886
The Gallery / Re: Camouflaged advertising?
« on: May 11, 2014, 05:20:36 pm »Crazy Dementio . At every call responds "I am Daniel".
Dementio
I am Daniel
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I am Daniel
887
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: A new piloting tool: Ship Stabilizer
« on: May 11, 2014, 10:34:20 am »
Have you considered harpoons?
If I had a Spire that has a harpoon on it it would instantly turn the spire out of arcs. Also it moves my ship towards the enemy which I actually don't want to happen.
This tool could allow me to use a harpoon on any ship and on any gun slot without having my ship turn against my will and without my ship getting pulled towards the enemy. I could actually reer the enemy in or even have them get stuck on the piece of cover that they were trying to get behind.
I see much more use for this tool when combined with a harpoon, when fighting mines or even combined with impact bumbers and less long range use.
Also, what would happen if everything on your ship is disabled? Does it still damage your engines/balloon/armor if you don't have these things anymore? Would it do perma hull damage? Or would the tool just not work if the thing that is to be damages is already destroyed? I think it would be rather useful to have a tool that can stop you from moving while your engines are down, like drouge chute slows your drop while your balloon is down.
Does it really have to damage anything? Why not leave it at bringing your ship to a deadstop no matter what you do while the tool is activated?
If you want to stop the tool from being abused why not leave it active for X seconds after deactivation or even ave the accelaration of everything be incredibly decreased and increase it by X% over a period of Y seconds until it's back to normal? Making it possible to move your ship again, but with the decreased accelartion your enemy can still gain the upper hand.
However, I do not see why the abuse of this tool would be severe enough to punish it in general. It should not reduce the damage you take or reduce recoil, which has nothing to do with the ship at all, making this tool less realistic than the entire game. It should just stabilize the ship and stop it from moving entirely.
The punishment already is when you have to give up a pilot tool. If you combine it with impact bumbers to counter rams entirely you have to give up 2 slots already leaving you only 1 more slot for more engine power or vertical evasion.
And Schwer: Having the tool interact with the throttle and stuff might confuse the player at times if they didn't read the description correctly. Causing more confusion than it was supposed to fix. Another possibility might be that the player is looking away while activating this tool, making it's interaction kinda pointless.
If I had a Spire that has a harpoon on it it would instantly turn the spire out of arcs. Also it moves my ship towards the enemy which I actually don't want to happen.
This tool could allow me to use a harpoon on any ship and on any gun slot without having my ship turn against my will and without my ship getting pulled towards the enemy. I could actually reer the enemy in or even have them get stuck on the piece of cover that they were trying to get behind.
I see much more use for this tool when combined with a harpoon, when fighting mines or even combined with impact bumbers and less long range use.
Also, what would happen if everything on your ship is disabled? Does it still damage your engines/balloon/armor if you don't have these things anymore? Would it do perma hull damage? Or would the tool just not work if the thing that is to be damages is already destroyed? I think it would be rather useful to have a tool that can stop you from moving while your engines are down, like drouge chute slows your drop while your balloon is down.
Does it really have to damage anything? Why not leave it at bringing your ship to a deadstop no matter what you do while the tool is activated?
If you want to stop the tool from being abused why not leave it active for X seconds after deactivation or even ave the accelaration of everything be incredibly decreased and increase it by X% over a period of Y seconds until it's back to normal? Making it possible to move your ship again, but with the decreased accelartion your enemy can still gain the upper hand.
However, I do not see why the abuse of this tool would be severe enough to punish it in general. It should not reduce the damage you take or reduce recoil, which has nothing to do with the ship at all, making this tool less realistic than the entire game. It should just stabilize the ship and stop it from moving entirely.
The punishment already is when you have to give up a pilot tool. If you combine it with impact bumbers to counter rams entirely you have to give up 2 slots already leaving you only 1 more slot for more engine power or vertical evasion.
And Schwer: Having the tool interact with the throttle and stuff might confuse the player at times if they didn't read the description correctly. Causing more confusion than it was supposed to fix. Another possibility might be that the player is looking away while activating this tool, making it's interaction kinda pointless.
888
Gameplay / Re: 1.3.6 Hotfix Flamethrower
« on: May 10, 2014, 07:06:27 pm »
I have my crew always take fire ext on mobula and sometimes even squid. Sometimes chem on squid is nice but if there is a flamer I am going to get the hell away from it, since massive engine and armor damage from tools and gatlings does not work well with fire, so fire ext is my only hero.
Another thing would be environments like desert scrap where you have to deal with sandstorms where could components die rather quickly and enemy losing you in the middle of it. Chem is rather inefficient 'cause you have to repair rather often in sandstorms which gets rid of fire immunity and then you would be forced to let the component die.
Also, if your general preferance is fire power instead of survivability you might as well bring flamer and just extinguish the guns and some other components if you have the time. If you manage to kill the enemy ship or disable the flamer quickly with your guns, it might be worth considering having your engis extinguish rather than re-chem everything just before impact.
Another thing would be environments like desert scrap where you have to deal with sandstorms where could components die rather quickly and enemy losing you in the middle of it. Chem is rather inefficient 'cause you have to repair rather often in sandstorms which gets rid of fire immunity and then you would be forced to let the component die.
