126 replies to this topic

[AlmightyTundra]

Caballo, on 11 March 2012 - 01:33 AM, said:

I think you're wrong, and here's why:

You didn't take in account the fact that the atlas was ALREADY overheated and ALREADY shut down and the attacker don't.

This means the atlas have to dissipate some of it's heat before restarting up. If the flamer heats up the atlas any number of Cº, it will need the time to dissipate that heat, plus the one that comes from it's original overheat. Unless it's got a big bunch of sinks (and in that case it shouldn't overheated itself, but that's just an assumption, the pilot would've made a mistake or just needed to perform an alpha... who knows), the odds are on an ammo explosion.

AAAAAAAAnyway, not as hard core as Scav went, but a little lighter, my idea of the flamers is the following: They should be a persistent mosquito, but not a bullet to the brain, as they become in MW4.

indeed >_>

[EDMW CSN]

In MWO, no mech should be alone. A flamer Jenner will still have a lot less HS than a Atlas so it cannot keep the Atlas shutdown for long before pushing itself to shut down.

In any case if a Jenner managed to get MG / Flamer range to your Atlas's blind spot, you are screwed either way, because if he was packing SRMs and med lasers, he would have taken part your rear torso in record time.

Teammates rectify that issue, unless they are all sleeping on the job or they are dead. And the latter scenario will mean ya screwed anyway if the enemy still has 4 to 5 mechs left.

Edited by [EDMW]CSN, 11 March 2012 - 07:13 AM.

[Vladimir Lenin]

Oh man Hunchback(2572) with flametrowers and jump pack is not classic flame camper is it?
One mission in Mechcomander against five of em just make me mad, awessome combat puzzle.
Ofc lets see in real situation, one light mech with one burner cannot heat up such giant like an Atlas.
P.S. or it will be a Clan Hunchback II c modification?

Edited by Vladimir Lenin, 11 March 2012 - 07:55 AM.

[Canned Heat]

I think the idea of a flamer maybe different to some people...for the tech level this era takes place in and as a military application a flamer would not be a jet of napalm spraying from the mech. This wouldnt be hot enough in my mind to effect a mech. Lets switch to a more proven industrial application thats used to cut through all metals like........a plasma arc welder. Anyone with experiance with one of these and a bit of imagination could see its potential as a weapon for this era and a good "reboot" of what we all may come to expect from previous mech games. A flamer capable of cutting a limb off and overheating a mech at the same time seems very cool to me...hehe

[God of War]

the whole idea screams: Face Palm!

[Canned Heat]

God of War, on 11 March 2012 - 07:38 AM, said:

the whole idea screams: Face Palm!

troll much? try putting up a plausible idea to counter it instead of a cheap one line bash. i see from your location you got the biggest FACE PALM...WWII ring a bell?

[Felicitatem Parco]

Canned Heat, on 11 March 2012 - 07:45 AM, said:

troll much? try putting up a plausible idea to counter it instead of a cheap one line bash. i see from your location you got the biggest FACE PALM...WWII ring a bell?

*facepalm*

Anyways, the poll is supposed to be about single scout Mechs, and not Lances of Firestarters... I'm asking because it's apparent that Flamers will be in the game, but it's mostly a Mech-on-Mech game and not an anti-infantry game. They might tweak the rules to make Flamers more effective against Mechs for MW:O's sake.

[SnowDragon]

Yeah, if the scout mech gets that close to an Atlas, you deserve the ammo explosion that's coming for you.

But on the same note, no Scout mech is ever going to be able to pack enough flames onto it to trouble an atlas with heat. It'll blow itself up long before the Atlas goes up. Remember, an Ammo detonation is the full compliment of rounds doing their damage to the internal structure. A Machine Gun with a full tonne of ammo (400 rounds) Each doing 1 damage each did FOUR FLIPPING HUNDRED damage when the store went up.

[Gremlich Johns]

Bring on the Inferno SRMs!!!

