Guns Of Icarus Online

Info => Feedback and Suggestions => Topic started by: TehPao on May 22, 2013, 10:01:27 pm

Title: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: TehPao on May 22, 2013, 10:01:27 pm
This comes in two parts.

1.
OK. Tar is extremely flammable. After one gets tarred, I want that ship to be somewhat blackened by the the tar. Then, if a flamethrower, flare, or any other flame-inducing weapons shoot a part of the ship, that tarred part should be damaged a bit more with the fire than it usually would.

2.
Fire spreads.
That friggin' "Flaming Goldfish" comes out of nowhere, hitting this "LJ Galleon" balloon. Fire spreads everywhere, and no one has an extinguisher! Oh noes!
If something is on fire and is unattended to, the fire could easily spread to the nearest item. Every... 10 seconds or so.
*Player 1 flames Balloon*
*Balloon fire spreads to Back Gun*
*Back Gun fire spreads to Main Engine*
*Main Engine fire spreads to Bottom Engine 1* etc. etc. etc.

That's all I have to say about that.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: N-Sunderland on May 22, 2013, 10:15:09 pm
This comes in two parts.

1.
OK. Tar is extremely flammable. After one gets tarred, I want that ship to be somewhat blackened by the the tar. Then, if a flamethrower, flare, or any other flame-inducing weapons shoot a part of the ship, that tarred part should be damaged a bit more with the fire than it usually would.

Squid --> drops tar --> uses rear flamer

Tar is effective enough as it is.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: TehPao on May 22, 2013, 10:16:29 pm
Squid --> drops tar --> uses rear flamer

Tar is effective enough as it is.
Name tar to something else then? Tar's flammable. Name it to "ROCKS AND STUFF"
Else, my idea is rather cool. Just add a few more fire ticks, and voila! It isn't necessarily game breaking. Just a few more fire ticks.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: N-Sunderland on May 22, 2013, 10:19:54 pm
Tar's flammable

I don't think realism is Muse's priority here.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Ofiach on May 22, 2013, 10:22:26 pm
I like the idea of fire spreading, or at least getting more intense after a few seconds, aka you cant just let that 1 stack of fire sit on the engine forever you achievement farming wh..... wait what was I saying?

I do like the idea of tar maybe making an extra stack of fire, not really igniting everything just, hey the guy just got tarred our flamethrower now adds 2 stacks instead of one. Flares maybe a full 20 stack.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: TehPao on May 22, 2013, 10:23:49 pm
Tar's flammable

I don't think realism is Muse's priority here.
Thanks for being critical over everything... Even realism.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: N-Sunderland on May 22, 2013, 10:27:00 pm
Tar's flammable

I don't think realism is Muse's priority here.
Thanks for being critical over everything... Even realism.

Look, I'm just saying that good gameplay is more important than it being realistic. So what if tar doesn't catch on fire? Changing its name to something non-flammable wouldn't improve the game at all.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Kestril on May 23, 2013, 12:10:02 am
Actually, I like the suggestion. It adds some synergy and options to combat, which is always a good thing.

But yeah, everything shouldn't ignite at once, but tarred ships could be more susceptible to burning while tarred. That sounds fine to me.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: TehPao on May 23, 2013, 12:13:21 am
Actually, I like the suggestion. It adds some synergy and options to combat, which is always a good thing.

But yeah, everything shouldn't ignite at once, but tarred ships could be more susceptible to burning while tarred. That sounds fine to me.
Thanks for the feedback. This is what I'm aiming for. Not everything will ignite at once while being tarred, just the part that's being aimed at.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: RearAdmiralZill on May 23, 2013, 12:17:18 am
Why does charging into your own tar cloud to use the shortest range weapon in the game to get a couple extra stacks of fire sound less than ideal to me... >_>
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: TehPao on May 23, 2013, 12:20:04 am
Why does charging into your own tar cloud to use the shortest range weapon in the game to get a couple extra stacks of fire sound less than ideal to me... >_>
I don't know, could you give me more insight? Seriously. I'm tired of the one liners to down everything. I'm getting more constructive criticism in the in-game chats than mods.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Ofiach on May 23, 2013, 12:24:35 am
It's a little thing called teamwork..... you see an enemy go through your buddies tar so you slap him with a flare or flamethrower as soon as he exits it.

OR is this just another example of something the almighty goonswarm doesn't want to see so there will be obvious troll responses, just to derail the topic?

EDIT
/ranton
You know what sorry but I'm going off on a tangent to derail the topic even more. Most people who play ingame won't even come to the forums to make suggestions because they know they will just get flamed and wont get any real feedback or ideas from CAs/mods. That is an extremely sad state of affairs for an indie games forums to be in when they are trying to improve on a game and promote it. No new players will stick around for long when they see the good ol boys come in and swoop on any suggestion that isn't to their liking.
/rantoff
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: RearAdmiralZill on May 23, 2013, 12:26:40 am
Well don't take it to heart. When we don't suggest anything, it's safe to assume that we are of the opinion that the proposed suggestion isn't ideal.

No offense really, but tar is strong enough already. I do wish it caught fire, but only as a visual effect honestly.