Also, if your general preferance is fire power instead of survivability you might as well bring flamer and just extinguish the guns and some other components if you have the time. If you manage to kill the enemy ship or disable the flamer quickly with your guns, it might be worth considering having your engis extinguish rather than re-chem everything just before impact.
889
Gameplay / Re: Engineering Game 1.3.6
« on: May 08, 2014, 09:21:42 am »
If the old flamethrower did not pose a thread to engineers than it had to be buffed.
Also if the teamwork/communication needed to accomplish what Crafeksterty has adviced is just not there you may need to do chem spray and fire extinguisher, if you fear fires that much. You may be sacrificing superior mallet/spanner combo and use a pipe wrench instead, but if flamethrowers are the majority of the enemy damage output it might very well be worth it.
I never liked playing engineer. Flamerthrowers or not, I hate the feeling of having a component die on me because I took a sec too long to repair it or having the armor die because, (e.g.) I was repairing the engines, but leaving the engines would result into them being destroyed easier and the pilot having less moveability which might serve as a severe disadvantage in whatever fight we are in right now.
I never understood why people like to play engineer so much. You are always doing the same thing, even before 1.3.6 have I seen my engineers repeating the same pattern the engineer before them did. I don't see how it was enjoyable before.
And if you can't take the pressure of having flamers shooting at your ship in the middle of you repairing everything, then your pilot should, I dunno, stay out of the enemy's range?
Also if the teamwork/communication needed to accomplish what Crafeksterty has adviced is just not there you may need to do chem spray and fire extinguisher, if you fear fires that much. You may be sacrificing superior mallet/spanner combo and use a pipe wrench instead, but if flamethrowers are the majority of the enemy damage output it might very well be worth it.
I never liked playing engineer. Flamerthrowers or not, I hate the feeling of having a component die on me because I took a sec too long to repair it or having the armor die because, (e.g.) I was repairing the engines, but leaving the engines would result into them being destroyed easier and the pilot having less moveability which might serve as a severe disadvantage in whatever fight we are in right now.
I never understood why people like to play engineer so much. You are always doing the same thing, even before 1.3.6 have I seen my engineers repeating the same pattern the engineer before them did. I don't see how it was enjoyable before.
And if you can't take the pressure of having flamers shooting at your ship in the middle of you repairing everything, then your pilot should, I dunno, stay out of the enemy's range?
890
Feedback and Suggestions / Re: Rocket Harpoon.
« on: May 08, 2014, 08:55:24 am »
I approve of this, also you are not the only one that thought of a medium gun that can push ships away. Only thing I am worried about regarding this gun is that it's piercing damage and explosive damage combined could make it a gun that can kill ships rather quickly on it's own. It might even replace the flak entirely...
891
Gameplay / Re: 1.3.6 Hotfix Flamethrower
« on: May 07, 2014, 06:49:00 pm »
I was not oblivious of the damage the flamethrower did to you:
Mind you that the missing flamethrower wasn't necessarily THE reason why CsRy lost to you. It was failed engagements. Your team just picked 1 out of those two pyramidions killing it in an incredible short amount of time, leaving the other to die in a simple 2v1. There was this one successful engagement of CsRy that did a number to you though, you were practically helpless.
Also, the double carronade pyramidion did survive a 2v1 on fjords against you for a rather long amount of time, making your argument of having a "gunner on guns longer" kinda irrelevant since this survivability would have not been possible with only 1 carronade and a flamer against chem sprayed everything.
The flamethrower would have only gotten it's use if the engagement took longer, like the ones OVW had. But this was not the case for CsRy and with flamethrower certainly wouldn't have lasted too much longer since chem spray was still on everything and it was most of the time a 2v1 scenario where it barely matters what guns that 1 ship has.
Also I do not understand why you would think that the flamethrower should not be overwhelming to a crew as it is. Almost no gun is not overwhelming in this game:
- A carronade can keep your balloon down, indefenitely
- A gatling destroys your armor, you can only delay the armors destruction with 1-3 mallet hits, but it WILL go down.
- Same for hades and mercury, however chem spraying against the hades DOES make it seem weaker
- Half of all explosive gun can finish an entire ship in 1 full clip before it's armor is even back up (if only 1 engineer is on it, but how often do you manage to get a second one on it?)
- Hwacha, being better at destroying all components on a ship and carousel having it's high fire ignition side effect, should not be too strong, else it replaces every mortar/flak in the game. The artemis being more popular for long range disable, although having good explosive damage, but low fire rate too...
- Mines, well, that one is pretty self explanatory. It's greatest weakness is that it has to deploy first before the immense damage kicks in. Good thing gunners have the tools and, combined with good pilot fly, the skill to hit the enemy anyway.
It has been stated before: The flamethrower does everything, but in no category is it better than any other gun in this game. It is ultimately relying on a second gun doing the actual damage. Best choice seems to be the carronade with it's power to get an entire crew to work on 1 component when it comes down to it.
We have talked about the strong points of the flamethrower already, over time it's just too much and wins the engagement. (Why it shouldn't is beyond my understanding. Why have a gun that makes you lose the upper hand?)
Now let's make the weak points of this gun clear again:
- If anti fire tools are used correctly the flamethrower alone is entirely useless.
- If I am not wrong, this gun has the shortest range of all guns in this game.
