82 replies to this topic

[Sereglach]

FupDup, on 18 February 2016 - 08:42 PM, said:

*snip*

All too true . . . let alone the terrible scaling mechanics that have been employed for the Flamer's use, as well. There are much simpler and more common sense oriented solutions out there then what PGI employed for this hotfix.

However, you also forgot one detail. The employed DPS of most weapons in MWO is also significantly higher than their TT counterparts. Thusly, not only does the flamer do 1/4 the damage of it's TT counterpart, but it's doing 1/4 the "TT DPS" when other weapons are doing significantly higher values. For example, the AC/2 does 2.78 DPS when its TT counterpart would also be doing a theoretical .2 DPS. Compared against its direct competition, the Medium Laser does 1.28 DPS when it'd do .5 in TT; and the Small Pulse Laser does 1.45 DPS when it'd be doing .3 in TT.

The fact that MWO isn't operating on a 10 second scale -like TT does- exacerbates the issue of the pitiful existence of the Flamer.

Again, to reiterate my previous points, setting it to something like 1.0 DPS, 1.0 Heat DPS, and .5 HPS sets flat, fixed values that aren't exploitable, they aren't overdoing anything, they aren't going to lock anyone down, and they certainly aren't OP or absurd in any way.

Void Angel, on 18 February 2016 - 08:55 PM, said:

*snip*

You know what they say about the road to hell and good intentions? Another thing that's also pertinent is the fact that sometimes the simplest solution is also the best. In this case, PGI has just kept piling on more and more convoluted mechanics to the Flamer that are neither intuitive or even logical.

Instead of just reengineering the Flamer, like they were going to, they just adjusted the values to slap on a Band-Aid . . . and then the problem that I reported to them over a year ago -that they ignored because the Flamer was laughably junk- suddenly became a serious issue. A terrible "I told you so" moment after I was going off about it since the patch notes were announced.

Void Angel, on 18 February 2016 - 09:00 PM, said:

*snip*

I don't have a copy of Total Warfare readily available, but might want to check the newest edition of rules. I'd love it if they could be quoted, for sake of the debate points. Last I played the Flamer does 2 points of Damage, Generates 3 heat, and does 1d6 heat damage to mechs. When vs. Infantry, that 1d6 heat damage is converted into a bonus 4d6 physical damage due to the conflagration that the Flamer creates on impact.

[Wintersdark]

Meh. I'm just happy they are (at least situationally) useful. I've learned to appreciate that much here: you can always want things to be better, but as utterly ****** up is always a possibility, when something goes from 4 years of uselessness to "at least somewhat useful" that makes me happy. I'll take that, without complaints.

[Sereglach]

Wintersdark, on 18 February 2016 - 09:31 PM, said:

Meh. I'm just happy they are (at least situationally) useful. I've learned to appreciate that much here: you can always want things to be better, but as utterly ****** up is always a possibility, when something goes from 4 years of uselessness to "at least somewhat useful" that makes me happy. I'll take that, without complaints.

My issue with this whole mess is that the biggest flaw in the design, the scaling/acceleration/exponential heat generation mechanic wasn't remedied.

The whole debacle comes from the fact that they slapped Band-Aid values on a broken system and caused a long ago reported exploit to become an actual serious factor in the game. Then, rather than fix the problem, they throw more convoluted matters on the issue.

The weapon needs the actual reengineering it was promised . . . not what we got, which is nothing short of an utter mess.

Edited by Sereglach, 18 February 2016 - 09:44 PM.

[Scanz]

old FX flamers better!

[Jack Shayu Walker]

@FupDup

Spoiler

FupDup, on 18 February 2016 - 04:27 PM, said:

The fact that the game even allows it to happen in the first place is utterly redunkulous.



I have an idea.

It's a very radical idea.

Are you ready for this?

Brace for impact.

It's coming.

Here it comes...

Why not just make them generate a higher (static) heat on the user than they do now?

There you go, there's your limiter. The user can't keep Flaming forever because they'll reach their own threshold.


And of course, there's already the 90% hard limit so that the victim can still move around and fire low-heat weapons no matter what happens, while the user can go all the way to 100%.

