Guns Of Icarus Online
Main => The Classroom => Q&A => Topic started by: Indreams on January 19, 2015, 07:41:34 pm
-
(http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/gunsoficarusonline/images/5/58/Firebullets.png/revision/latest?cb=20130103034636)
+20% Increased Chance of Causing Fire on Hit
-30% Projectile Speed
-25% Clip Size
-30% Rate of Fire
Let's talk Incendiary rounds.
I believe it is one of the less popular ammo choice. I know I don't like it too much.
Increased fire chance is pretty cool, but - Projectile Speeds, - Clip Size, and - Rate of Fire is a massive downside. Come to think of it, + Causing fire is not much of an upside either.
What do you guys think about Incendiary rounds? I don't like how it shoots, but what about you guys?
-
inci rounds are for the gunners that can't consistently hit target even at point blank (when I see it on a mercury or banshee or art I just die inside).
the fire is there to do dmg what a good gunner would otherwise do with much better ammo.
-
inci rounds are for the gunners that can't consistently hit target even at point blank (when I see it on a mercury or banshee or art I just die inside).
the fire is there to do dmg what a good gunner would otherwise do with much better ammo.
Well... No.
Incin is good on specific guns in specific places, just like any ammo. It cuts back on arming time, and adds fire to guns that might not have done fire damage before.
Heavy Flak, Lumberjack, Mines, Light Cannonade (on occasion, Heavy Cannonade, but I wouldn't recommend it often), Gatling, Flare, and prooooobably a few guns I'm forgetting, all benefit from incendiary in many circumstances .
edit: flamer, hades, and banshee can also benefit form incendiary as an alternative ammo choice
-
Considering how easily chem-spray negates it, it's probably my least-used ammo type, as there's no situation in which it really excels, and many in which it hurts overall performance.
I occasionally will have it brought for the light carronade, in which case it's used to help force engineers to make hard choices. Fix the balloon, and chem later, and risk it burning, or chem now, and have to rebuild twice. That's what fire's good for in GOI-forcing optimal/imperfect repair cycles, and making pilots have to pick what parts of their ship they're willing to sacrifice.
-
Incin is good on specific guns in specific places, just like any ammo. It cuts back on arming time, and adds fire to guns that might not have done fire damage before.
Heavy Flak, Lumberjack, Mines, Light Cannonade (on occasion, Heavy Cannonade, but I wouldn't recommend it often), Gatling, Flare, and prooooobably a few guns I'm forgetting, all benefit from incendiary in many circumstances .
edit: flamer, hades, and banshee can also benefit form incendiary as an alternative ammo choice
Well, it does cut on arming distance (not arming time, there's a technical difference), but than, greased.
On mines, incendiary is a pretty good choice. Real good destruction. I really don't like incendiary on carro or gat. If I'm at 'reduced' carro/gat range, I'd rather be preventing flames (heatsink) than causing them (incn). And really, greased feels [bi]soooooooooo[/i] much better.
Theory crafting, I guess incendiary will panic fresh engis and put a 3/5 sec pause on experienced engis.
I heard once that incendiary on heavy flak causes like 8 stacks of fire. Is that true?
-
Hmm. I highly doubt it, unless heavy flack distributes damage differently than any other explosive weapon. The only weapon that you can get a large number of stacks on per shot is the carronade, because each "fragment" rolls hit percent separately.
I am also skeptical of it's effect on mines. Mines already have a fairly high base chance to do fire stacks, with their main advantage for setting fires with incendiary being the number of components hit. Otherwise, it seems to basically be the "two step" (primary/secondary) chance-to-set-fires roll.
-
With mines...
Mines has mag size of 1. Clip size and rate of fire penalty is nothing.
Incendiary reduces the range on mines (which is a wanted). Other ammos to do so are greased, heatsink, and lochnagar. Greased just reduces the damage of one mag mines. Heatsink does about the same thing. Lochnagar... is lochnagar.
May as well take that added fire.
-
I use them on a Gatling gun sometimes. Or a flack or mortar while waiting for the armor to decay and I have nothing better to load.
I like the idea of making the engineers run around and do something rather than manning another gun. Probably better against mobulas and pyramidions than squids or goldfish for that reason.
I think the biggest disadvantage is the -30% ammo speed. That makes whatever you shoot have a pretty short range so you have to get in very close. It's very situational to be sure.
-
The problem of incendiary is the clip size and rof reduce. And the weak potential of fire against an experienced crew.
The projectile speed reduce is actually the big thing I see for this weapon.
Projectile / muzzle speed isnt really intuitive. Guns like lj or flak have arming time. This means they have to travel a certain amount of time till they do their secondary damage.
This means with less projectile speed your bullets travels less in a set amount of time meaning your shot will arm closer to you. This allows you to gain an additional 90m where you can deal full damage with guns like lj or hflak.
In the end the other ammos with projectile decrease are often better than incendiary. But thats not due to the muzzle speed thats due to its other stats.