I mean come on, how hard is it not to fly into it? Also, isn't that what almost everybody said when the triple art Junker was a thing?: "Don't fly headfirst into it!", "Don't try to brawl it!", "Get out of it's sight, cover and more basic anti-long range tactics!". This is exactly the same, only that the flamethrower can't hit at long range!
If you make a mistake and let the enemy get close to you with superior close range weapons (which also applies for gat/mortar) than it's your own damn fault! And don't get a "it depends on the map" argument going. Saying long range on dunes is superior to close range is the same thing as saying the same about gat/mortar on dawn. Although in dawn you do have more cover than on dunes...
What do you do against flamer/carro in dawn? I say what do you do against gat/mortar in dawn! It's the exact same thing! Both gun combination have their advantages in their own category, but they both have the same disadvantages. It isn't the flamethrower that is too powerful for you, I say that you are just too lazy to actually deal with it! And if this were to be true I would even go as far as saying that you think so because carro/flamer is too effective against your precious little Junker than gat/mortar, but that might be a bit more personal and go into an entire wrong direction...
Do you see what I think about the flamer now? It's easy to counter, if you just avoid it! It's even easier to counter than any other gun in the game, because you don't need pilot skillz or the right ship choice to render this gun useless, just let the crew chem everything if you can't be bothered otherwise! But don't just come complaining about it's power if you sit in the flamethrower's fires for 3 hours without it actually managing to kill you the entire time and at the same time having rendered you disabled because you thought it was a good idea to just let the fires engulf you in the first place! Why did you think it was a good idea? Because you have a chemical spray on everything all the time! Screw fires, ain't I right mate?
Seriously. That gun is not hard to beat and certainly doesn't dictate over your ship and loadout choices more than any other gun already does, without you thinking about it. (Why do I need a mallet again? Surely it must be because of fires and not because the gatling is soo good at destroying hull armors!). Every short range counters works for every short range gun. The flamethrower being one of them. Just counter it! It's not impossible and certainly isn't hard.
Maybe it's more psychological bullshit: The longer the gun disables you and does not kill you, the more you see how powerful it is. Or maybe you are just not used to this immense amount of damage, since piercing guns still take their own while to shred the junker's armor and thus you often don't get killed as fast as other ships. Other ships for example are spires which are probably the weakest ships against anything armor destroying, making even simple slow rams kill it, unlike the junker.
And everybody can rebuild even before the hwacha reloaded.
Regarding nerf on that gun: Lowering rate of fire is fine with me, but lowering chance of ignition is a bit more tricky. If it's too low I might just bring a carousel or incendary rounds or even both, since the stacks are why I would want a flamer. This is what a flamer does and why it is as powerful a gun as it is. You said it yourself that the dealing with it causes overwhelm. What would cause this "overwhelm" if not the fire stacks?
Also, I am not fond of decreasing the flamethrowers clip, since I am used to it having an incredible large clip and the image of it having less clip just doesn't want to fit in my head. Also, less clip causes more reload, which can cause a gunner to easily switch between ammounition for different ranges much quicker, where as now the gunner would have to "guess" if greased is ok and the pilot can stay in range. The second he gets out of range the gunner will most likely try to change ammunition to something longer ranged (lesmok) which opens up a window of no damage and the enemy can gain more distance. If the reload happened more often or too often the gunner can estimate if the enemy ship is getting out of range for lesmok or is going to be IN range for greased and switch ammo during the natural reload to something more appropriate. This gives the gun more advantages in the hand of an attentive gunner than disadvantages in general, thus not really nerfing it in that regard. If you however made the reload longer, like almost too long, than the timewindow for counter attacks is much greater.
But I honestly doubt that that is necessary at all.
Regarding the fire extinguisher: It's either buff it or nerf chem spray. But of course you can leave it as it is too, since for certain situations fire ext is just better than chem spray. It's just that most people that learn of chemical spray almost never use fire extinguisher again believeing it is in general "weaker" than chem spray, especially since with chem spray you can fight fires while not having it interrupt with your repair cooldowns. On the contray you would have to use fire extinguisher indefnitely to fight constant fires without ever getting to actually repair anything. But then again, if it comes down to it and a component has more than 3 stacks of fire the fire ext does offer a much quicker solution to the problem...
However, I believe, the weaknesses of these two tools is what makes fire as powerful as it is and as well their strength combined (pipe/fire ext/chem engineer) offer you the power to be completely immune to fire.
As an engineer you give up either
- Best repair & rebuild power (Mallet/Spanner)
- Buff
- Fire immunity
"Pipe wrench/buff/chem spray"-engineer being the best combination of all these things, but it's just not the best at what it does. (Chance of fire overwhelming, less repair/rebuild power)
This should be discussed in another thread though.
I dunno what it is that makes you believe this gun is "too overwhelming", which is total bullshit since all guns are overwhelming in their own aspect and have a right to be so! (#GunRights) Or that this gun adds too many fire stacks, but if it was lowered too much carousel and inc could add more fire stacks and if the number of stacks was lowered just enough people almost wouldn't notice the difference between the flamer and inc carrousel, regarding stacks alone.
