I did bring up this idea after reading the thread to Watchmaker yesterday,
It would require ALOT of new stuff added and mechanics and physics and testing, not to say it is not a good idea but maybe something for the future, perhaps add this to the ammo thread as a H2O Round?
It's very exciting to hear that the devs are discussing this! I don't think it should be incorporated as an H2O round, for a few reasons.
For one, the knock-back of the weapon is vital, I feel, to it's balancing, as you destabilize the position of friendly ships as you extinguish. Not to mention the weapon is supposed to be a soft counter against ramming vessels.
The lack of damage is also vital. H2O ammo would also give weapons that already do damage a support role that could make them overpowered. I'm no expert, but it seems the balancing process of trying to add extinguishing potential to every weapon slot and weapon type in the game would be a nightmare.
You mentioned that this would take a lot of work, but even if you did make the ammo eliminate direct DPS and do knock-back, I can't be sure but I would imagine that balancing the game with this addition would be far more daunting than just adding a whole other weapon: trying to individually tailor the effect of H2O ammo to each gun so that the extinguishing power, knock-back power, and physical behavior of the weapon fire are all suitable pros and cons for use in that weapon slot/ship versus the largest number of ships which also might have a variety of different weapons that might have that ammo type...
It just seems to go on and on instead of keeping it simple and saying, "New support light weapon, does it's own thing with incendiary but other ammos affect it like a shorter, upside-down flamethrower arc."
Certainly seems a lot simpler to my non-programmer mind, especially with regards to competitive balancing. And if this isn't an addition that can be made right away, lets not forget we're working to improve an already stellar game, and I'm certainly willing to wait a good while to see it gets implemented right : )