Even with better stats on incendiary you will most likely still not use incendiary on flaks. Thats due to the fact that every explosive weapon has a decent chance to set things on fire. The higher the damage on it the higher the chance.
Incendiary is only really viable on mines as they dont benefit from any other arming decrease ammo when you dont want to face the risk of lochnagar mine.
Besides that I sometimes see and use incendiary on carronades. But besides that I dont use them on any gun.
-
I can't remember the numbers but it definitely make the shortest arming distance, very handy if you intend to use gat flak as you're able to keep your gatling range easier and still have the flak be effective.
The added fires make it a fun one to pester "no chem pub" crews with.
-
Dont take me 100% but im rather sure that it is 20% for greased and something between 20%-30% for heatsink.
But as gat flak isnt really a good option I wouldnt take that as an argument.
Why bother with gat flak when gat mortar is much better. Higher damage, harder to abuse by the enemy ...
Dont see why I should take gat flak ...
If i want mid to closerange id take hades flak or hades banshee.
-
Incin is good on specific guns in specific places, just like any ammo. It cuts back on arming time, and adds fire to guns that might not have done fire damage before.
Heavy Flak, Lumberjack, Mines, Light Cannonade (on occasion, Heavy Cannonade, but I wouldn't recommend it often), Gatling, Flare, and prooooobably a few guns I'm forgetting, all benefit from incendiary in many circumstances .
edit: flamer, hades, and banshee can also benefit form incendiary as an alternative ammo choice
Well, it does cut on arming distance (not arming time, there's a technical difference), but than, greased.
On mines, incendiary is a pretty good choice. Real good destruction. I really don't like incendiary on carro or gat. If I'm at 'reduced' carro/gat range, I'd rather be preventing flames (heatsink) than causing them (incn). And really, greased feels [bi]soooooooooo[/i] much better.
Theory crafting, I guess incendiary will panic fresh engis and put a 3/5 sec pause on experienced engis.
I heard once that incendiary on heavy flak causes like 8 stacks of fire. Is that true?
Like I said.
Why set parts on fire when you can shoot heavy to actually break parts. Or greased for better dps.
and naturally I was not counting mines, you always need inci with mines on a brawler. Inci is the same as the greased vs charged debate.
For arming, inci vs greased. Mines? sure inci. Anything else like a flak or lumber? Just use greased.
For component sniping. Heavy vs inci. Inci if you can't consistently hit the components.
-
The problem with incendiary are not only its low damage and low rof, but also that guns are just too good. With normal rounds a gatling can still destroy almost any armor, a carronade still almost any balloon, a mercrury and artemis still any gun and engine.
Incendiary, are comparable to the Pyramidion side guns, rarely used and the damage output of the other guns/ammo are better, but have both and you will win regardless.
I have incendiary on Goldfish side carronades, with its heavy gun on the front the disable is rather quick and almost unbearable, add fire stacks to balloon, armor and some random components and the damage is unbearable. One could say a flamer achieves the same result, but if chem spray is actually up, the carronade will still do a decent amount of damage.
I only really use incendiary on carronades actually, for everything else I prefer heatsink, because every other case is probably about arming time and about what ammo the gunner is going to take. Gunners can't use chem, so heatsink over incendiary, usually.
Dont take me 100% but im rather sure that it is 20% for greased and something between 20%-30% for heatsink.
Heatsink is exactly the same as greased in arming time reduction, but with less damage reduction than greased.
-
I used to go incendiary on hwachas, than I realized that I'm destroying everything and not setting anything on fire.
Btw, does incendiary work for flamethrower at all? Maybe it was the reduced range, but on a match, I fired a full clip of incendiary on a squid and didn't set anything on fire (components, I'm sure, weren't chemsprayed).
Incendiary, are comparable to the Pyramidion side guns, rarely used and the damage output of the other guns/ammo are better, but have both and you will win regardless.
I feel like Incendiary is more comparable to range finder, although range finder is far worse.
Pyramidion side gun works pretty well when your captain knows how to get that sweet sweet trifecta.
-
Incendiary should work on flamers but its totally not needed.
The roughly 25% on the flamer is already enough takin gthe big (360) clipsize, the great rate of fire and the ability for flamer particles to pass components and set several different things on fire.
-
I didn't think incind Carronade would be that effective until my ship was shot by one. The balloon going from full to almost dead with a couple stacks of fire and random other bits catching on fire too was pretty bad. Also unlike a complete balloon kill that could be double teamed and brought up quickly an almost dead burning balloon limited the ships mobility and took longer to deal with. I think it messed with the engineer's rhythm.
-
I didn't think incind Carronade would be that effective until my ship was shot by one. The balloon going from full to almost dead with a couple stacks of fire and random other bits catching on fire too was pretty bad. Also unlike a complete balloon kill that could be double teamed and brought up quickly an almost dead burning balloon limited the ships mobility and took longer to deal with. I think it messed with the engineer's rhythm.