The fire stacks really make you wanna sacrifice something to effectively have a firefighter on your ship does it not? What do you want to sacrifice: The best repair/-build power in the game? The ability to buff? Or do you really sacrifice the gunner class only because you are not good enough to not get close to flamethrowers? Yes, harsh assumption, I know, but you haven't stated yet that you can indeed keep yourself away from it. But if you can, what's your problem again?
I say once more that the Flamethrower is just right.
It also has the power to get rid of endless buff on really everything. There once was a discussion about how the buff tool does not have any disadvantages compared to anything else in the game, other than the fact that it is timed.
Either way. Either 1 engineer has to be a firefighter or the gunner class gets out of the picture or you just don't get close to that gun. Do you let your crew adapt to fire or do you use basic short range counter and let your crew be optimised for your ship and guns?
It's all up to the captain of the ship.
Yes, I can argument with you about the Flamethrower until Adventure Mode is released! If you want to of course.
By the way, I am Daniel
The carronade alone did the trick, the flamer only added disabling power while everybody was busy on the balloon, effectively rendering their entire ship useless if they managed to get the balloon back up without somebody destroying it again.It's a bit less detail though. Also, incoming wall of text with no summery! Also another warning, there might be a lot of redundancy, for which I want to apologize in advance.
Mind you that the missing flamethrower wasn't necessarily THE reason why CsRy lost to you. It was failed engagements. Your team just picked 1 out of those two pyramidions killing it in an incredible short amount of time, leaving the other to die in a simple 2v1. There was this one successful engagement of CsRy that did a number to you though, you were practically helpless.
Also, the double carronade pyramidion did survive a 2v1 on fjords against you for a rather long amount of time, making your argument of having a "gunner on guns longer" kinda irrelevant since this survivability would have not been possible with only 1 carronade and a flamer against chem sprayed everything.
The flamethrower would have only gotten it's use if the engagement took longer, like the ones OVW had. But this was not the case for CsRy and with flamethrower certainly wouldn't have lasted too much longer since chem spray was still on everything and it was most of the time a 2v1 scenario where it barely matters what guns that 1 ship has.
Also I do not understand why you would think that the flamethrower should not be overwhelming to a crew as it is. Almost no gun is not overwhelming in this game:
- A carronade can keep your balloon down, indefenitely
- A gatling destroys your armor, you can only delay the armors destruction with 1-3 mallet hits, but it WILL go down.
- Same for hades and mercury, however chem spraying against the hades DOES make it seem weaker
- Half of all explosive gun can finish an entire ship in 1 full clip before it's armor is even back up (if only 1 engineer is on it, but how often do you manage to get a second one on it?)
- Hwacha, being better at destroying all components on a ship and carousel having it's high fire ignition side effect, should not be too strong, else it replaces every mortar/flak in the game. The artemis being more popular for long range disable, although having good explosive damage, but low fire rate too...
- Mines, well, that one is pretty self explanatory. It's greatest weakness is that it has to deploy first before the immense damage kicks in. Good thing gunners have the tools and, combined with good pilot fly, the skill to hit the enemy anyway.
It has been stated before: The flamethrower does everything, but in no category is it better than any other gun in this game. It is ultimately relying on a second gun doing the actual damage. Best choice seems to be the carronade with it's power to get an entire crew to work on 1 component when it comes down to it.
We have talked about the strong points of the flamethrower already, over time it's just too much and wins the engagement. (Why it shouldn't is beyond my understanding. Why have a gun that makes you lose the upper hand?)
Now let's make the weak points of this gun clear again:
- If anti fire tools are used correctly the flamethrower alone is entirely useless.
- If I am not wrong, this gun has the shortest range of all guns in this game.
I mean come on, how hard is it not to fly into it? Also, isn't that what almost everybody said when the triple art Junker was a thing?: "Don't fly headfirst into it!", "Don't try to brawl it!", "Get out of it's sight, cover and more basic anti-long range tactics!". This is exactly the same, only that the flamethrower can't hit at long range!
If you make a mistake and let the enemy get close to you with superior close range weapons (which also applies for gat/mortar) than it's your own damn fault! And don't get a "it depends on the map" argument going. Saying long range on dunes is superior to close range is the same thing as saying the same about gat/mortar on dawn. Although in dawn you do have more cover than on dunes...
What do you do against flamer/carro in dawn? I say what do you do against gat/mortar in dawn! It's the exact same thing! Both gun combination have their advantages in their own category, but they both have the same disadvantages. It isn't the flamethrower that is too powerful for you, I say that you are just too lazy to actually deal with it! And if this were to be true I would even go as far as saying that you think so because carro/flamer is too effective against your precious little Junker than gat/mortar, but that might be a bit more personal and go into an entire wrong direction...
Do you see what I think about the flamer now? It's easy to counter, if you just avoid it! It's even easier to counter than any other gun in the game, because you don't need pilot skillz or the right ship choice to render this gun useless, just let the crew chem everything if you can't be bothered otherwise! But don't just come complaining about it's power if you sit in the flamethrower's fires for 3 hours without it actually managing to kill you the entire time and at the same time having rendered you disabled because you thought it was a good idea to just let the fires engulf you in the first place! Why did you think it was a good idea? Because you have a chemical spray on everything all the time! Screw fires, ain't I right mate?