Spreading fire is interesting, and could offset the high number of stacks it takes to disable a gun, but if you give it a higher priority, you lose the effectiveness some by making engies know they can't leave that fire there else it'll spread. And that timer would need some good balancing, else you risk some OP potential with never ending fires hopping to new components.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: TehPao on May 23, 2013, 12:42:30 am
Well don't take it to heart. When we don't suggest anything, it's safe to assume that we are of the opinion that the proposed suggestion isn't ideal.

I do take it to heart. I come in wanting something constructive, and stupid one-liners coming from mods is REALLY sad.

No offense really, but tar is strong enough already. I do wish it caught fire, but only as a visual effect honestly.

If it caught fire, I'd set the stack at *Whatever number it originally is* and add 2 or 3 to it. Once set on fire, the tarred part will no longer have tarred effects, and will just be on fire.

Spreading fire is interesting, and could offset the high number of stacks it takes to disable a gun, but if you give it a higher priority, you lose the effectiveness some by making engies know they can't leave that fire there else it'll spread. And that timer would need some good balancing, else you risk some OP potential with never ending fires hopping to new components.

If set on fire, give it ten seconds (experimental, if proven OP, change the seconds), and if it isn't gone within that time frame,  an object in a vicinity of five meters  (again, experimental) will catch fire, and the newly flamed object will have half of the original stack. If that isn't taken care of, it'll move onto a new object, halved from the second object.
Fire to Hull -> 15 stacks
Fire to Engine -> 7 stacks
Fire to Main Engine -> 3 stacks
Fire to Engine 2 -> 1 stack
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: RearAdmiralZill on May 23, 2013, 12:51:29 am
Quote
I do take it to heart. I come in wanting something constructive, and stupid one-liners coming from mods is REALLY sad.

Well then my apologies for not conveying my humor in good spirits, as that was the intent.

Quote
If it caught fire, I'd set the stack at *Whatever number it originally is* and add 2 or 3 to it. Once set on fire, the tarred part will no longer have tarred effects, and will just be on fire.

I just don't see where this would be happening when someone is in a tar cloud. Plus, the components would already be breaking at a rapid pace at this point, so fire stacks would be meaningless once broken. I can only imagine it on a squid or galleon with a rear flamer, but extra fire stacks wouldn't matter when it came to breaking a mass of components anyway.

Quote
If set on fire, give it ten seconds (experimental, if proven OP, change the seconds), and if it isn't gone within that time frame,  an object in a vicinity of five meters  (again, experimental) will catch fire, and the newly flamed object will have half of the original stack. If that isn't taken care of, it'll move onto a new object, halved from the second object.
Fire to Hull -> 15 stacks
Fire to Engine -> 7 stacks
Fire to Main Engine -> 3 stacks
Fire to Engine 2 -> 1 stack

Again, I find it interesting. Makes more sense when you put it that way. It would either be this, or lower the stack requirement to disable guns I think. Curious to see how the logic would look on spreading fires from a design standpoint.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Ofiach on May 23, 2013, 01:08:57 am
To tack on, the tar would have to have maybe a few seconds of "sticky" time after someone leaves a tar cloud.

5 seconds of increased fire vulnerability, like you say it wouldn't matter much on components, but for a hull or balloon that could be painful. It would add a new aspect to teamplay.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: RearAdmiralZill on May 23, 2013, 01:15:27 am
To tack on, the tar would have to have maybe a few seconds of "sticky" time after someone leaves a tar cloud.

5 seconds of increased fire vulnerability, like you say it wouldn't matter much on components, but for a hull or balloon that could be painful. It would add a new aspect to teamplay.

Would be pretty tricky to pull off, especially so close to tar clouds. I swear they suck you in sometimes. 5 seconds doesn't sound long enough to make it worthwhile. 10 seconds at least.

I say all this, but I'm still under the opinion that tar barrel needs no kind of buffing right now. It does its job very well. Instead of buffing tar to help fire, why not just stick to the spreading idea that buffs fire directly?
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Gunny RP on May 23, 2013, 01:20:57 am
I say all this, but I'm still under the opinion that tar barrel needs no kind of buffing right now. It does its job very well. Instead of buffing tar to help fire, why not just stick to the spreading idea that buffs fire directly?

I agree, it seems that making tar to be more likely cause more damage to a ship would change quite a bit in the game. It leaves the question of what if someone had their engines on fire and then they release tar? does the ship releasing that tar suddenly have worse fire? In a way it makes a lot of small different situations that could come up that have to be added into the games working if it was done.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Gambrill on May 23, 2013, 02:55:39 am
The fire adding stacks sounds great to me.. but with the air being thinner the higher you get what if maybe if you get high enough it will lower stacks.. and the more stacks the higher you need to be to lower..


 so say I have 9 stacks, if I'm high enough it will lower to 8 then a few seconds later 7 etc. Etc. But I can see why muse won't put this in.. this game is meant to be fun. If its made too realistic, muse will just have to change the game name to 'airship simulator'
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: -Muse- Cullen on May 23, 2013, 04:28:59 am
While the tar is an addictive tool to use, it is still just a tool. Adding flammability as an extra effect would make it less of a tool and more of a weapon. As of now, briefly flying through tar will cause a mess of trouble as a punishment for chasing a ship. Making the tar cause even more trouble by adding fire may make it a go-to strategy- if you take tar, you have to take the banshee, flare, or flamethrower (Or incendiary ammo, I suppose), as well, in order to maximize its effects. As of now, the tar acts like a defensive tool well enough- use it to disappear, or to shake off a pursuer. I believe that the tar should not be changed, so the pilot must rely on the ship's gunners to do the real damage, not simply use them as an ignition spark.