And many people will not keep up their chem cycles if they believe they're only going against carro gatling, giving a very sneaky oppertunity
-
If you shove in incendiary after a prolonged engagement, especially on a gattling and/or a carronade. The hull/ balloon are never going back up imo
Picture this: You've destroyed hull or balloon with a gat or carronade respectively.
You being the sly dog you are, load in incendiary.
If they mallet rather than chem, yes they have more health, but then it's on fire plus it's taking good damage from the gun. It get's destroyed.
If they chemspray, it has no health, and is destroyed again due to good damage from gat or carro.
See what I'm getting at?
Although it is possible to repair efficient enough that they don't set on fire, they have a gat and a carronade on you. #BrokenComponents
And after a while the chem will run out no matter how good you are. Then you will burn. And things will never be repaired ever again.
In summary:
Incendiary can be checkmate ammo in the gat or carronade imo.
-
Only counts for standard pub match. In any highlvl game people will observe builds and loadouts and even if not its just a one timer. And if you need such a prolonged engagement and count on onetimers then you already did a huge mistake imo.
Rather get the intented kill by improving the execution of your main goal.
Blend them down, annoy them and either have your ally do the same if youre planning for double disable or get the quick kill from your ally in a forced 1n2.
-
Sometimes you need a back up to escape a 2v1 yourself, incendiary Carronade is pretty versatile and punishes enemy for slight mistakes. If they are perfect on chem/repair they still take a decent amount of damage, incendiary just punishes more.
Perfect engagements don't always happen, so it is good to have a plan B in case you do get in a prolonged engagement or whatever.
-
Sometimes you need a back up to escape a 2v1 yourself, incendiary Carronade is pretty versatile and punishes enemy for slight mistakes. If they are perfect on chem/repair they still take a decent amount of damage, incendiary just punishes more.
Perfect engagements don't always happen, so it is good to have a plan B in case you do get in a prolonged engagement or whatever.
+1. I've studied Incendiary for a long time, and it does certainly feel like it was made for the Carronades. In theory chem hard counters it, but in practice perfect chem is much harder to keep up with your main engi being dedicated to rebuild and repair balloon, and 2nd engi having to choose the lesser evil - repair or maintain chem/extinguish. It's also strong against ships that don't usually run chem cycles like Mobula, Spire.
-
My usual Carro ammo was Heavy, Greased, and Incen anyway. Spreading fire is NEVER bad, and I figured that pressure is pressure, and that the engies would have to screw up eventually.
-
It's good for close-range mines. Otherwise I never use it.
-
Personally i love to incendiary round on mines and the flamer. Not all the time on flamer but i find incendiary mines to be very effective. Incendiary flamer is also good but is very slow moving in my opinion. Both are quite fun though and worth using.
-
Incendiary Lumberjack is extremely potent especially on a lumberfish where the lumberjack is more about control than damage. You to shoot closer and the high damage and aoe of the lj means that its harder to keep chems up.
The ammo is extremely situational and I would say necessitate a gunner (BLERG!). I can't think of a gun that benefits from only using incendiary.
BTW it is horrrrrrible in the flamer.
-
I once ran double Carro squid
with the right side Cannonade engineer using incendiary
It was going pretty good until I realized I couldn't fly it :P
-
Incendiary should work on flamers but its totally not needed.
The roughly 25% on the flamer is already enough takin gthe big (360) clipsize, the great rate of fire and the ability for flamer particles to pass components and set several different things on fire.
BTW it is horrrrrrible in the flamer.
Incendiary flamer gives more fire stacks per second than greased flamer, and the most fire stacks per second compared to any other ammo type you'll be using on the flamer.
The flamer base chance for fire ignition is currently 18%.
-
Incendiary flamer gives more fire stacks per second than greased flamer, and the most fire stacks per second compared to any other ammo type you'll be using on the flamer.
The flamer base chance for fire ignition is currently 18%.
Hi Extirminator,
I'm not sure if I missed any changes in the recent patches, but in 1.3.6 at least, flamethrower has "1.6 Direct Fire Damage with 27.4% of igniting 1 fire stack".
Based on this, I think the ignition rate of greased does beat incendiary, and not by a small amount either. ;D
-
Apologies for the double post, because I can't find the edit button. But it seems that you are right because there was a hotfix that nerfed it to 1.2 Direct Fire with 18% chance of ignition. Still, I think Greased has a slightly better ignition rate, however Incendiary can fire longer without reloading.
-
Apologies for the double post, because I can't find the edit button. But it seems that you are right because there was a hotfix that nerfed it to 1.2 Direct Fire with 18% chance of ignition. Still, I think Greased has a slightly better ignition rate, however Incendiary can fire longer without reloading.
With your current data, of incendiary fire ignition chance improvement of overall 20% - it does come up on top:
Greased:
shots/sec: 26.672
fire ignition chance: 18% (0.18)
fires/sec: 26.672*0.18=4.8
Greased will ignite 4.8 fires per second.
Incendiary:
shots/sec: 11.669
fire ignition chance: 18% + 20% (0.18+0.2=0.38)
fires/sec: 11.669*0.38=4.43
Incendiary will ignite 4.43 fires per second.