[Strum Wealh]

Prosperity Park, on 11 March 2012 - 09:31 AM, said:

*facepalm*

Anyways, the poll is supposed to be about single scout Mechs, and not Lances of Firestarters... I'm asking because it's apparent that Flamers will be in the game, but it's mostly a Mech-on-Mech game and not an anti-infantry game. They might tweak the rules to make Flamers more effective against Mechs for MW:O's sake.

But, what of a single FS9-H Firestarter - one light (35-ton) 'Mech with four flamers?

I believe my argument still stands - a single Firestarter or Firestarter-esque 'Mech with a small cluster of 3-4 flamers should not be able to keep another 'Mech in "perpetual heat-induced shut-down", but it should still represent a viable and significant threat to any other 'Mech(s) in the area (especially those that tend to run hot and/or have pilots who are less adept at heat management).

And a coordinated attack by a full lance of such 'Mechs (a total of 16 flamers for a full lance of Firestarters) probably could - and, IMO, should - be able to roast any other single 'Mech into oblivion, yes?

[Vexgrave Lars]

If you rig your mech to do that task, then good luck with success!

[Corsair114]

Flamers need to be tipping point weapons. Giving equal or *more* heat to the user as a balancing factor vs the reward of using the at the correct time is a heat induced shutdown. They ought to be absolutely vicious when you're in a favorable situation for them (ballistic weapons + flamers vs a laser boat).

You probably should not be able to carry a lone flamer with the expectation of being able to find a napping 'mech and keep it shutdown indefinitely, as that would mean one flamer generates enough heat to overcome the base 10 heatsinks of the chassis plus however many additional it is equipped with. Sounds like it would be awesome, but consider, what would happen if you had three or four of these same uber-flamers on a 'mech? You'd be looking at a minimum of 10 heat on target from each flamer, easily reaching or exceeding 40 heat and making it possible to have a 'mech that one-shot shuts down another 'mech. If heat suicides could occur, this effect would be even more powerful. This would be abysmal for gameplay.

Take a long hard look at what flamer boats could do MW3: a fast moving Shadow Cat or Strider could sidle up to a 'mech end cause so much heat on target that it would instantly explode (regardless of its tonnage or heatsinks). This is something to avoid.

Flamers can let you extend a shutdown, make it worse, or make it more likely to occur (or heat-induced death, if the pilot is wildly overriding), but you should not be able to keep a 'mech, *any* 'mech, shutdown indefinitely with even an array of flamers.

[Alaric Hasek]

In the tabletop game this is so. This is not the tabletop game nor is it any previous Mechwarrior video game.

DOubtless you've seen the videos where any number of things about weapon systems are different from the tabletop game (a heat bar that does not creep up incrementally, lag time of ballistic weapons striking the target downrange, etc.).
We should expect corresponding changes in tactics too: people trying to avoid missile hits by ducking behind terrain, flamers keeping opposing 'mechs from cooling down, and such.
Perhaps a flamer-armed 'mech (such as the Firestarter) won't be able to keep a 'mech shutdown as the victim's heat sinks go to work... but we'll see, I guess.

frostfly, on 10 March 2012 - 11:17 PM, said:

No, and here's why. Flamers in game have the option of increasing the opposing mechs heat by 2 points. How many flamers can you fit on a light mech...and just to make it fun,each one increased the heat of the firing mech by 3. Odds are the atlas has more Heatsinks then a light mech...so light mech will overheat and shut down...and the atlas will stand up and blast him with the AC.

Bad hypothetical is bad.

[wwiiogre]

canon table top according to the new rules can only have 15 total heat added externally per turn, so if that is in any way translated, meaning the mech can remove that much each turn thru its own heatsinks, then it should fire back up, but if thru engine damage or heatsink damage that it could not flush that much external heat in a turn and it kept it past safety protocols and wouldn't let it restart then tough, suck the flames and stay down.

Now, the firestarter mech that could actually only bring 12 extra heat a round, would also be slowly overheating if it did so until it couldn't flame because it was shut down for to much heat. Now saying you got a fifth flamer and added some extra heat sinks and now can actually put 15 heat a round on a shut down mech, then You have made yourself a one trick pony, but if you can keep an atlas or an awesome shut down for 5 or 6 rounds or a about a minute while your team blows it up or the pilot finally ejects in disgust then more power to you. But you did so because you took out all of your other weapons to become a pyro and if and when you can pull it off, awesome, but in reality good luck with that. Since flamers are mainly used as anti infantry weapons in the lore of BT and we do not get to kill infantry. So no point.