As for the fire spreading mechanic, that could be interesting. Fire, currently, seems underwhelming because stacks of fire are only problematic at higher amounts, and fire mostly relies on DoT. Giving fire some extra power would be nice... but the spreading mechanic doesn't seem to me like it would fit in with the game. If a fire's charges grew over time, that would, in my opinion, feel like it would belong.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Ofiach on May 23, 2013, 05:40:02 am
Cul isn't that kind of the point? Opening up a whole new playstyle by adding a single change? Now instead of meta heavy ammo you have gats with incendiary and banshees are brought into play, or you could just stick to basic "kill em kill em hard" tactics.

The tar would probably be a pain in the nalgas to implement but as for fire spread at half stacks rounded down... that doesn't seem that hard??? Then again I have the programming knowledge of wet toilet paper so I could be totally off base.

@ Zill i was going to say 10 seconds but it seemed so long counting it out in my head....

We aren't going to get the artemis back so why not make disabling like this? scatter the engineers, make em run 20 different directions. The LJ and the hwacha are really the only two guns that make engies have to repair multiple components with a single clip. Well and Tar XD but still! FIRE TAR!

Also Cul why does fire spread feel wrong to you? Honest question there. I think it would be awesome! Fire spreads down the rigging to an engine, the hull, or a gun. That would be awesome! Well IMO anyway.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Gambrill on May 23, 2013, 08:16:58 am
I have one problem with the spreading tbh... How do they decide where it spreads to next? Because if  fire spreads the closest things will ALWAYS be the hull. Meaning engineers will have to prioritize extinguishing... Say a rear turret that's on fire because it'll ruin the hull even if the balloon is down
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Machiavelliest on May 23, 2013, 11:02:51 am
I do like the idea of spreading fires.  It definately makes the engineering triage game more interesting.  I -do- fear it will make the gunner that much more marginalized as a class.  It's a great suggestion, though.

The tar in the air is not tar, per-se.  Tar is fed with the fuel into the engine, combusted, and ejected, like what happens when your car burns oil and you get that nasty blue cloud.  The tar would't just suddenly ignite even if you shot flames into it.  It's all already been ignited.  So now we can move on from that 'realism' bit about the tar.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: TehPao on May 23, 2013, 11:47:34 am
The tar in the air is not tar, per-se.  Tar is fed with the fuel into the engine, combusted, and ejected, like what happens when your car burns oil and you get that nasty blue cloud.  The tar wouldn't just suddenly ignite even if you shot flames into it.  It's all already been ignited.  So now we can move on from that 'realism' bit about the tar.
Ah.. Now that that's mentioned, I understand.

I have one problem with the spreading tbh... How do they decide where it spreads to next? Because if  fire spreads the closest things will ALWAYS be the hull. Meaning engineers will have to prioritize extinguishing... Say a rear turret that's on fire because it'll ruin the hull even if the balloon is down
I was thinking maybe program it to start a new fire in a vicinity of X amount of meters.
*Crap Pseudocode*
If Fire canReach # Meters
TransferFire at /2 stacks
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Honeybadger on May 23, 2013, 12:40:47 pm
DEAR GOD NO!
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: TehPao on May 23, 2013, 12:41:53 pm
DEAR GOD NO!
Well why not? Can you give an explanation as to why not?
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Ofiach on May 23, 2013, 05:01:06 pm
Hes an engie and fire spreading makes his clicker hurt :P
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: -Muse- Cullen on May 23, 2013, 05:07:06 pm
If fire started visually spreading around the ship, that would put some stress on the game, so some people would lower graphical settings... which is rough.

How would you be able to extinguish it if its creeping around the ship? Simply extinguishing the source wouldn't take care of flames that are moving up riggings and such.

If a crew didn't bring an extinguisher, then the entire ship would be completely destroyed over time. Having fire spread would mean that a ship without extinguishers would have to hope that the system breaks before the fire spreads, lest it creeps into something else. While it is a small gripe, there is strategy to not bringing fire resistance, so don't say that 'Everyone should bring extinguishers anyway'. The point is that each class gets a bonus to their specific tools- making fire creep would make being an engineer an even more attractive option. It would also mean that everyone would take incendiary rounds... so it would basically mean that the Chemical Spray and Extinguisher would always be required just in case. I'm against removing choices from people.

As for the tar, I will have to agree with Machiavelliest. The ingame description of the Tar Barrel is that you are putting tar into the engines in order to make smog clouds behind you. Smoke is the result of combustion, and the engines make it into a fog, so... Yeah. The mechanic would have to change. If we were to ignore the minor details and assume that the potential is there for flammable smog,  I still wouldn't be for it, simply because the Tar Barrel is problematic enough right now. It does a lot of damage, currently, and the only trade off is that the ship's engines take a little damage. The OP's reasoning for why tar should be flammable was simply that -Tar is flammable-, so I'm not sure what else to say. When Zill said that tar was strong enough right now, OP replied that 'It'll remove tar effects, but light the thing on fire anyway. That's not really a counterpoint to the argument, in my opinion. Its really strong right now. Making it even more strong would make it an almost uncounterable full disable.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Ofiach on May 23, 2013, 05:13:06 pm
Well the fire would spread every ten seconds or so as TehPao said. If you chem/extinguish the fire before the time limit it means it's no longer spreading. also the fire will eventually die out on its own. It reduces by half every component jump.

