Heat Sink

[Spud Nick]

Small buff to heat sink ammo: Puts out 3 stacks of fire when ammo is loaded.

[Zyem]

How about an EoT (Extinguish over Time)? Every second it removes a stack of fire.

The reason I suggest this is because currently, it is possible to set a weapon on fire, load in heatsink and it will burn indefinitely. But if you had heatsink loaded in already, it would be completely immune to the fire.

Have it EoT makes it tend towards its natural state (non-burning and immune).

[Captain Smollett]

This would certainly be a step in making gunners more useful.

[RearAdmiralZill]

More like making heatsink borderline required in a gunner's loadout like it used to be.

[Crafeksterty]

But that would be playing with fire. No i litterally mean it. If you want heatsink usefull, then fire needs to be more dangerous. And fire is dangerous.


Heatsink has always been usefull, to me atleast. It gives more bullets than greased, where the mercury and heavy flak have 3 shots. Not only that, heatsink does actually do more damage than charged in merc and H.flaks matter.


It does need some kind of buff, but an apparent buff. I always support the idea of the ammo types need to be more saturated. As in, charged is for DMG. Greased is for SPEED. Incindiary is for FIRE and lesmok is for RANGE. Heavy clip is quite alright on that subject. Removes all recoil.

But heatsink is actually a tough ammo to saturate. Its a mix of everything atm. But i do believe it is the fires fault. I dont remember the ammount of stacks of fire it takes to put a gunner away from his gun and how much it was before.

Right now, a small reduction in stack requierment to put a gunner away from his gun may be neccesary to put heatsink back in action.

[Thomas]

I think it's fine as is. However, if you can't put out the fire that already exists on a gun with heat sink loaded in, then that might actually be a bug of some kind.

But it gives a big boost to clip size, actually increasing the amount of ammo on guns like heavy flaks and carronades, not to mention making your weapon immune to disable when your playing against enemies that are a little fire heavy. It especially comes in handy when that fire heavy enemy is a squid with a flamethrower. Your gun is immune to the fire and turns faster, letting you be all up on that little squid when they try to ambush you.

[Squidslinger Gilder]

Fire is not as dangerous as it was a year ago. When guns would catch fire, they'd be knocked out entirely. This made Heatsink a must carry tool and a reason for it's existence. Then Muse changed it and we went through most of this years with super weak fire.

[Crafeksterty]

You are saying it like it was a bad thing that they changed it. Of what i heard, a single stack of fire knocked any one on the gun out. A SINGLE FIRE.

I can only imagine heatsink being a must but also some kind of fiery offencive too just because of how broken it was.


I do want less stacks to put a gunner away from his gun. And know that chemspray honestly nullifies fire by a tremendous amounts of helps...

Hades does damn good damage versus baloons. If that baloon is chemsprayed, it is just flinched. How will the hadez gunner know that the baloon in chemmed? So.... fire is pretty weak if countered correctly. But i still want to be abit more forced to use more counters. Bit less fire stacks for pulling a gunner out of his gun may be a good way of making heatsink viable... uh like i said before :L

[Captain Smollett]

Flame throwers used to be brutal.  The game was dominated by heavy flak goldfish, gatt flak pyras and all flak galleons for organized crew. 

Still almost everyone took a flamethrower somewhere on their ship; if you could get in range for a flamer tri/bifecta you could potentially turn the fight around and shut off the enemies weaponry in one sweep.  Oh and flamer squids were just really really cruel agianst new players (I remember being victamized by a few while I was learning and then of course victamizing other new players with them as I got better).