Seriously. That gun is not hard to beat and certainly doesn't dictate over your ship and loadout choices more than any other gun already does, without you thinking about it. (Why do I need a mallet again? Surely it must be because of fires and not because the gatling is soo good at destroying hull armors!). Every short range counters works for every short range gun. The flamethrower being one of them. Just counter it! It's not impossible and certainly isn't hard.
Maybe it's more psychological bullshit: The longer the gun disables you and does not kill you, the more you see how powerful it is. Or maybe you are just not used to this immense amount of damage, since piercing guns still take their own while to shred the junker's armor and thus you often don't get killed as fast as other ships. Other ships for example are spires which are probably the weakest ships against anything armor destroying, making even simple slow rams kill it, unlike the junker.
And everybody can rebuild even before the hwacha reloaded.
Regarding nerf on that gun: Lowering rate of fire is fine with me, but lowering chance of ignition is a bit more tricky. If it's too low I might just bring a carousel or incendary rounds or even both, since the stacks are why I would want a flamer. This is what a flamer does and why it is as powerful a gun as it is. You said it yourself that the dealing with it causes overwhelm. What would cause this "overwhelm" if not the fire stacks?
Also, I am not fond of decreasing the flamethrowers clip, since I am used to it having an incredible large clip and the image of it having less clip just doesn't want to fit in my head. Also, less clip causes more reload, which can cause a gunner to easily switch between ammounition for different ranges much quicker, where as now the gunner would have to "guess" if greased is ok and the pilot can stay in range. The second he gets out of range the gunner will most likely try to change ammunition to something longer ranged (lesmok) which opens up a window of no damage and the enemy can gain more distance. If the reload happened more often or too often the gunner can estimate if the enemy ship is getting out of range for lesmok or is going to be IN range for greased and switch ammo during the natural reload to something more appropriate. This gives the gun more advantages in the hand of an attentive gunner than disadvantages in general, thus not really nerfing it in that regard. If you however made the reload longer, like almost too long, than the timewindow for counter attacks is much greater.
But I honestly doubt that that is necessary at all.
Regarding the fire extinguisher: It's either buff it or nerf chem spray. But of course you can leave it as it is too, since for certain situations fire ext is just better than chem spray. It's just that most people that learn of chemical spray almost never use fire extinguisher again believeing it is in general "weaker" than chem spray, especially since with chem spray you can fight fires while not having it interrupt with your repair cooldowns. On the contray you would have to use fire extinguisher indefnitely to fight constant fires without ever getting to actually repair anything. But then again, if it comes down to it and a component has more than 3 stacks of fire the fire ext does offer a much quicker solution to the problem...
However, I believe, the weaknesses of these two tools is what makes fire as powerful as it is and as well their strength combined (pipe/fire ext/chem engineer) offer you the power to be completely immune to fire.
As an engineer you give up either
- Best repair & rebuild power (Mallet/Spanner)
- Buff
- Fire immunity
"Pipe wrench/buff/chem spray"-engineer being the best combination of all these things, but it's just not the best at what it does. (Chance of fire overwhelming, less repair/rebuild power)
This should be discussed in another thread though.
I dunno what it is that makes you believe this gun is "too overwhelming", which is total bullshit since all guns are overwhelming in their own aspect and have a right to be so! (#GunRights) Or that this gun adds too many fire stacks, but if it was lowered too much carousel and inc could add more fire stacks and if the number of stacks was lowered just enough people almost wouldn't notice the difference between the flamer and inc carrousel, regarding stacks alone.
The fire stacks really make you wanna sacrifice something to effectively have a firefighter on your ship does it not? What do you want to sacrifice: The best repair/-build power in the game? The ability to buff? Or do you really sacrifice the gunner class only because you are not good enough to not get close to flamethrowers? Yes, harsh assumption, I know, but you haven't stated yet that you can indeed keep yourself away from it. But if you can, what's your problem again?
I say once more that the Flamethrower is just right.
It also has the power to get rid of endless buff on really everything. There once was a discussion about how the buff tool does not have any disadvantages compared to anything else in the game, other than the fact that it is timed.
Either way. Either 1 engineer has to be a firefighter or the gunner class gets out of the picture or you just don't get close to that gun. Do you let your crew adapt to fire or do you use basic short range counter and let your crew be optimised for your ship and guns?
It's all up to the captain of the ship.
Yes, I can argument with you about the Flamethrower until Adventure Mode is released! If you want to of course.
By the way, I am Daniel
892
Gameplay / Re: 1.3.6 Hotfix Flamethrower
« on: May 07, 2014, 03:55:08 pm »
Galleons, Spires and Mobulas all have the power to go long range and kill any ship with a flamethrower before it even gets close. If any of these ships decide to go close range it comes down to how good their pilots are at predicting and teamworking.
If the flamer would be such a concern in competitive matches I wonder why gat/mortar isn't. It just obliterates anything if it gets the chance and I doubt too many people will give up this power for 1 "ok" flamethrower that might even be ineffective because of chem spray...
Also even on the previous mentioned ships you only need 2 engineers to keep chem spray going enough for infinite until something gets broken by something else (most of the time a carronade).
Every ship can be used in competitive, even with loadouts like 5 harpoons on a mobula. It only comes down to wether the team flying these ships can actually fly them. If it can't it should either choose other ships or practise them a bit more.