Example a flare, 15 stacks balloon-> 7 stacks main engine -> 3 stacks secondary engine -> 1 stack side gun-> burns out

It is another example of how a single change brings new tools and strategies to the forefront of the game.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: -Muse- Cullen on May 23, 2013, 05:31:56 pm
I'm not sure how this would bring new tools to the game, but I feel that the only strategy that spreading fire would add to the game is that more people would use fire-starting equipment, and that people will simply bring chem/extinguisher all of the time. While there is nothing wrong with making incendiary ammo more attractive, your example seems to only work with flares. A flamethrower has a small chance to ignite a system once, but it fires so quickly that it seems like the chance is higher than it is. Systems that are targeted by the flamethrower usually will ignite with one - three charges of fire before they are dealt with, so the spreading fire mechanic wouverldn't even take place due to that. Incendiary ammo weapons only add one charge per shot if they ignite something, so... spreading wouldn't kick in until it hit two stacks, and by that time, more than 10 seconds would have passed... so the mechanic wouldn't even get seen.

My only other problem off the top of my head is that every system is reachable within a few seconds of running, so... lighting one thing on fire would just light everything else on fire after that X seconds. Engines are all grouped together, same with guns.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: TehPao on May 23, 2013, 05:43:53 pm
The OP's reasoning for why tar should be flammable was simply that -Tar is flammable-, so I'm not sure what else to say. When Zill said that tar was strong enough right now, OP replied that 'It'll remove tar effects, but light the thing on fire anyway. That's not really a counterpoint to the argument, in my opinion. Its really strong right now. Making it even more strong would make it an almost uncounterable full disable.

Yes. Tar is flammable.
Yes. Once the tarred part ignites, it will remove the tar effect, but it will catch on fire, thus furthering the damage.
*Tar damages Gun*
*Player 1 Ignites Gun on fire*
*Gun takes fire damage*

My only other problem off the top of my head is that every system is reachable within a few seconds of running, so... lighting one thing on fire would just light everything else on fire after that X seconds. Engines are all grouped together, same with guns.

Play a game on a Pyramidion, and look at the balloon when it catches on fire. Half the time, the balloon stays on fire (unless someone yells it out). Using fire to spread out is a good strategy for the fire ship, and it also makes communication vital for the ship that is on fire.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Ofiach on May 23, 2013, 05:53:30 pm
Cul thats the point!!! Maybe I'm not being clear here. I will attempt to show specific examples.

It brings new guns to the forefront of strategic gameplay! The banshee now has a real role as a harassment weapon! the flamethrower gets its power back because the components will ignite eachother! the flare... well the flare might just be a tad OP with this system but hey, tweak it!
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: -Muse- Cullen on May 23, 2013, 06:20:51 pm
The OP's reasoning for why tar should be flammable was simply that -Tar is flammable-, so I'm not sure what else to say. When Zill said that tar was strong enough right now, OP replied that 'It'll remove tar effects, but light the thing on fire anyway. That's not really a counterpoint to the argument, in my opinion. Its really strong right now. Making it even more strong would make it an almost uncounterable full disable.

Yes. Tar is flammable.
Yes. Once the tarred part ignites, it will remove the tar effect, but it will catch on fire, thus furthering the damage.
*Tar damages Gun*
*Player 1 Ignites Gun on fire*
*Gun takes fire damage*

My only other problem off the top of my head is that every system is reachable within a few seconds of running, so... lighting one thing on fire would just light everything else on fire after that X seconds. Engines are all grouped together, same with guns.

Play a game on a Pyramidion, and look at the balloon when it catches on fire. Half the time, the balloon stays on fire (unless someone yells it out). Using fire to spread out is a good strategy for the fire ship, and it also makes communication vital for the ship that is on fire.

Once again, I have to ask for you to give better reasoning as to why flammable smoke from the tar barrel should be included. Tar is put into the engines and it makes smog. The simple reasoning that the cloud it is flammable is incorrect, because it is smoky fog. Give an reason why the tar needs to be buffed to include flammability. Everything that I pointed out in that first post, you ignored and gave me the same exact answer that you gave to Zill.

And it seems like you want the fire to spread simply as a punishment for people who don't understand the importance of extinguishing flames... i.e. newer players. From a realistic perspective, since it seems like you enjoy that side of things, the balloon component is a metalic pump sitting on a metal grate suspended away from all other systems- how it could spread is beyond me- unless it spreads via the actual balloon. If it did, then that would mean it ignites everything, because the balloon is directly connected to all edges of the ship, which is where the engines, guns, and hull all touch.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: -Muse- Cullen on May 23, 2013, 06:29:17 pm
Cul thats the point!!! Maybe I'm not being clear here. I will attempt to show specific examples.

It brings new guns to the forefront of strategic gameplay! The banshee now has a real role as a harassment weapon! the flamethrower gets its power back because the components will ignite eachother! the flare... well the flare might just be a tad OP with this system but hey, tweak it!