That DOES mean that greased flamer would ignite more fires per second than the incendiary flamer.
However, it seems like most of you, if not all were a bit confused by muse's inability to keep stuff updated.
As evident in this thread- https://gunsoficarus.com/community/forum/index.php/topic,4569.0.html (https://gunsoficarus.com/community/forum/index.php/topic,4569.0.html) that I made, about incendiary behavior. Which as you can see is supported by a person with code access:
Incendiary is in fact 25%. It seems that it is added on top before the roll for fire happens. After that, anything on the object taking damage that modifies fire chance (such as hydrogen) is then multiplied into the final chance to catch fire.
Now let's do the calculating again,
Greased wasn't affected by the fire ignition chance mistake, so we can count on it being 4.8 fires per second still.
Recalculation for incendiary:
shots/sec: 11.669
fire ignition chance: 18% + 25% (0.18+0.25=0.43)
fires/sec: 11.669*0.43=5
Incendiary will ignite 5 fires per second.
-
Now let's do the calculating again,
Greased wasn't affected by the fire ignition chance mistake, so we can count on it being 4.8 fires per second still.
Recalculation for incendiary:
shots/sec: 11.669
fire ignition chance: 18% + 25% (0.18+0.25=0.43)
fires/sec: 11.669*0.43=5
Incendiary will ignite 5 fires per second.
Wow, I never thought it would actually be 25%, that would indeed make incendiary have higher ignition rate and be much better than greased. Thanks for sharing. *thumbs up*
However, in the recent 1.3.9 patch, it says: "Skill descriptions now draw directly from configuration (so they can't get out of sync with the actual effects)." So I'm totally confused right now.
Edit: I've test it and it does seem like it is 20%. Considering it applies to Direct and Secondary damage I have about 40% ignition chance firing at dummy balloons on the gatling.
-
In either case, Incendiary is still the best flamer ammo. New flamer meta...?
-
In either case, Incendiary is still the best flamer ammo. New flamer meta...?
After running a test (which I actually did before), I stand my ground that Greased is the better flamer ammo because of ignition rate and range.
-
However, in the recent 1.3.9 patch, it says: "Skill descriptions now draw directly from configuration (so they can't get out of sync with the actual effects)." So I'm totally confused right now.
Yes, it made me quite confused too, however, ever since the change for the fire ignition to be 25%, there wasn't any noted change, nor since when Queso checked it out in the code there was any change.
I am not sure what EXACTLY is going on either.
In either case, Incendiary is still the best flamer ammo. New flamer meta...?
After running a test (which I actually did before), I stand my ground that Greased is the better flamer ammo because of ignition rate and range.
A subtle change of 0.2-0.5 fire stacks per second could not be easily tested and experimented without a substantial amount of measurements and accurate means of time measuring. I highly doubt you could prove something like that with the random nature of the random.
-
After running a test (which I actually did before), I stand my ground that Greased is the better flamer ammo because of ignition rate and range.
A subtle change of 0.2-0.5 fire stacks per second could not be easily tested and experimented without a substantial amount of measurements and accurate means of time measuring. I highly doubt you could prove something like that with the random nature of the random.
Well I tested it by spawning 108 test dummies, firing a single incendiary round at all their balloons - 44 of them caught fire (40.74%). I ran this test a few months back and got similar results.
My assumption is that the flamer doesn't have secondary dmg type, so it only applies the 20% or 25% only once to direct dmg.
-
Well I tested it by spawning 108 test dummies, firing a single incendiary round at all their balloons - 44 of them caught fire (40.74%). I ran this test a few months back and got similar results.
My assumption is that the flamer doesn't have secondary dmg type, so it only applies the 20% or 25% only once to direct dmg.
So the question is, if it is 20% or 25%. Once we answer that question, you can determine what gives you more fires per second. And that can really go both ways here, if you got a result of 40.74% - That's quite an average result between the presumed 38% and the suspected 43%(average is 40.5%).
-
Well I tested it by spawning 108 test dummies, firing a single incendiary round at all their balloons - 44 of them caught fire (40.74%). I ran this test a few months back and got similar results.
My assumption is that the flamer doesn't have secondary dmg type, so it only applies the 20% or 25% only once to direct dmg.
So the question is, if it is 20% or 25%. Once we answer that question, you can determine what gives you more fires per second. And that can really go both ways here, if you got a result of 40.74% - That's quite an average result between the presumed 38% and the suspected 43%(average is 40.5%).
Sorry I wasn't clear on that post, I fired a gatling incendiary round at the balloons. In theory the average for that should be 40% flat (20% direct, 20% secondary) and my tests support that.
-
Sorry I wasn't clear on that post, I fired a gatling incendiary round at the balloons. In theory the average for that should be 40% flat (20% direct, 20% secondary) and my tests support that.
I would still like some sort of confirmation from code access people about 20/25%, but that sounds more reasonable^^
-
Sorry for double post, but actually, I haven't taken into account some things and some other data I have from some time ago that supports your claims for 20% as well, when second glancing it. I might have just been mislead. Just wondering what Queso might have been talking about then?