If the flamer would be such a concern in competitive matches I wonder why gat/mortar isn't. It just obliterates anything if it gets the chance and I doubt too many people will give up this power for 1 "ok" flamethrower that might even be ineffective because of chem spray...
Also even on the previous mentioned ships you only need 2 engineers to keep chem spray going enough for infinite until something gets broken by something else (most of the time a carronade).
Every ship can be used in competitive, even with loadouts like 5 harpoons on a mobula. It only comes down to wether the team flying these ships can actually fly them. If it can't it should either choose other ships or practise them a bit more.
893
Gameplay / Re: 1.3.6 Hotfix Flamethrower
« on: May 07, 2014, 06:34:35 am »
Then we should discuss what to do with the anti-fire tools, if not Fire Extinguisher only, and leave the Flamethrower as it is, for the time being.
894
Gameplay / Re: 1.3.6 Hotfix Flamethrower
« on: May 06, 2014, 08:53:22 pm »
Yes, thank you for pointing out one of my missing clarifications. I thought I had mentioned it somewhere, but I will do it now anyway. I agree with you on the point of the flamerthrower always being a powerful gun. But for some reason not many have used it.
Might I add, that adding the flamethrower does not necessarily beat the Mandarians. Overwatch had demonstrated great teamwork and managed to split the mandarians up, went out of their gun arcs and just picked at the ducks one by one until they died. The carronade alone did the trick, the flamer only added disabling power while everybody was busy on the balloon, effectively rendering their entire ship useless if they managed to get the balloon back up without somebody destroying it again.
The Mandarians needed one another and since they choose the same ship, they had the same weakness in common. Overwatch could effectively beat them in any 1v1 scenario once the carronade went down. Mind you, the carronade did most the work, not the flamethrower.
There is a lot of other stuff that can be said, but I think that's enough to clarify that the flamethrower was not THE gun that led ovw to victory on that one match.
Now, I don't know if you actually know why it was in the patch at all, but I will try to explain it to you why it was:
As most know by now, the flamerthrower's particles have the ability to go through components and the flamethrower shoots tons of that particle stuff at once. These particles had a problem, namely - and I am honestly not sure if I got that entirely correct either - they were traveling so fast that some of these particles weren't calculated correctly, leading to an unpredictable behaviour of the gun. A buf which had to be fixed.
Once this topic was brought up MUSE "fixed" the gun, ergo every single particle hit correctly. This in turn led to a tremendous amount of damage that nobody could deal with it. Before the nerf it was said that double flamer rivaled the power of gat/mortar, which is pretty damn strong.
Now after the nerf, I don't see that problem anymore. It wasn't about the community, it was about fixing a bug and MUSE did fix a buf. This fix however led to an imbalance of the game resulting into a discussion on how to "balance" it again.
I say, it already is balanced and thus won't need more nerf, although I would accept having it's firening speed or AoE decreased, but that's about it.
This "fix" made the gun look more appealing to more people and when more people use it, MORE people use it as well! Spreading like virus.
Really, I think that gun is fine and a damage reduction of 1% won't change anything. Heck, I bet MUSE could say that the damage has been reduced by 25% without actually having reduced the damage (a Hoax!) and most would not know better...
I do believe that those who still are against the flamethrower believe it to be too strong compared to pre-1.3.6 because it gets more use than before. Simply because people use it more.
Let me tell you about ANOTHER one of my experiences in the game:
I once did double flamethrower pyra BEFORE the flamerthrower buff, more than once, and, by the gods, did we annhilate the opposition! If I wouldn't know better, I would say that the Flamethrower is even weaker than it was before the patch! But that might just be subjective gibberish...
Anyhow, I stand and say that this gun is fine for the time being.
If the noobs didn't know how to fight fires before 1.3.6 than they have as much of a chance against it as they did before.
Same with competitive gameplay. If higher levels were beaten up by a flamer before 1.3.6, there wouldn't be much difference to now either.
Nothing changed and if people think that the gun was fine before, it is fine now.
Might I add, that adding the flamethrower does not necessarily beat the Mandarians. Overwatch had demonstrated great teamwork and managed to split the mandarians up, went out of their gun arcs and just picked at the ducks one by one until they died. The carronade alone did the trick, the flamer only added disabling power while everybody was busy on the balloon, effectively rendering their entire ship useless if they managed to get the balloon back up without somebody destroying it again.
The Mandarians needed one another and since they choose the same ship, they had the same weakness in common. Overwatch could effectively beat them in any 1v1 scenario once the carronade went down. Mind you, the carronade did most the work, not the flamethrower.
There is a lot of other stuff that can be said, but I think that's enough to clarify that the flamethrower was not THE gun that led ovw to victory on that one match.
Now, I don't know if you actually know why it was in the patch at all, but I will try to explain it to you why it was:
As most know by now, the flamerthrower's particles have the ability to go through components and the flamethrower shoots tons of that particle stuff at once. These particles had a problem, namely - and I am honestly not sure if I got that entirely correct either - they were traveling so fast that some of these particles weren't calculated correctly, leading to an unpredictable behaviour of the gun. A buf which had to be fixed.
Once this topic was brought up MUSE "fixed" the gun, ergo every single particle hit correctly. This in turn led to a tremendous amount of damage that nobody could deal with it. Before the nerf it was said that double flamer rivaled the power of gat/mortar, which is pretty damn strong.