The banshee is a rare gun that feels like it benefits from all ammo types- it does shatter damage, explosive damage, as well as has a chance to ignite systems on fire. Shatter damages guns and engines, and fire, at 8 stacks, disables a gun. This weapon is very useful as a disabler when used correctly. Sadly, people don't notice the shatter damage on it and instead aim for the hull, which leads people to believe that it isn't very effective.

While I could go on, I feel that it wouldn't matter. I am firm in my belief that adding all of these extra fire mechanics would make the game turn into Flames of Icarus. Icarus' wings melted off / lit on fire because he flew too close to the sun. If we add these mechanics, there'll be too much fire that the same will happen to engineers who get overwhelmed with an already difficult job.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: N-Sunderland on May 23, 2013, 06:39:10 pm
The banshee only does explosive, actually. Not shatter.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: -Muse- Cullen on May 23, 2013, 06:45:26 pm
The banshee only does explosive, actually. Not shatter.
Updating the wiki.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Ofiach on May 23, 2013, 06:48:20 pm
it does shatter?! Hell i thought it was explosive/fire chance!

But Cul that is my main point!!! fire spreading could turn useless guns.. aka banshee into team weapons of mass pwnage!

Also whats wrong with fire!?!?!?!? were on wooden ships FFS! fire was a killer on the sea if it was let alone! why shouldn't it be a killer in the air!

Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: -Muse- Cullen on May 23, 2013, 06:56:24 pm
it does shatter?! Hell i thought it was explosive/fire chance!

But Cul that is my main point!!! fire spreading could turn useless guns.. aka banshee into team weapons of mass pwnage!

Also whats wrong with fire!?!?!?!? were on wooden ships FFS! fire was a killer on the sea if it was let alone! why shouldn't it be a killer in the air!
A weapon should be buffed to the point where it can be countered, but still effective when used intelligently and correctly. Making fire spread makes a team without an extinguisher completely out of luck. While it should be effective, making fire spread would make it completely shut those types of ships out- more charges on fire doesn't mean more damage over time. Weapons that do fire damage aren't useless, but they do need a buff. That's why I am all for the idea of fire increasing stacks over time.

Through all of this discussion, I don't think that I know why you want fire to spread. Why is that?
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Ofiach on May 23, 2013, 06:58:56 pm
I want it to spread because it makes fire a real killer again! instead of a ... well whatever somethings on fire dont worry about it. Also chem spray can deal with alot of fire still! TEN seconds is a long time to leave a fire burning without putting it out!

If my crew left a fire burning that long I would be cussing them out for being achievement farming...... bad people.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: TehPao on May 23, 2013, 07:01:50 pm

Once again, I have to ask for you to give better reasoning as to why flammable smoke from the tar barrel should be included. Tar is put into the engines and it makes smog. The simple reasoning that the cloud it is flammable is incorrect, because it is smoky fog. Give an reason why the tar needs to be buffed to include flammability. Everything that I pointed out in that first post, you ignored and gave me the same exact answer that you gave to Zill.

And it seems like you want the fire to spread simply as a punishment for people who don't understand the importance of extinguishing flames... i.e. newer players. From a realistic perspective, since it seems like you enjoy that side of things, the balloon component is a metalic pump sitting on a metal grate suspended away from all other systems- how it could spread is beyond me- unless it spreads via the actual balloon. If it did, then that would mean it ignites everything, because the balloon is directly connected to all edges of the ship, which is where the engines, guns, and hull all touch.

Yes, I've already been proven wrong on the tar, because in the description of the Tar Barrel, it says smog. I didn't need to give you anything new.
Punishment for people who don't understand the importance of extinguishing flames? Isn't there already punishment for players having to deal with fire?
Realism isn't necessarily my goal, by the way. It's a video game, and I'm only making suggestions. You, as a CA, need to realize that I'm only trying to better the game (this may or may not better the game, but you need to review this).
Yes, the pipes and whatnot would cause mass destruction for ships being caught on fire. Hah. May as well recognize this before I'm told that I ignored it. Back on topic.
It isn't punishment. It's strategy. Having extinguishers is usually required by engineers, anyway. They should deal with the problem before it gets bigger. And it only takes on a portion of the ship, since it's only a few meters from each part. The Pyra's balloon/guns won't reach down the the hull, the back of the junker is isolated from the rest of the ship, etc., for other ships.


Through all of this discussion, I don't think that I know why you want fire to spread. Why is that?

Why? I dunno, I was out of it last night and thought it would be a good idea. Then more thoughts came with how far it should reach, and how much fire stacks it should take.
I didn't know I was required to have an idea for it. I just did. Imagination?

Fire spreads, no? I'm from Oklahoma. My house has been so, so very close to being turned into ashes. I feel bad for the dozens of homes around me that turned to dust. That fire spreads due to wind. It was a WINDY day that day, and that fire was going super fast. The people in California recently had fires. It was a VERY windy day there, too.
Now, with that said, we're on an airship. We're dealing with wind. Fire spreads on wind. Which gives me a new idea. Fire should work its way to wherever the wind is traveling (if you're speeding forward, fire spreads 5m to the back, vice versa for reversing) for 5 meters, or whatever a suitable number is.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: -Muse- Cullen on May 23, 2013, 08:20:10 pm
Give an reason why the tar needs to be buffed to include flammability.
I didn't need to give you anything new.
...Alright then. I can't comment any further on this, then.

