 damage and heat or even the current .8 damage. It would pretty much scale like this-If target hit by weapon a in previous second, add modifier. So, if you held a .5 damage, .5 heat weapon on target for a 5 second duration, it would cause you to accumulate 2.5 heat(if the weapon heat was also .5 per second); the enemy mech would take 7.5 heat and 7.5 damage over 5 seconds. That is 1.5 dps overall That could be extreme if you boated a lot of flamers, so lets say heat generation on your mech is .8ps and the effects on the enemy stay at .5. Same damage, same heat on the enemy over time, but you would generate 4 heat over 5 seconds. 1.5 dps and about 1.88 damage per heat.

Just a thought. It would give it a higher dps then a SL and a slightly higher dps then a SPL but at a far shorter range over a longer duration with additional heat to the enemy. Its damage per heat would be higher then a SL, but lower then a SPL(at .8 hps generation). Its DPS/T would be a 1.5 average, which would be higher then a SPL but lower then a SL. Its HPS would be higher, but it would also be adding heat to the enemy, and have a shorter range.

Oh, and maybe give it a 2-2.25 second cooldown once you let off the flame. I guess it would kind of be almost like a laser you could control the duration of the beam.

Edited by jlawsl, 21 February 2015 - 08:24 AM.

[Molossian Dog]

I very much approve of this thread, but I am alarmed that the greatest flaw of the flamer wasn´t even touched yet.


The drawings you make with it do NOT last!

You have no idea what wonderful pictures and uplifting slogans decorating the countryside you would have run into otherwise...

[Sereglach]

Very solid thread, many solid points. I wholeheartedly approve of the goals of this thread. Echos the points that I had made several years ago now, and have been fighting for ever since. It's a pity that we were promised reengineering of the weapon system in January of 2014 (being told by Paul it was nearly completed in February of 2014).

However, the recent NGNG podcast that you cite (Thank you, Ambuscade, for pointing that out) greatly restored some of my faith in PGI. The kick in the teeth to the flamer in the last town hall, "You want a use for your flamer, there's a use for your flamer" really did a great deal to destroy it. It felt pretty damn mocking. With this renewed push on actually seeing the weapon get some love, and Paul stating that progress is being made, I may be inclined to pick up an Artic Cheetah because of it. It'll be nice to have a clan mech that also always carried a flamer on it.

[Choppah]

Agreed, flamer needs a complete rework. A lot of what is there already can be salvaged, but the values need rebalancing.

1. No blinding. As mentioned above this is being removed/toned down, for good reason, being stunlocked by heat while blind is terrible. Personally, I would love to see a more blowtorch like flame emitting from a flamer (bigger end of the flame coming from the emitter). Red/orange for IS, blue/white for clan.

2. Damage should be at least usable. I disagree with the original decision of making MG and Flamers less than 1 dps and increasing their crit chance. It makes them worthless until armor is finally stripped, where they then do stupid amounts of damage.Translating from TT, 2 dps for 3 hps would be fine.

3. Heat applied to target should remain less than heat gained from weapon. I think appropriate values would be 1 hps to armored sections, 2 hps for stripped. So at 3 hps generated from each flamer, the flamer mech would still overheat before the target, but now it will be a predictable linear increase instead of exponential.

4. These changes may necessitate the removal of increased crit chance, which I would be fine with, if only to have niche but usable weapon. However, if the changes above were not enough, I would love to see a armor debuff mechanic instead of crit chance. Example, 5% reduction in damage absorbed by armor per flamer, so 4 flamers after 1 second would reduce the effectiveness of armor by 20%. When the flamer stops firing, the debuff slowly wears off (10% a sec) capping out at 5 seconds max.

Edited by Choppah, 21 February 2015 - 01:34 PM.