Heat by itself is the natural damage limiter in the game for nearly all mechs, it doesn't have to have any convoluted exponential equations.

-----

Alternatively, you can reduce the heat on target because 4.5 per second for just one Flamer is pretty damn high. For reference, a Clan mech with 23 DHS (10 TruDubs) cools off at 4.54 heat per second...

FupDup, on 18 February 2016 - 04:27 PM, said:

The fact that the game even allows it to happen in the first place is utterly redunkulous.



I have an idea.

It's a very radical idea.

Are you ready for this?

Brace for impact.

It's coming.

Here it comes...

Why not just make them generate a higher (static) heat on the user than they do now?

There you go, there's your limiter. The user can't keep Flaming forever because they'll reach their own threshold.


And of course, there's already the 90% hard limit so that the victim can still move around and fire low-heat weapons no matter what happens, while the user can go all the way to 100%.

Heat by itself is the natural damage limiter in the game for nearly all mechs, it doesn't have to have any convoluted exponential equations.

-----

Alternatively, you can reduce the heat on target because 4.5 per second for just one Flamer is pretty damn high. For reference, a Clan mech with 23 DHS (10 TruDubs) cools off at 4.54 heat per second...

FupDup, on 18 February 2016 - 04:27 PM, said:

The fact that the game even allows it to happen in the first place is utterly redunkulous.



I have an idea.

It's a very radical idea.

Are you ready for this?

Brace for impact.

It's coming.

Here it comes...

Why not just make them generate a higher (static) heat on the user than they do now?

There you go, there's your limiter. The user can't keep Flaming forever because they'll reach their own threshold.


And of course, there's already the 90% hard limit so that the victim can still move around and fire low-heat weapons no matter what happens, while the user can go all the way to 100%.

Heat by itself is the natural damage limiter in the game for nearly all mechs, it doesn't have to have any convoluted exponential equations.

-----

Alternatively, you can reduce the heat on target because 4.5 per second for just one Flamer is pretty damn high. For reference, a Clan mech with 23 DHS (10 TruDubs) cools off at 4.54 heat per second...

This suggestion advocates for making flamers better on dedicated flamer boats, but worse on general use mechs who want to use the flamer for utility. Flamers should be usable as a method of supression while your mech is cooling off, even if only for a few seconds.

Edited by Jack Shayu Walker, 19 February 2016 - 12:08 AM.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

I legitamently don't understand why people are butthurt over exponential flamer heat? This hotfix just fixed an exploit, what's with all the whining?

[PFC Carsten]

Sad day for Firestarters. Now I'll have to use in-game chat and the forae again for real good flaming.
Oh - and the new graphics effect for flamers is REALLY ugly.

Navid A1, on 18 February 2016 - 07:47 PM, said:

You know that 1 ton flamer is actually ejecting super heated plasma directly from the mech reactor right?

in other words... its not the flamer that is heating up the target... its a freakin fusion reactor doing it. Think of the flamer as a 1 ton nozzle!

I was not really sure about this, so I pulled my comment, but here it is again:
Sipping Plasma from the reactor should make an unreasonbly high amount of flamers not overheat the mech firing them, but instead impair it's own movement and firing rate to the point where there's not enough power from the reactor left to walk or fire anything other than a machine gun. Possibly factoring in engine rating as well.

Edited by PFC Carsten, 19 February 2016 - 02:03 AM.

[Nauht]

Shiney, on 18 February 2016 - 08:53 PM, said:

I can walk on Lava in my Mech - 700 to 1,200 °C (1,292 to 2,192 °F).
Gasoline burning 900 to 1,250 °C

So, a similar effect as lava. How come lava and flamethrowers aren't similar in effect?

If you can explain to me in rl physics your first line, I can attempt to try and explain how rl temps comes into play for fictional mechs.

Otherwise, for the sake of creativity, let it go... let it go...

[ulrin]

plz PGI, bring me back my old blinder...
And... when you flame plasma cut something very close, u can see a star inside the beam....
As im a graphist, i have a proposition for u :
change ur graphist.

Other questions :

- As a compagny, didnt u test every modification on a players panel before introducing them ?
- Moar important, will the mantis green color become glowing in the dark in the future (my urbie really want it !)