Realism isn't necessarily my goal, by the way. It's a video game, and I'm only making suggestions. You, as a CA, need to realize that I'm only trying to better the game (this may or may not better the game, but you need to review this).
Me, as a CA, understands that you are only trying to better the game. That is why I am having this discussion with you instead of simply ignoring it. Its an interesting topic, but I want you to really persuade me as to why it should be included. I've given my sides of the story with backup and such, but you guys aren't giving me much to reply to beyond it being a fun mechanic, it would buff fire, and it being realistic.

Through all of this discussion, I don't think that I know why you want fire to spread. Why is that?

Why? I dunno, I was out of it last night and thought it would be a good idea. Then more thoughts came with how far it should reach, and how much fire stacks it should take.
I didn't know I was required to have an idea for it. I just did. Imagination?
Fire spreads, no? -snip-
Its good to post ideas and things like this, don't think I'm saying not to! Its just that, when a debate comes up, both sides should have reasonings ready. I agree that fire spreads, but the whole wind aspect, and direction of fire movement, would be difficult to include in the game, that's for sure. Some maps have wind, some don't, etc etc etc.. I think that the discussion should be as to why the spreading mechanic should be included in general, instead of how it should work. If it were to be included, I can safely say that the whole wind aspect wouldn't accompany it, just because that's a lot of variables to work with.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: TehPao on May 23, 2013, 08:25:15 pm
Yes, with the whole wind being programmed in, would basically require a kickstarter. Reversing would mean flames go forward, going forward would mean flames go back. I can't give much more than that (if wind isn't included).
I wasn't necessarily asking for wind, was just saying the mechanics of it.
It's been fun chatting, but I'm not going to get support from this. I'm glad you are trying to help. Maybe a dev will see it and give him/her inspiration for something down the line.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Ofiach on May 23, 2013, 08:26:48 pm
Cul is it really hard to implement? honest question again, I have ZERO programming /coding ability. But that doesnt seems that hard! Just simple maths!

Also CUL I have been trying to persuade you but you are almost as stubborn as a vrgin on prom night!!!! This fire spread idea brings flame weapons back without them being ridiculous OP!!!! OR am i missing something here? once again an honest question I'm trying to be very PC on the forums now. The fire spread makes flames deadly without making them stupid OP. at least IMO  would really love to hear what your take on that is.

TehPao you noob stop cutting in on my replies with your edits XD.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Ofiach on May 23, 2013, 08:29:46 pm
Sorry i probably deserve a warning for this BUT this is what CA's should do!!!!! he has a fucking opinion and is willing to explain it without being a snide asshole! This is what we want!
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: TehPao on May 23, 2013, 08:31:36 pm
Agreed. I'm glad Cul came in to change my opinion on certain areas. I like the discussions on here, I just don't like that there isn't anyone else.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: -Muse- Cullen on May 23, 2013, 09:21:30 pm
Cul is it really hard to implement? honest question again, I have ZERO programming /coding ability. But that doesnt seems that hard! Just simple maths!

It would be complicated to explain, but there is a huge amount of variables that would have to be factored into a math problem in order to find out where the fire moves, how quickly, and how it changes direction. Some maps have wind, so there would have to be an extra variable thrown in for that, as well. Basically, spreading fire based on wind would have to take into effect the speed of the ship, how its turning, how its changing altitude, and current wind on the map. Putting it bluntly like that doesn't make it seem difficult, but the developers have enough on their plates with Adventure Mode, and adding this dynamic fire movement would take a good amount of time.

Also CUL I have been trying to persuade you but you are almost as stubborn as a vrgin on prom night!!!! This fire spread idea brings flame weapons back without them being ridiculous OP!!!! OR am i missing something here? once again an honest question I'm trying to be very PC on the forums now. The fire spread makes flames deadly without making them stupid OP. at least IMO  would really love to hear what your take on that is.

If we were to ignore the wind aspect, a fire would spread to the entirety of the ship if not taken care of. The problem is that fire is usually taken care of right away, or it is left because of a more important problem. If the hull is being bombarded, an engineer is basically required to nurse it back to health. If a system were to catch on fire on the opposite side of the ship, the engineer has to decide whether it is worth fixing- hull damage, or a lost engine? Or hull damage, or a lost balloon? This makes the engineer make choices as to what is more important in the current situation. With spreading fire, there is nearly no choice in the matter- previously, it was between losing the hull or losing a system; now, it is between losing the hull or losing multiple systems. If fire could spread, it would make an ignited system have the same priority as the hull. I feel like there should be a hierarchy of components- the hull, the balloon, the guns / turning engines, and the main engine. Fire would ruin that hierarchy and place (imo) too high of a priority on the spreading fire. Giving the enemy the ability to place that priority on systems without destroying them doesn't sit well with me.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Ofiach on May 23, 2013, 10:49:30 pm
NO CUL NO DAMMIT!!!! It spread to a SINGLE random component within 5 meters. not every component within 5 meters!