Now after the nerf, I don't see that problem anymore. It wasn't about the community, it was about fixing a bug and MUSE did fix a buf. This fix however led to an imbalance of the game resulting into a discussion on how to "balance" it again.
I say, it already is balanced and thus won't need more nerf, although I would accept having it's firening speed or AoE decreased, but that's about it.
This "fix" made the gun look more appealing to more people and when more people use it, MORE people use it as well! Spreading like virus.
Really, I think that gun is fine and a damage reduction of 1% won't change anything. Heck, I bet MUSE could say that the damage has been reduced by 25% without actually having reduced the damage (a Hoax!) and most would not know better...
I do believe that those who still are against the flamethrower believe it to be too strong compared to pre-1.3.6 because it gets more use than before. Simply because people use it more.
Let me tell you about ANOTHER one of my experiences in the game:
I once did double flamethrower pyra BEFORE the flamerthrower buff, more than once, and, by the gods, did we annhilate the opposition! If I wouldn't know better, I would say that the Flamethrower is even weaker than it was before the patch! But that might just be subjective gibberish...
Anyhow, I stand and say that this gun is fine for the time being.
If the noobs didn't know how to fight fires before 1.3.6 than they have as much of a chance against it as they did before.
Same with competitive gameplay. If higher levels were beaten up by a flamer before 1.3.6, there wouldn't be much difference to now either.
Nothing changed and if people think that the gun was fine before, it is fine now.
895
Gameplay / Re: 1.3.6 Hotfix Flamethrower
« on: May 05, 2014, 08:49:22 pm »
To be honest, I haven't played too often lately so I have no idea how many flamethrowers there are.
And now a warning: I will now try to summerize the majority of arguments and statemants against flamers and try to counter it with my own. If you wanna read this, it might take a while and is full of stuff I already mentioned. I only want to make others see what I see, because that's apparently not the case. At the end is a little summarization and I hope I got it all down, if you really don't wanna read this.
Argument #1: Flamethrower dictates an entire ship in order to counter it.
Counter argument: Every other gun in the game requires my entire crew to bring repair tools. Else there would be more gunner with buff tools. I need a repair tool to counter shatter damage on engines and guns, I need a repair tool to counter flachette damage on balloons and I need a repair tool to counter piercing damage on the armor. There is no difference between this and the flamethrower.
The flamethrower does fire damage, which can't be countered with a repair tool, so you have to bring either fire extinguisher or chem spray, maybe even both. Even a gunner can counter it with heatsink, but heatsink isn't always the best type of ammunition for guns so the gunner has to know when to use it, and god forbid if it's too late.
The flamethrower does a lot of fire, if not perma chem spray/heatsink and if things go problematic you have to let the fire kill whatever is on fire or use a fire extinguisher if one is around.
If countered correctly you can almost nullify the damage output of this gun, no other gun in this game gives you the privilege of countering it to such a great extent.
Argument #1 can be seen as either entirely invalid or valid when it takes every other gun into account too, since you have stuff to counter every gun in the game to some extent.
For carronades there is even a pilot tool (drouge chute) and no engineer in the world can keep up with the gun AND at times requires the entire crew repairing balloon and hull to stay alive. Is that not op? At least I can beat the flamer without having to fear the ground. This effectively counters every flamethrower on the enemy ship, without the pilot actually having to do something and still have somebody shooting without disturbances (e.g.: Gun destruction, balloon destruction leading to the gun to be out of arc).
Example: Enemy pyra has double flamethrower
Once my crew gets going I see an enemy being useless, thus allowing my team to effectively beat up his ally in a 2v1 scenario which leads to a 5:0 victory.
Example: Enemy pyra has flame/carro combo
The carronade will fuck me up before the flamer gets in range. Therefore I will make use of special pilot skillz and teamwork for suprise attacks or to disable the enemy guns before they even get close to me. This is basic piloting with strategy, not necessarily a flamer counter.
Example: Enemy Spire has flamethrower and 3 more guns to back it up.
Same as before. Don't give the enemy the opportunity to even use it.
Last Example and very often mentioned: Triple-quadritruple Flamer Squid Trifecta of Fire.
Squid with their high manouverbility can counter almost any ship in close range. If it gets close to me I will be forced to tank the fire if I can't kill it from the very beginning. While tanking I hope my ally gets my message and goes for the squid. The squid with its low armor health will naturally escape, this is where it loses flamer arcs and I can effectively concentrate on shooting it down.
Double flamer squid? Go long range and camp in a corner is the easiest counter strategy. You don't even need anti-fire tools for it.
If you think that is just stupid: Charging headfirst into a flak spire while at least 1km away is stupid. Long range is a tactic and squids are known for not being good at long range. This will lead to victory.
Argument #2: With the new power of the flamer a 3rd engineer with either chem spray or fire extinguisher is obligatory, at least on certain ships that to some are hard to repair in general.
Since it never actually became harder to counter the flamethrower Argument #2 lacks arguments. The real problem here is that more people have started using it and you are just not used to the amount of flamethrower, does not used to keep up with perma chem spray.
Let me tell you that before the buff Flamer was still devastating once a chem spray has been forgotten or missed. Again, only more people use it, thus you will meet the flamer in situations where you once thought you wouldn't meet a flamer. Get used to it.