[Wintersdark]

Jack Shayu Walker, on 19 February 2016 - 12:14 AM, said:

I legitamently don't understand why people are butthurt over exponential flamer heat? This hotfix just fixed an exploit, what's with all the whining?

This is my feeling. I mean, sure, one flamer can overheat a mech made out of heat sinks eventually... So? So what? Why is that such a big deal?

I like that even just a couple Flamers can be useful, and bringing too many is a disadvantage.

I like that the system works best with 2-4 Flamers, with more offering diminishing returns due to pushing up the heat too fast. It stops the oh so typical boating race where he who mounts more wins.

Edited by Wintersdark, 19 February 2016 - 03:54 AM.

[Wintersdark]

Sereglach, on 18 February 2016 - 09:42 PM, said:

My issue with this whole mess is that the biggest flaw in the design, the scaling/acceleration/exponential heat generation mechanic wasn't remedied.

You know, with the old Flamers, this was the LEAST of their problems. People didn't bring them because they were actually useless, not because of the scaling heat generation.

I still don't understand why people are so bent out of shape about scaling heat generation in the first place. Maybe not ideal, but it seems to work.

Are you saying that the Flamers now will not be usable BECAUSE of the scaling heat? That that will be the reason they fail?

[veedubfreak]

The new flamers look like a windproof lighter.

[pacifica812]

veedubfreak, on 19 February 2016 - 06:25 AM, said:

The new flamers look like a windproof lighter.

Edited by pacifica812, 19 February 2016 - 07:38 AM.

[Sereglach]

Wintersdark, on 19 February 2016 - 04:00 AM, said:

You know, with the old Flamers, this was the LEAST of their problems. People didn't bring them because they were actually useless, not because of the scaling heat generation.

I still don't understand why people are so bent out of shape about scaling heat generation in the first place. Maybe not ideal, but it seems to work.

Are you saying that the Flamers now will not be usable BECAUSE of the scaling heat? That that will be the reason they fail?

The convoluted and obscene layers of mechanics that PGI has put in place to "manage" a weapon system and its associated exploit are completely contradictory to the weapon itself.

1. The Flamer of MWO is designed to be a stream fire weapon. Now, because of these mechanics they put in place, it's not really a stream fire weapon, it's a weapon that now has a convoluted mechanic to impose a pseudo-cooldown because of the flawed implementation of its own heat mechanics. Layers of awkward mechanics and implementation do not make a good or functional weapon system.

2. The scaling heat mechanic isn't really functional. This "Band-Aid" fix proves that. The weapon would be exceptionally more functional and useful if PGI just took the simple solution on fixing the weapon system, instead of piling on more and more complicated and obscene metrics onto a system that's flawed from the beginning.

3. Flamers are supposed to do physical damage. It doesn't need to be huge amounts of damage, but it should at least be putting out DPS akin to a MG or Small Laser. It wouldn't be hard to actually have it do physical damage, either, if they actually fixed the problems that the weapon system currently still has . . . namely the scaling heat mechanic.

4. EDIT: Oh, and another huge and glaring issue is that this "fix" still creates a weapon that can be fired in bursts for zero heat, which is just WRONG.

If PGI had gone with a proper fix we'd have a weapon that'd generate some heat on the enemy, but never have the ability to stun-lock anyone. It'd do modest damage, enough to make it useful. It'd generate heat for the wielder . . . even if the trigger is "feathered" or macro'd . . . and there'd be no exploits that would have had to been dealt with OR poorly implemented scaling heat mechanic. THAT would put the Flamer in the spot it's supposed to be in, and not the mess we currently have.

Edited by Sereglach, 19 February 2016 - 08:00 AM.

[Wonderdog]

Why not have flamers negatively affect heatsink cooling efficiency, rather than actually heating up the mech directly?

[eXorcyst]

So, this issue has divided the community. Because of macro usage. But here is my combat experiences with new flamers (b4 hot fix), albeit the sample size is modest, only some 15 or 20 matches.

I took my 5mpl FSH-9 and made it a 4mpl 2Flamer. I gave up 20% of my damage creation ability for the potential of slowing down damage received overtime. Most of my drops, I was playing with a partner (5mpl FSH-9) in a wolfpack.