Also yes he has to make a decision, and it brings a new meta into it, chem or extinguish!
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Nidh on May 23, 2013, 10:54:54 pm
NO CUL NO DAMMIT!!!! It spread to a SINGLE random component within 5 meters. not every component within 5 meters!

Also yes he has to make a decision, and it brings a new meta into it, chem or extinguish!

Careful Ofi, I wouldn't post here until after tomorrow. But I agree that the spreading of flames is a good idea. It makes flames more of a threat rather than an annoyance. Right now flames are so low on the list of things to take care of that even if they spread to all components after a reasonable amount of time, I don't think it would be overpowered.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Machiavelliest on May 23, 2013, 10:56:30 pm
(for brevity) spreading flames would upset balance because it would make an extinguisher a mandatory item
Not really.  If I pop you in the balloon or hull with a flare gun and you don't have one, you're pretty much hosed, too.

My thought on the mechanics would be that, after a certain time (however many ms--we'll call it a 'tick'), a component on fire has a fire AoE based upon the number of stacks on the component.  I'm still on the fence about whether it would maintain any balance to have the component that's already on fire grow in size.

One other thing to consider: as more components catch fire, they are in turn heaping fire upon each other, so it could get wildly out of hand.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Nidh on May 23, 2013, 11:00:27 pm
Quote from: Machiavelliest
One other thing to consider: as more components catch fire, they are in turn heaping fire upon each other, so it could get wildly out of hand.

Isn't that what you would expect flames to do though? At the stacks generated by the flamethrower in the current patch, I still don't think flames would be as aggravating as they were before the nerf.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Ofiach on May 24, 2013, 03:20:30 pm
IMO flames right now suck. they need something else to really give them their own niche. That something else is this! Everything else stays the same but the fire can spread. I talked to my brother, And he said that adding this mechanic shouldn't be that hard because the dots are all there it just needs a new activator. Just his take on it.

Also yes if you sit in a flamethrower barrage you're going to get fires feeding on eachother, and you're gonna get roasted.

I'm not understanding the reason you believe chem spray wouldn't be effective anymore? Can you highlight that a little bit for me? 
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Audie Murphy on May 25, 2013, 02:44:20 pm
IMO flames right now suck.

No, they do not. They're THE only multipurpose damage type. With fire you can burn down their balloon while also putting decent damage on their armor. And if their armor gets stripped, fire deals extra damage to the permahull. And since the particles pass through ships and damage anything they touch, you can already set multiple components on fire.

The idea of fire-spreading is a good one. I personally like it. However, I think that, priority-wise, it will have to go on the back burner, if Muse decides to implement it at all. The fire mechanics as they are now are pretty solid, and easily tweaked for balance by adjusting ignition rate, particle range and damage, etc.

It's not a bad idea, it's just not worth the time and effort it would take to implement. There's more important things for Muse to be working right now.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Ofiach on May 25, 2013, 06:43:22 pm
I'll say this as my main reasoning for why flames suck. A flamethrower, launching a full canister of flame juice at an enemy ship usually does nothing beyond annoy the engineers and cause some cussing. Crews spray down hull balloon and engines and then just wait for the Flamer to have to reload and make the guy suffer.

The only real reason anyone brings an extinguisher is because of flareguns. And even then alot of people still would rather have chem spray. If people are so unworried about stacks of fire and getting them out quickly, then there needs to be a penalty for letting a fire burn for a while. Intensifying or spreading.

As far as an order of priority I dunno, you don't see a flamethrower in any semi competitive games. Flares maybe but the flamethrower and the banshee are weapons that are only used when you need achievements for fire. They're pretty much left behind any other time. When two guns are left collecting cobwebs because "fires too easy to counter" I think new ideas would need to be something to look at right away. Thats just my two cents.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Machiavelliest on May 25, 2013, 10:15:24 pm
Flamethrowers are a novelty.  Just tap to repair then spray with an extinguisher/chem spray.  You've undone all the damage the fire did and put it out.  It really is an annoyance because it degrades performance of a component, but it's just that--annoying, not effective.  I have never seen one used against a remotely meta build and be successful.  I don't even use it on my Squid.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Audie Murphy on May 26, 2013, 12:03:45 am
I'll say this as my main reasoning for why flames suck. A flamethrower, launching a full canister of flame juice at an enemy ship usually does nothing beyond annoy the engineers and cause some cussing. Crews spray down hull balloon and engines and then just wait for the Flamer to have to reload and make the guy suffer.

ANY light weapon, by itself, is naught but an annoyance, unless the conditions are just right. If you're looking for a weapon that can overwhelm a chief engineer all by itself, you need a heavy weapon, not a light flamethrower.

It's cool that you're throwing your 2 cents out there. Keep doing that. However I'm simply not seeing the suck from the flamthrower at all. I just spent this afternoon crewing a Flamethrower/Carronade squid piloted by an experienced member of my clan (who plays competitively), and we wrecked the enemy over and over and over again.

Flamethrower/Carronade builds on squids are both quite effective and popular. I crewed one piloted by one of the devs. I myself have a flamethrower/artemis build on mine (which I've used to take down Galleons). I've also seen Flamethrower/Gatling utilized effectively. I've seen double flamer Pyras.

I agree that right now the meta is too restricted to Gat/Flak, and I think Muse is already working on that. We're looking at a new ship, and a new weapon coming out with the next patch. Don't worry, more options for your ships will open up as Muse continues to add content.