I like the Firestarter as a mech and it is iconic and if they make heat an issue there will be a place in the game for them. Especially if things can catch on fire and produce smoke. Then the Firestarter becomes important for dynamically changing the battlefield. Especially if the battle took place in a desert and the extra heat becomes even that more damaging.

chris

[Orzorn]

If flamers are strong enough to do that, then yes *snickers*, we should be able to.

Besides, what the hell is an Atlas doing out by itself without its heavy support keeping the lights and mediums off of it? It deserves to die, whether to flamers or any other weapon, for that grave mistake.

[Endai Baekem]

Why can I not just flush all my coolant and blast the little b.ugg.er off the face of the earth?

Edited by Endai Baekem, 11 March 2012 - 05:00 PM.

[Orzorn]

Endai Baekem, on 11 March 2012 - 04:57 PM, said:

Why can I not just flush all my coolant and blast the little b.ugg.er off the face of the earth?

Coolant was not present in the gameplay videos nor has it been mentioned by the developers. Its likely it will not make an appearance. Personally, I prefer it that way.

[Azantia]

Using Canon as a guide :

I.S. Flamers are 1 ton each, 1 crit each and deal 2 damage, generate 3 heat, and increase the heat of the mech struck by 2 (later rules, in the beginning you had to choose between 2 damage or 2 heat in tabletop, which doesnt really apply here, so lets assume damage is dealt and heat is raised)

If we are using single heat sinks, most mechs mount extra...very rarely do you see a single heat sinks design only incorporate 10 heat sinks unless it uses a high concentration of ballistic weapons and doesnt need them.

Now, Atlas designs

Atlas AS7-D = 20 single heat sinks.
,

So, just to KEEP this atlas shutdown for a few extra seconds you need 10 Flamers (10 Tons of weaponry), which on an alpha strike would generate 30 heat, the equivalent of 3 Inner Sphere PPCs or 2 I.S. ER PPCs.

No other Atlas variant uses less than 20 heat sinks, many carry more, from 22 to 26 singles to 15 doubles for 30 heat dissipation, which would mean even 10 Flamers wouldnt be able to keep the Atlas shutdown.

Dont really have an opinion cause it doesnt matter. We will see how Flamers function with time, either during beta or upon release. If its a viable tactic, im sure people will do it, but ultimately, PGI uses Canon as their guide and I have found that they are just as much fans of the universe as myself or anyone in the community, so I would think its safe to use the above information as a rule of thumb. It would be disappointing if Flamers were too powerful, and likewise would be disappointing if they were too weak and pointless to use. Time will tell

Edited by Azantia, 11 March 2012 - 05:19 PM.

[Iron]

I voted other. I think a flamer should create heat for the other mech. But I dont think one flamer will keep a mech shut down. If you have a mech with the flamers to keep the big guy sleeping flame away.

[Orzorn]

Azantia, on 11 March 2012 - 05:17 PM, said:

Dont really have an opinion cause it doesnt matter. We will see how Flamers function with time, either during beta or upon release. If its a viable tactic, im sure people will do it, but ultimately, PGI uses Canon as their guide and I have found that they are just as much fans of the universe as myself or anyone in the community, so I would think its safe to use the above information as a rule of thumb. It would be disappointing if Flamers were too powerful, and likewise would be disappointing if they were too weak and pointless to use. Time will tell

Indeed. However, the real use of flamers isn't to force a shutdown, no that is much too powerful of an ability. The true use of a flamer is to keep your opponent from being able to ride a heat line or to fire all their weapons. You artificially keep their heat high so they're forced to make difficult firing decisions. Do they play your game and fire only a few weapons at a time, or do you take a chance and fire a lot in hopes of getting rid of the target, but potentially shutting down?

Now, a lance of mechs with flamers could shut down a mech, but they wouldn't be too useful in a real fight.