Berfing (Buff but also nerf) The chemspray

[Crafeksterty]

I was thinking of something that will help chemspray users, and weaken them. Along with making fire still very viable (Perhaps more).

The underlying problem is how chemspray if used correctly can stop fires completely for a long time.
An added layer to this problem is how active the chemspray demands the player to be for it to be used well.
Making the extinguisher less prefered, and opponents choosing fire weapons non-existant.

So i was thinking...

- Chemspray now gives 75% fire resistance instead of immunity (Or another number)
- But the length of the spray is 80 seconds (Or another number) But there also now shows a timer much like the buff hammer
- Fire stack takeaway stay the same
- Maybe lower cooldown by 1 second

Extinguishers immunity changes to the new resistance of the chemspray.
But heatsink stays as immunity (Or changes to the new resistance)



What does this change?

-Chemsprays become much easier to use and is much less required functionally. It will make the chemspray act more like how its intended with less worries of when the chem spray removes but minor worries for fire poppin in. Proactively, it does better. The ammount of fires that can happen should not be alot and enough for the chemspray to handle it.

-But now fire isnt completely stoppable. Fire can now add fires to chemmed components, but the ammount will be minimal and just enough to warrant chemsprayers to worry a little. The new enemy to the engineers should then be Incendiary Ammo. That ammo along with perhaps fire starting weapons will now break down chemmed components into fire easier. Resulting in fire starters to put ships in fire, but not as chaotically and need to put more effort in adding that fire.

-So since chemsprayers now have a worry, and fire starters can pierce against chemsprayers. Extinguishers will server as the saviour of when the fire is starting to get uncontrollable. With the long spray buff, the extinguisher should have no problem fixing any large stacks while the components wont suddenly lose their buff anytime soon.



=In summary, the chemspray Berf will make it easy and not mind consuming to use, the Extinguisher required with it, Fire starters still able to cause fire just need to add more effort into it, like incindeary that may be more usefull because of this.


Whats the catch?

Other than changing a little bit on crew playstyle with the addition of extinguishers now being more usefull and incendiary threatning to pierce the resistance harder, its how The ammount of fire chance % works versus fire resistance %. I dont know how it would calculate.

So if my flamer which has 22% fire cause chance by default, added with incendiary (20%+), then it becomes 42%. The 75% fire resistance would then take 75% of that 42%. Resulting in the component would instead have 11% chance to gain a fire stack from the weapon... ?

Does that sound good? Bad? Becuause versus Banshee which is 35 (55 with incend) on direct hit, 26 (46 with incend) on AoE would Coralate to 9 (14 with incend) on direct hit, 7 (12 with incend) on AoE versus the new chemspray.


What is your goal?
To make Chemspray easier, not as required as it is now + simutaniously make the other elements still usable and have a chance.

[Kamoba]

I like this, a lot.

[Ashunera]

Ya know, it would need tweaking, but this isn't a bad idea.

[Carn]

I like the concept definitely.

[Fynx]

In my opinion the idea is terrible.

It's not because it's making chemsprays useless or OP or anything like that.

In your scenario:

Chemspray can't be used on it's own on the hull or balloon anymore. Unless it's something that hasn't needed chemsprays so much so far.
Spire... (coincidence?)
Maybe it could, with cooldown small enough. Less than 1 sec make sense.

But there's still a much more important issue:
Pyra / galleon / goldfish / junker
A chance for the hull or balloon to get on fire is a chance too much.
Without fire immunity these stacks that hull / balloon catches during mallet cooldown make flamers OP. Incendiary would probably be balanced then, but it's possible to balance incendiary without changing the entire world around.

Unbalancing the flamer is not something everyone wants... I think?
Or do we want chained changes, every change balancing one thing and unbalancing two others...

[Richard LeMoon]

My thoughts on chemspray are to make it function completely different than Extinguisher.

1. First, no instant extinguish power. Reapplying chem would not remove any extra fire stacks.

2. Give it a reduced chance of fire like the original idea, but reduce it to 50% or less.

3. Add fire reduction over time. For example, if it had -1 fire stack per second, it would remove 10 stacks of fire in ten seconds.

4. Reduce or remove cooldown.

5. Increase duration.


This makes chem more and less risky, depending on the situation. Since it can be applied instantly, it does not interfere with other repair tools. It can easily combat most weapon fires, such as Banshee or Hades. A few fires would constantly start and go out while under fire from any flame weapon. It can be overcome with very heavy flamethrower use, though. However, if you can escape, any amount of fire would be removed in (using the -1stack/second) 20 seconds. The balance should be set so that one flamethrower is almost, but not completely offset by chem.

[Sammy B. T.]

While I like ideas that encourage usage of both flamers and chems on a ship, I dislike how this forces both. Also 80 seconds is a ridiculously long time. While amybe needed to make the tool balanced, its awkward having something combat related last that long.

[Richard LeMoon]

Using my suggestions, it would only force both if facing two flamethrowers at once.