-
Every time I see greased or heatsink mines I die a little on the inside....
Incendiary is essential for a mine gunner, as it changes the way the projectile arcs in a unique way. I have seen it arc over a ship and deploy mines behind them, causing them to basically ram into you full force with no armor. Also, normal mines have an OK chance of setting 5 stacks normally, but incendiary mines will almost always set 4-5 components with 5 stacks.
That being said, it is mediocre in carronades but that is about it. Compared to heavy clip (or loch in the H. Carro) it really has no advantage against balloons and if you are using heavy carronade to cause engineers to panic, charged or heavy work better for taking out components. Lumberjack loch has closer range and can effectively be kept up close to indefinitely with good engineering. I suppose incendiary gatling could force a choice between chemspray and mallet if the engagement has been going for several clips, but most ships will either be able to keep chemsprays up during the loss of DPS from greased or they will have lost armor anyway and it doesn't matter.
-
I know this sounds kinda silly but what if we considered the idea of using incindiary for weapons that are more specialized for certain roles, for instance the light flak. There`s generally not a productive means of shooting that before the armor break, but if you used incindiary up until the break and stick with standard rounds perhaps that might serve a secondary purpose and give the engineer gunning on it a means to keep shooting instead of waiting. It would put more stress on engineers for the damage and fires incurred (however small they are) onto the target ship.
After all it doesn`t lose its damage per shot, it simply has a slower firing rate and smaller clip size. Its slower projectile speed *could* serve a beneficial purpose - and let me be clear here, this is not the IDEAL setup but as something a pilot might consider toying with for guns like the light flak when using ammo types like incindiary. :)
-
Incendiary rounds on a flak means you can get a little bit closer (I think 120m) with armed shots, great if you want to use Flak on a Junker with gatling, even a pyramidion fat flak becomes that little bit more effective at the closer rangers because of this, and as you mentioned yes, it makes waiting for armour breaks less rudimentary as the flak becomes a weapon to add harassing to the teams engineers.. So yes I can see that being effective! :)
Hmm I wonder about the viability of Incendiary in a Hades for close range now...
-
The thing is, that if you want to use weapons outisde their specialized roles another weapon would do better. This is essentially the weakness of incendiary.
Adding stress to engineers with an incendiary explosive gun generally doesn't work, because the explosive gun is intended to kill the enemy. And often times paired up with a piercing gun that will destroy the enemy armor, and also a flamer, banshee or hades would do better in adding stress in terms of fire. Even that might not work if the enemy is top notch with their anti fire stuff.
Also, a flak inside arming time is can still do a significant amount of hull damage that everybody seems to underestimates. A mortar is better of course in close range, because it doesn't get a damage reduction because of any arming time and so you can shoot like half a mortar clip before the enemy armor dies and still have enough left to kill them.
Greased hades has better dps and maybe more fires per second than incendiary hades, but if you want to create as many fires as possible, hades is not the way to go anyway. If you get incendiary arming time close to the enemy than you want to consider a gatling anyway.
What I can see work though is when you pair an incendiary mortar not with a piercing gun, but with a carronade or even an artemis and disable the living hell outta them and when the armor does die you can use normal mortar for maximum dps and kill them in one clip. But then again, a banshee might do better...
-
The way I see it, it's generally a tradeoff between heatsink and incendiary.
Heatsink is great on the light flak and is second only to burst in terms of dmg per clip. The reduction in clip and fire rate from incendiary are too much.
The difference between incendiary range and greased/heatsink on a hades is too little to make it work in my opinion. The dps is too low.
I experimented with double/triple incendiary carronades at one point, it's entertaining atleast.
I have found a use for incendiary on lumberfish and flak spires. The extra 40 meters (compared to heatsink/greased) for lumberjack has some use as an alternative to lochnagar. I like lesmok heatsink incendiary/greased/loch.
For the flak it's about 60 meters less than heatsink. In many cases I'd still prefer heatsink, but incendiary can work. I wouldn't bring a gunner on a flak spire though. My preference is spanner mallet buff charged/loch.
What I can see work though is when you pair an incendiary mortar not with a piercing gun, but with a carronade or even an artemis and disable the living hell outta them and when the armor does die you can use normal mortar for maximum dps and kill them in one clip. But then again, a banshee might do better...
I'm not a fan of incendiary mortar. I find that burst mortar is fairly effective against components, wears down armor/balloon, and starts some fires. I love carro + burst mortar pyra.
Does anyone know if there are two fire stack chances from double explosive weapons? A chance for primary and a chance when dealing AOE?
-
The way I see it, it's generally a tradeoff between heatsink and incendiary.
Heatsink is great on the light flak and is second only to burst in terms of dmg per clip. The reduction in clip and fire rate from incendiary are too much.
The difference between incendiary range and greased/heatsink on a hades is too little to make it work in my opinion. The dps is too low.
I experimented with double/triple incendiary carronades at one point, it's entertaining atleast.