Keep flying, and keep getting more experience. One thing you'll learn is that you can win with almost any weapon combo if you and your crew communicate, work together, and performs your roles with competence.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: N-Sunderland on May 26, 2013, 12:19:49 am
Just a note: based on the little I know of the Manta Ray so far, it'll probably still be a good while before it comes along. But the mine launcher... Now that'll be interesting.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Ofiach on May 26, 2013, 12:29:05 am
You can get away with alot of troll builds with a good captain and crew. Dual flamer ramamidions with moonshine have worked for me in the past. That doesn't mean it's viable in the slightest.

It just means you're having a little fun at the expense of inexperienced enemies. Seriously though the flamer doesn't even take down hull armor or the balloon well. A flare can cause some havoc but once you know the enemy has a flamer the engies prespray important parts and sit back and let the extra guns burn.

I saw flamers in one competitive match, honestly if they had had gatlings or flaks or even carronades they would have done alot more damage, as it stood they put 1-2 stacks on maybe 3 components and that was it. we even just let the sideguns burn to death because we were more worried about the hull and the other enemy ship.

If those fires could have spread they could have actually pulled the engie away from the hull/engines for a couple seconds. As it stood it just didn't matter, and we rebuilt once we finished that engagement.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Machiavelliest on May 27, 2013, 07:32:57 am
You can get away with alot of troll builds with a good captain and crew. Dual flamer ramamidions with moonshine have worked for me in the past. That doesn't mean it's viable in the slightest.
Carronade/flame is a troll build.  I used to use it until it took me 5 minutes (yes, I timed) and four popped balloons of a Spire pogo-ing on the ground to kill it.  In any level of competitive play, it's totally unviable.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Captain Smollett on May 27, 2013, 03:20:40 pm
Hold onto these thoughts guys. 

Based on Muse comments I'm expecting to see a fire buff within the first two weeks of June that should make these weapons viable again. 

There's obviously a good amount of tweaking to do with them but I believe the process has already started.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Audie Murphy on May 29, 2013, 12:10:50 pm
Hold onto these thoughts guys. 

Based on Muse comments I'm expecting to see a fire buff within the first two weeks of June that should make these weapons viable again. 

There's obviously a good amount of tweaking to do with them but I believe the process has already started.

While I don't think that fire is as weak as is implied by others on this thread, I will welcome to the buff to fire damage. More incentives for brawling builds over sniping builds.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: -Muse- Cullen on May 30, 2013, 06:10:34 am
I think that a buff to fire's damage would be pretty cool, cos the amount of damage that the flamethrower deals out only seems to be worthwhile when up close in an enemy's blindspot. All other ranges and locations around a ship make it outmatched in nearly all regards. Likewise, I think that changing how fire charges work would also be welcome- it would change how people view incendiary rounds, as well as the banshee.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Gambrill on May 30, 2013, 01:04:01 pm
I think what we all need to think about is that we can't buff the flame too much. While we may be unhappy about what its putting out we should only expect a slight bump otherwise the flamer will overtake everything and the meta will be double flames.

I'm not sure if what I'm saying is right but that's what I'm understanding from this
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Captain Smollett on May 30, 2013, 08:01:48 pm
I actually had no problem with the previous flamethrower.

The problem was, like all disabling weapons, it was brutal against newer players.

Hopefully they get enough boost to make them viable and we improve our new player teaching so we can have nice things.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Audie Murphy on May 30, 2013, 10:36:37 pm
Well, beyond just better player teaching, the game itself needs to be welcoming to new players, else you risk confining your audience too much.

Game mechanics should stay as simple as possible to accomplish the given goals. I think that we can give fire damage a buff without making it overly complicated.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Ofiach on June 01, 2013, 04:37:32 am
I agree with Smollett here 100% there needs to be exhibition matches where a caster who knows piloting comments and explains the moves. @Audie this games mechanics are as simple as they come. I truly think the basics are easy and mastering them is what turns your basic pilot into a force of nature.

Right now 90% of pilots don't know a GD thing about maneuvering beyond pyri flies straight at enemies rawr! They need to understand how brawling works to actually understand how piloting works. TBH Smollett, sammy, and hizumi along with a few Falconeer hopeful pilots could fly against eachother with people like Zill and skyraider commentating so hopeful GoI pilots could truly understand the depth of point and counterpoint in piloting.

That was a little off topic but I would love to see it.

@Gambrill flame spread is that buff if flames could spread to chem sprayed equipment. and IMO that would be the true balance point. OK you chem sprayed the hull good for you that 15 stacks of fire on that gun you don't care about just went straight into the chem sprayed hull. You now decide whether letting that fire burn itself out while you sit on the hull with chem is the right decision or if bringing an extinguisher is the right decision. It's a single change that adds more decisions and IMO that is great.

Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Spud Nick on June 01, 2013, 08:23:27 am
They should just lower the number of charges it takes to turn a gun red hot. It's at 8 charges right now, What if it was cut in half? Than we could disable guns again without it being too powerful.
Title: Re: Fire! *Suggestion*
Post by: Rainer Zu Fall on July 18, 2013, 11:24:49 am
... I think the original ideas of this post aren't that lovely with the new engineering things and stuff.