[Crafeksterty]

Chemspray can't be used on it's own on the hull or balloon anymore. Unless it's something that hasn't needed chemsprays so much so far.
Spire... (coincidence?)
Maybe it could, with cooldown small enough. Less than 1 sec make sense.

Im sorry what? How is that my scenario, and how does a spire find fires not threatning?

But there's still a much more important issue:
Pyra / galleon / goldfish / junker
A chance for the hull or balloon to get on fire is a chance too much.
Without fire immunity these stacks that hull / balloon catches during mallet cooldown make flamers OP. Incendiary would probably be balanced then, but it's possible to balance incendiary without changing the entire world around.

That is... something all ships have in common... Fire is most difficult on difficult to manage ships. You control fire easily in easy to manage ships. While pyra, junker, goldfish and galleon have a far much easier time managing fire than Spire, squid and mobula. Youl want extinguishers to help out over chemsprayers when fire is getting uncontrollable. You can control fire with chemspray, but you fight fire with extinguisher. 1 stack of fire shouldnt be too much of a problem during a cooldown, i dont know how that is turning the world upside down. Specialy since you still can take fire off.

I see that you are too worried about the flamer. The flamer as of now has always done default ammount of fire giving (22% for every hit) It would go down to 6%!!! with the usuall lesmok versus this new chemspray. But 11% if the flamer has incendiary in which then they need to be much closer than default range.

While I like ideas that encourage usage of both flamers and chems on a ship, I dislike how this forces both. Also 80 seconds is a ridiculously long time. While amybe needed to make the tool balanced, its awkward having something combat related last that long.

Yeah, the ammount of time could be diminished to maybe 60 seconds. But it doesnt force people to use both. Maybe im missing something here but why should you bring a flamer if you think you can endoure it and just kill the enemy ship normaly?

[Crafeksterty]

I like richards idea, to a degree. It is neat but its still uses the same way like the current chem.
By that i mean the mindfullness of it is still there, making it tiny bit more punishing. But then again theres no cooldown.

The fire extinguished stacks per second thing is odd as it makes fire from most other guns like the current chem except the flamer which can apply fire stacks faster than the seconds tick.

[Sammy B. T.]

Yeah, the ammount of time could be diminished to maybe 60 seconds. But it doesnt force people to use both. Maybe im missing something here but why should you bring a flamer if you think you can endoure it and just kill the enemy ship normaly?

Ever messed up a chem spray against a flare gun? Imagine not messing up a chem spray against them and still having 50% chance of a 10 stack? (2 shots with 25% chance of igniting.

Heat sink flares suddenly become OP unless you have both.

[Crafeksterty]

Unless you have both what?!

I mean haha i didnt think about flares but thats amazing, but 10 stacks oh no we all gon die?
I didnt argue for the chemspray incapable of taking out fire stacks.

[Daft Loon]

A somewhat tangential point - currently with flamethrower + extinguisher you can (almost?) set 20 fire stacks on a component, remove them, set another 20, remove them all inside 1 clip of the flamethrower.

What do you all think about the concept of making setting and removing fires more difficult in general so that setting 20 stacks on multiple parts becomes an achievement (in the general sense) and is more rewarding in some way when you do.

One possibility being removing the free extinguish on broken components (probably allowing extinguish on them too) and even using fire stacks on broken stuff as a spread mechanic or even adding hull damage (on broken + on fire armor)



Unless you have both chem and extinguisher available for the flare targeted part i think he means

[Hoja Lateralus]

How about trying out less drastic changes? Like reduce stack reduction from 3 to 2 but increase the time of resistance by 5-10 seconds? Or something like that? You have you chem nerf and you have your less running around.

I think the idea OP suggests 'may' be acceptable if chem would grant 90-95ish % ignition protection.

[Crafeksterty]

@Mr.Disaster, Yeah i tottaly understand what you mean. But you rarely see the use of fire because of chemspray.  Its this critical On or Off situation i feel. If its chemsprayed, forget about adding fire. If its not chemmed FIRE FIRE FIRE! If you look at it in a balance point of view, (Or mine) the fire immunity strikes an unbalance just for that reason.

@Daft Loon, Thats, an odd idea? I mean adding 20 stacks of fire sure is cool to behold when looking at your targeted ships baloon. But because fire does damage within cooldown, and how easy it spreads (AoEs and Fire pellets) its mostly to cause difficult to manage chaos. In my view, 20 stacks of fire is the recievers fault, not the dealers reward.


Oh and, yeah the idea is that extinguisher is the standard fire fighting tool while the chemspray is an added preventer for fire fighting. Youde want both.
But youde survive easier with 2 extinguishers than 2 of this chemspray, which is simply easier for gameplay in general (Ofcourse easiest with both). Chemspray always behaved and read to be a more advanced or situationally different version to the extinguisher. While the extinguisher being straightforward, take out all fires on select component. But youde still be able to fight fires soley with a pair of this chemspray.