Highlights from the fights...

Able to draw off an Adder, I would flame him, partner would hit him, eventually, Adder overheated and died. He died alone. Same match, was able to draw off a TBR, while it was a much more challenging fight, Running in circles through a city, we pushed his heat high enough that he could not alpha us and even shut him down twice, we finished him off. The next mech attacked - he had friends. As I worked his heat up, his friends clobbered me before I could shutdown the SCR we targetted.

Another battle in the same Mechs, he and I waited until a majority of their mechs passed, then we sprang on slow movers and LRM boaters. Together, we made quick work of catapult, then stumbled upon a Dire Wolf and ShadowCat. We weaved through Crimson streets and went after the Cat first. Got him almost disabled and at high heat. The direwolf showed up and alpha'd me, taking my arm. I disengaged the Cat and tried to get to the Direwolf to start him heating up. While circling him, my partner took out the Cat. The Direwolf Legged me and I got him to overheat 4 consecutive times, but he was still able to shoot. he called for help presumable, because I got crushed by LRMs and laser fire from his team mates. The advantage being, the entire team turned to face our two mechs. The rest of my team was able to take advantage and push in on the flanks and they overran the opponent. We harassed and were successful. Caused a disruption and distraction.

Working with other brawlers, I was able to support them by making their opponents suffer for face hugging or ignoring me. The loss of the 1mpl was not significant, but the extra heat could be the difference in keeping my heavy/assault friends alive for another few moments.

I had to pick and choose my moments (as a light harasser would). Locate that laservomit Crab or Nova already running the red line and give them the extra heat to nudge them to overheating,

Downsides...

After my partner in crime left, I could not effectively harass alone, not without getting torn to pieces by opponents in teams. Sure, I could heat one person up, but if they had teamwork, I would usually get thrashed in short order and need to run away to survive.

In the intensity of a fire dance, it was easy to lose track of exactly how long I was flaming. Fire discipline was a must.

Point is this... my friend and I were able to pick off stragglers, at no point could we stunlock anyone, mechanics just don't allow it. My kill counts go down overall, my damage done is lower, but my team success rates have improved overall. Which in the grand scheme is my goal in playing the game.

I had to pick and choose my moments (as a light harasser would). Locate that laservomit Crab or Nova already running the red line and give them the extra heat to nudge them over. Find the LuRMageddoner and slow their volleys down.

Using the flamer involves taking risks and fire discipline. This hot-fix will make this harassing role even more challenging. The extra wait times on the cool down for the weapon will require better discipline. I've yet to play with this hot-fix in place, but will bring my FSH-9 out to play over the weekend. As a harasser, I don't think it will have as dramatic an effect as many think, on first blush. If you are hit-and-running, chances are, you will have the needed time to reset the weapon's 4.75 second counter anyway between shots.

If I can keep the 2x flamer on target for 2s before I pass out of range, I contributed 18 heat to the enemy and .4 damage. As I reposition to another target, it is generally 2 more seconds before I can use the flamer again. I think it will not be an issue.

[Tordin]

Quote

to a point where they effectively became 'heat neutral'

Well using flamers should be heat neutral in use for the user in the first place, or so I heard. It draws from the reactor itself, so the pilot shouldnt be affected. The enemy mech on the other hand should be in bad shape if having heat intensive weapons, meeting a flamer. Its useless with a very few exceptions, even now.

And yeah, it should be WORTH flaming someone. A substatinal cb, exp gain for the effort and sacrifice you have to do, heating up enemy mechs to the point they fail/ shutdown etc. Like with NARCing, tagging, and so on.

Edited by Tordin, 19 February 2016 - 10:20 AM.

[M A S E]

T-Comp MK5 projectile speed also needs to be fixed to 25%, it is the same as MK6 right now at %30

[Bolter01]

^ Its an AC20, what do you want?
I like the model showing the equiped weapons.

BTW anyone experiencing Crashes in the form of the game freezing/locking up at the beginning of a round recently?

[D V Devnull]

<*Looks at patch, gets dismayed...*>

Okay, PGI, un-goof the LRMs already!!!

~D. V. "Quit sabotaging my Mech!" Devnull