22 replies to this topic

[SockSlayer]

I do appreciate your analyzing so far, as its not a cut and dry answer, and it actually looks at the varying angles of it. The discussion is helping me scale back my own ideas about it, and get more real about it.

I do feel that balancing the flamer is a challenge, as its not just every other weapon with damage, but has the heat damage element too, plus its exponential heat generation makes sense, as some weapons even in real life can overheat or jam from long usage.

Now flamers can have regular damage, it just can't outweigh its heat damage effect, explanation below:

the Current Flamer does have the right stats that are general characteristics (or rule) of flamers that the devs have programmed:

1. Its range is shorter than any weapon, as it is supposed to be.
2. Its damage is supposed be less than any other weapon, except the narc, as in some past games, it deals 0.1 damage.
3. It should deal heat damage, and cause heat to self when exponential kicks in. Its Heat damage should exceed regular damage, not like plasma cannon which is damage first, then a little of heat damage.

I think where it is failing is when we get to exact characteristics instead of general:

-Even in ww2: tanks had flamethrowers that could do 150m, namely the Churchill crocodile, now while the mechs use plasma vs napalm, the flamerthrower has lost 60m...in 1000 years from now??? Kind of unlikely. General characteristic satisfied...but exact characteristic is off. 150m would still satisfy the general characteristic as shortest range weapon. ECM was 90m, and was increased to 120m, so this is not out of the question.

-Heat Damage should out exceed regular damage. Current stats satisfy the general characteristic, but once we get to exact, the flamer is like plasma cutting torch...should it be doing a bit more regular damage then that? Thus why 0.2 to 0.4 regular damage would not fail the general characteristic, as it is half of the damage of light MG. Heat Damage could be dropped as low as 2.0, thus taking away the extreme griefing effect, while still having more heat damage then regular damage as required. HSL can be moved to 6 to then match up with other small weapons

-To make it simple, general characteristic can still be satisfied even if the exact characteristic is changed, so as long as it does not break through a set range, allowing a better weapon, and hopefully a less annoying one for both user and foe.

Sidenote: if heat damage is dropped to 2.0, regular damage 0.2 to 0.4, range to 150m, general characteristic or rule of flamers is still reached, but less annoying for flamer players to use, or foes to get hit by.

Conclusion: General rule of flamers were successfully implemented as they should be, now to get the exact characteristics right.

My new suggested 2.0 heat damage instead of 4.0, is because all other small weapons have 6 hsl, and the micro lasers have 12, so if it is going to fit as a small weapon that it is, the heat damage has to be dropped more to line up the hsl values. This also means no one gets to grief mechs with just 4 flamers, and has to actually be invested in getting better mechs to use the higher hsl limit. Lots to digest here, but good analysis will get the job done.

Edited by SockSlayer, 02 September 2024 - 11:03 PM.

[Ttly]

I don't think reducing the heat damage is warranted, as it is 4 flamers can inflict like what, 70% heat (taking account target's dissipation) within 5 seconds? It sounds a lot, but for that much tonnage/hardpoints used you could've fired 4 medium laser/c-ersl almost twice and did almost 40 damage instead, not to mention having real range to play with.
The flamer's current main gimmick of supporting an ally mid-brawl by overheating an distracted target as it is to guarantee a kill by overheat (which isn't reflected to the flamer user's score) or disabling said enemy from firing back without overheating would take a major blow if its heat damage were to be nerfed even if it were to gain more HSL (hardpoints are at premium) or slightly more range (you'd want vehicles that are mobile enough to even get into position and the proposed extra range isn't significant enough to change this).

Edited by Ttly, 04 September 2024 - 11:07 AM.

[SockSlayer]

[color=#0693f4]Ttly[/color],

Assuming your scenario in where heat damage is not to be reduced, I think it would be still not overpowered to add some regular damage back (0.2 to 0.4 regular damage), and increase range to 150m.

Lights already can get into the 90m range easily, so 150m actually would not help at times, as making a larger circle around assaults mean they can track the light better to defeat them.

It is Heavies and Assaults that really could use the range boost, as its been a lights only weapon in many cases.

Whatever the case, I have found players, flamer users and not, who are annoyed by them right now.
-For those who use them, hard to get good scores since no regular damage, and a frustratingly small range that doesn't even make historically any sense, see ww2 example above.
-For those getting hit by them, they can overheat a mech still just a little too quick.

Note: The HSL increase would actually be better or the same even if heat damage is slightly reduced as you would also not have to pay a terrible ghost heat penalty.

Edited by SockSlayer, 03 September 2024 - 07:04 PM.