Well the point I was making was providing the gungineer in this instance who normally handles the light flak to provide some kind of distraction and to a lesser extent additional damage incurred on the target before hull break - because normally most captains would prefer they only shoot after the hull is stripped. If I were captaining a ship where I had my gungineer performing this I would have them stick with standard ammo when the hull does break - that way you return to a larger clip and faster firing rate from what incindiary does. Just timing it to make sure after the engagement starts has to be a bit precise so as the flak is ready to go when the hull does indeed break. The use of flak in this example doesn`t have to necessarily be focused on the hull, it can hit other components and start fires where chem sprays are not frequently upkept often enough - again this serves more a distraction than any real disable but for targets like a mobula or spire, engineers would eventually have to be pulled off their weapons to address the fires aboard their ship - meaning less guns firing and less damage one`s own ship.
Now take that idea into the equation of a hades flak pyramidian, even though the gunner may have broken the hull after said shots, they might likely have additional shots and continue with those, the barrage from both weapons that continuously open up on that target ship would mean theoretically it would incur continual damage and its eventual destruction. Although it won`t be a 1-2 knock out like most conventional strategies provide - it would however offer an unusually different play style. Which for some might be a refreshing change of pace.
Incindiary is one of those kinds of ammos that can be reasonably flexible with a variety of weapons its used on and offer an interesting manner of tactical use if players so wish.
-
I generally assume they're chem sprayed. For me the increased fire chance doesn't outweigh the dps and range reduction. I prefer lesmok burst or heatsink.
The fire stacks on components is useful, but the range reduction is the biggest factor for me. When using a flak I expect them to be quite far away. I'm not worried if I get a few fire stacks on stuff and tell my crew to keep shooting until the opponent is sufficiently overwhelmed or destroyed. A banshee is a lot more scary.
The only non armtime weapon I see it having any use on is the heavy carro. The problem with incendiary is that the fire chance is too low and the dps reduction too high to use on most weapons. Experienced crews won't worry about a few fires. It could be refreshing to play with incendiary, but I don't see it as very useful. Incendiary is the weakest ammo and I'd support a reasonable buff.
-
Incendiary is my main ammo choice. More fire = more fun. adding fire to any damage you do causes engineer to repair out of sync due to the fact they may need to stay and put out a fire before repairing or vice versa as to leave it to repair another peice of equipment would cause the first peice to break.
-
Incendiary is my main ammo choice.
Even as a gunner, I was surprized when I read that. :)
Ammo choices should always complement what the gun does; the problem with incendiary is the significantly reduced range, rate of fire AND clip size. This is why I would only ever use it for the Carronades, only they can throw out enough fire stacks to offset the negative effects.
These are the viable situations I can think of for incendiary:
Incendiary Heavy Carronade vs Junker, Mobula, Galleon
Incendiary Light Carronade vs Junker, Mobula
Edit: I failed to mention an exception, you can use them for reduced arming range on the Mine Launcher too
-
Edit: I failed to mention an exception, you can use them for reduced arming range on the Mine Launcher too
Don`t forget its uses on Lumberjacks and Flak guns (dependant ofc on how the captain assorts the ship loadout!)
-
I just had a thought.
4v4s, or Crazy King,
Flak Fish Build.
One Pilot - Kero, claw, drogue chute - Move and stabilize.
One Buffgi - Spanner, Mallet, Buff - Buff flak.
One Maingi - Spanner, Mallet, Chem - lots of chem.
One Amazing Gunner (you) - on heavy flak, with Incendiary.
Incendiary Flak, at a good range, can put fire on four/three heavy Galleon guns, put fire on an entire pyra, put much fire on a junker, etc. etc.
Incendiary Buff Flak Fish with amazing gunner would make a hell of a sniper support/kill ship. Use Incendiary to enable disables. Use other ammos to kill. Would work great (better than flak spires) on crazy kings.
-
Only of you have allies who you know will call their targets and give you the chance to shoot at a stripped ship, but yes, it could work... Plenty of room to change the loadouts too :)
-
the reason its usually my main is that im used to pilots that end up bumping into enemies.
incend on a gatling is deadly.
on a merc it helps hit a terget ducking for cover
flak for reason previously stated
carronade is the same as flak
and lumberjack is obvious :)
-
People might have been mistaken a bit...
Incendiary heavy flak for the sake of igniting more fires is completely redundant and you might as well use charged with better range, less trajectory arc and probably more overall damage to components than you would get from any additional fire stacks of incendiary heavy flak.
Incendiary flak-
direct hit(which I am extremely certain any good gunner would be challenged to hit directly at the component he needs with incendiary flak.)-
fires per clip-2.4
fires per second-0.353
aoe hit(a lot more likely.)-
fires per clip-2
fires per second-0.295
Now lets compare with normal heavy flak ignition rates:
aoe hit(ignition chance is aoe, therefore no need for direct hit.)-
fires per clip-1.6
fires per second-0.256
...Not much difference.
As to lumberjack - the lumberjack has no ignition chance to begin with, so it's straight up 20% added chance both in direct and aoe to ignite one stack. Considering you actually want to hit the balloon with the lumberjack and do significant damage, your direct ignition chance is lost with the balloon destruction. But we'll calculate both just for the heck of it.
ofc normal or any other ammo type that isn't incendiary will not have any ignition chance.
Moving to incendiary lumberjack-
direct hit(balloon pop is more important so its not recommended)-
fires per clip-2
fires per sec-0.132
aoe hit(more likely)-
fires per clip-1
fires per sec-0.066
Right, so you got about one stack of fire per clip on everything that wasn't chemical sprayed. and all you've done by that is either very slightly damage the enemy components or made the engineers chem spray them since it's only 1 stack - rendering all further incoming shots with incendiary useless.
Also keep in mind that both the lumberjack and the heavy flak don't have that big of an aoe as people make them to have. Not by any chance can they hit every component on any ship currently in the game with their aoe radius.
I agree with ZanC saying that incendiary carroandes are probably the only way to go, with the exception of probably the gatling gun that can have incendiary in very situational heavy disable situations.
Other than that, incendiary is only for arming distance reduction.
-
For a gunner I'd choose heatsink almost every time. Incendiary gat really doesn't start many fires and the dps is so low. Even on a mobula when we have extinguishers, I love getting hit by incendiary gat because it doesn't hurt. "Don't worry guys it's just incendiary keep shooting!"
Also for heavy carro don't shoot incendiary at ballon. Aim for hull and components. But the hull should be chem sprayed. Use heatsink on merc for 3 disable shots.
For explosive weapons I think the fire chance is relative to the amount of explosive dmg. So charged on heavy flak increases fire chance. If incendiary fire chance was increased to 50% it would be more balanced, but still not effective enough. Dps is usually better
-
Also for heavy carro don't shoot incendiary at ballon.
If you smash incendiary at a broken balloon/component, it will ignite the armor. If prioritizing component disables, Heavy/Charged is better.
My personal opinion after reading most of this thread - there are all kinds of misconception about this ammo. However, hopefully the discussion helps to learn, and there's nothing to stop players from playing with less optimal yet fun combinations.
-
I guess I should have clarified: don't shoot incendiary at an unbroken balloon because it'll break anyways and you're losing dps. Incendiary on the heavy carro is only really useful if you see them miss a chem on armor and components. It's a big if
-
I'm pretty sure that flak puts more than 1 stack of fire on a component.
It really shouldn't, but I've had 3+ fires definitely from a heavy flak.
@Exterminator
When I engineer, I find that any heavy flak shots (even with charged rounds) are one mallet hit on a component (with the rare exception of lochnagar). But incendiary heavy flak shots are at least a chemspray and a mallet. I think Incendiary gives a gun with our disable potentials a slight disable potential.
I wish we could mix ammo types. Imagine greased-incendiary mortars. So much fire everywhere.
-
GREASENDIARY GAT INCOMING
Might as well call it the Beehive or Hornet Storm.
EDIT: Muse, make it a thing!
-
I think the fire chance and the amount of fires are both relative to the amount of explosive damage. So using charged boosts the damage and fires. It's usually best to assume that they have a new chem before taking damage, so you want to do max dps. You need to break armor asap.
The advantage of incendiary is the reduced arm range, allowing you to do full damage at a closer range. This also makes it difficult to land shots at longer ranges. In arm time it rivals the dps of buffed charged.
-
I'm pretty sure that flak puts more than 1 stack of fire on a component.
It really shouldn't, but I've had 3+ fires definitely from a heavy flak.
oh absolutely, it has a chance of 20% to ignite 4 stacks of fire on aoe hit. But everything I was talking about there was average fire stacks since you can't assume anything else with this ammo type. you can get 20 stacks of fire, and you can get 0 stacks of fire. But most commonly, and accumulating over time of testing, it would produce 2 fires per clip and 0.295 fires per second on average upon aoe hit(incendiary).
-
Hmm...
I played a match some time ago with Sgt. Toast or something else.
He screamed "Oh Yeah! 8 STACKS OF FIRE!!" While manning Heavy Flak with Incendiary.
We weren't getting flamed, so I think he meant he put 8 Stacks on the enemy.
I know you can see how badly burnt enemy component is, but can you tell how many stacks?
-
I've seen what I can only describe as incendiary banshee causing 4 fire stacks in one hit. So it's possible that incendiary adds a second chance to deal the fire stacks of the weapon. Judging from the description it sounds like it just increases the gun's fire chance.
If you look closely you can tell relatively how much fire an enemy component has- or atleast you can with a flamed out gun.
-
yeah, with a flamed gun it's very clear because the entire thing starts glowing bright red.
-
The discussion has reached something very interesting that I have overlooked. We know incendiary gives 20% to both direct and AoE damage, but does this chance stack with itself to potentially give 2 fire stacks?
If this is true, in theory it would be
- 0 Stack: 64%
- 1 Stack: 32%
- 2 Stacks: 4%
After a good 30 minutes of testing, I've found that this IS true and incendiary has individual 20% chances which stacks.
-
The discussion has reached something very interesting that I have overlooked. We know incendiary gives 20% to both direct and AoE damage, but does this chance stack with itself to potentially give 2 fire stacks?
If this is true, in theory it would be
- 0 Stack: 64%
- 1 Stack: 32%
- 2 Stacks: 4%
After a good 30 minutes of testing, I've found that this IS true and incendiary has individual 20% chances which stacks.
This confused me as a diminishing stack like that would be (32+4)% = 36% fire chance. However, after many rounds of testing, it is still 40%. And within this 40%, there is a small chance you get 2 fires instead of 1. Not sure if this is intended, but it does make incendiary slightly stronger.
-
This confused me as a diminishing stack like that would be (32+4)% = 36% fire chance. However, after many rounds of testing, it is still 40%. And within this 40%, there is a small chance you get 2 fires instead of 1. Not sure if this is intended, but it does make incendiary slightly stronger.
It isn't a 36% chance but it's 40%. Since the 40% is referred to setting one stack of fire. 4% to set two stacks translates into 8% chance to setting 1 stack on fire which would add up to 40% in addition to the 32% to set 1 stack of fire. This is intended, since this is how probability works. You have one chance of 20% for setting stuff on fire for direct and 20% for setting stuff on fire for aoe, as depicted below(handdrawing it was easier)-
(http://i.imgur.com/XhLoXYP.jpg)
-
This confused me as a diminishing stack like that would be (32+4)% = 36% fire chance. However, after many rounds of testing, it is still 40%. And within this 40%, there is a small chance you get 2 fires instead of 1. Not sure if this is intended, but it does make incendiary slightly stronger.
It isn't a 36% chance but it's 40%. Since the 40% is referred to setting one stack of fire. 4% to set two stacks translates into 8% chance to setting 1 stack on fire which would add up to 40% in addition to the 32% to set 1 stack of fire. This is intended, since this is how probability works. You have one chance of 20% for setting stuff on fire for direct and 20% for setting stuff on fire for aoe, as depicted below(handdrawing it was easier)-
(http://i.imgur.com/XhLoXYP.jpg)
Gentlemen, you have given me faith in my math classes.
-
Actually, isn't possible for the secondary AoE damage (say, from heavy flak) to hit a large component (Balloon or Hull), more than once?
Or is that not a thing?
-
Actually, isn't possible for the secondary AoE damage (say, from heavy flak) to hit a large component (Balloon or Hull), more than once?
Or is that not a thing?
Nope, that isn't possible.
-
I love using incend as my first or second salvo on a gatling gun. With its peircing / shatter combo recuding most components to low HP a few fire stacks to help knock them down is nice, as an engie can't both extinguish and repair at the same time.
-
I love using incend as my first or second salvo on a gatling gun. With its peircing / shatter combo recuding most components to low HP a few fire stacks to help knock them down is nice, as an engie can't both extinguish and repair at the same time.
But you're a Cake, we all know you'd put Incendiary on a fire extinguisher if you could.
-
I love using incend as my first or second salvo on a gatling gun. With its peircing / shatter combo recuding most components to low HP a few fire stacks to help knock them down is nice, as an engie can't both extinguish and repair at the same time.
But you're a Cake, we all know you'd put Incendiary on a fire extinguisher if you could.
So a pistol but a Flamethrower for a Spy Firefighter?
Good idea...
-
I love using incend as my first or second salvo on a gatling gun. With its peircing / shatter combo recuding most components to low HP a few fire stacks to help knock them down is nice, as an engie can't both extinguish and repair at the same time.
But you're a Cake, we all know you'd put Incendiary on a fire extinguisher if you could.
So a pistol but a Flamethrower for a Spy Firefighter?
Good idea...
NO
YOU GUYS ARE TERRIFYING ENOUGH AS IT IS
-
How is the Incendiary round on the Minotaur?
I think Minotaur does the "Buckshot" that carronades do, at a much greater range. Is Incendiary any good on the Minotaur? I haven't been able to figure it out yet.
-
Well it further reduces the arm range which is a plus. The fire rate reduction isn't much of a big deal, but it reduces the clip size down to 3. As for the fire chance, it's minimal. 5 projectiles at 20% chance each has a probability of 3 fires per clip.
-
Well it further reduces the arm range which is a plus. The fire rate reduction isn't much of a big deal, but it reduces the clip size down to 3. As for the fire chance, it's minimal. 5 projectiles at 20% chance each has a probability of 3 fires per clip.
You'd think a 50% chance would be nice but then people'll start loading it in a gatling and.. dear god.
Welp, even more incentive to chemspray!
-
Well it further reduces the arm range which is a plus. The fire rate reduction isn't much of a big deal, but it reduces the clip size down to 3. As for the fire chance, it's minimal. 5 projectiles at 20% chance each has a probability of 3 fires per clip.
actually it's 6 fires per clip due to the chance being separate on direct and aoe.