This is like the artemis hype all over again. Too many people used the artemis thus everybodies guns and engines were down, even from a longer distance. It eventually led to death. The artemis then got a nerf in which it didn't really get weaker, but harder to use.
The flamer is a close range gun and close range gun are usually easy to use, the best counter to it is long range. This applies for all close range guns like the famous gat/mortar combo.
Argument #3: Less experienced don't know how to deal with flamethrower.
Again this was a problem before, but now that this gun actually gets used, it deserves to be mentioned.
I stated that we have to rely on tutorials on this one. Of course not everybody takes a look at them. But from personal experience I can say that I am glad to have a decent tutorial showing all the basics I need to know to play this game correctly. When I started playing this game, the tutorials lacked content. I had no idea what my pilot tools did, because I had yet to earn the ability to read the description. And some point I got it down, read the forums for guides, asked other player what to do and learned. Now people say I am a good pilot. You start every game low and you have to learn stuff to become better.
Biography aside, it is up to the new players wether they want to learn how to play this game correctly or just have fun by doing what they want to do.
The latter is often not widely supported, but I feel MUSE does its best to enable this feature. If somebody decides quit playing this game because of one gun that they have yet to learn how to counter, it does require some tuning, without a doubt. Maybe this gun just requires such a high amount of teamwork to counter that it should be locked for less experienced players, but is certainly doesn't deserve another nerve regarding % of stack, damage in general and range.
Concerning Argument #3 I have to be honest: I have no idea what do to in this situation. All I can say is that the gun is fine as it is and changing it's ease of use is no ease task, since it is close range and in close range everything is easy to use (e.g.: Hit the balloon with a carronade, hit the hull with gat/mortar. Not the hardest things in the world).
To summerize a bit of what I wanted to say and maybe a bit more stuff, I dunno:
- Every gun needs to be countered, the flamer only has it's own tools for it.
- And Fire extinguisher usually isn't the way to go against a Flamethrower, so there is only 1 tool being used that has been used for forever.
- Fire Extinguisher might need a buff
- If counter is successful: Flamer is useless and can render an entire ship useless (Double Flame Pyra)
- Strategy is always a counter to flamer (long range), which does not negate the usefulness of the gunner
- The gunner himself can use heatsink to not worry about his main gun or other guns getting set on fire.
This does replace an engineer circle of chem spray for guns only. But it also depends on the gunner to know when best to use heatsink, if the pilot is busy.
- A flamer squid catching you of guard is like a mine or burst Hwacha hitting you while you are off guard. Stuff is destroyed and without help from your ally eventually kills you. "How to teamwork"
- Flamer was always devastating. Because of the the lack of use nobody ever paid it any heed.
- Subconcious/Psychological bullshit going on where excessive use of flamethrower gives it special powers, which it doesn not possess
- More nerf might push the flamer back to the corner of never used guns
- New players have to learn the game in order to defend their fun, somewhat. If you happen to not know how to shoot a gun in (example) counter strike, you will not have fun.
Please consider that it was rather late when I wrote this and thus might lack some clarifications here and there.
And now a warning: I will now try to summerize the majority of arguments and statemants against flamers and try to counter it with my own. If you wanna read this, it might take a while and is full of stuff I already mentioned. I only want to make others see what I see, because that's apparently not the case. At the end is a little summarization and I hope I got it all down, if you really don't wanna read this.
Argument #1: Flamethrower dictates an entire ship in order to counter it.
Counter argument: Every other gun in the game requires my entire crew to bring repair tools. Else there would be more gunner with buff tools. I need a repair tool to counter shatter damage on engines and guns, I need a repair tool to counter flachette damage on balloons and I need a repair tool to counter piercing damage on the armor. There is no difference between this and the flamethrower.
The flamethrower does fire damage, which can't be countered with a repair tool, so you have to bring either fire extinguisher or chem spray, maybe even both. Even a gunner can counter it with heatsink, but heatsink isn't always the best type of ammunition for guns so the gunner has to know when to use it, and god forbid if it's too late.
The flamethrower does a lot of fire, if not perma chem spray/heatsink and if things go problematic you have to let the fire kill whatever is on fire or use a fire extinguisher if one is around.
If countered correctly you can almost nullify the damage output of this gun, no other gun in this game gives you the privilege of countering it to such a great extent.
Argument #1 can be seen as either entirely invalid or valid when it takes every other gun into account too, since you have stuff to counter every gun in the game to some extent.
For carronades there is even a pilot tool (drouge chute) and no engineer in the world can keep up with the gun AND at times requires the entire crew repairing balloon and hull to stay alive. Is that not op? At least I can beat the flamer without having to fear the ground. This effectively counters every flamethrower on the enemy ship, without the pilot actually having to do something and still have somebody shooting without disturbances (e.g.: Gun destruction, balloon destruction leading to the gun to be out of arc).
Example: Enemy pyra has double flamethrower
Once my crew gets going I see an enemy being useless, thus allowing my team to effectively beat up his ally in a 2v1 scenario which leads to a 5:0 victory.
Example: Enemy pyra has flame/carro combo
The carronade will fuck me up before the flamer gets in range. Therefore I will make use of special pilot skillz and teamwork for suprise attacks or to disable the enemy guns before they even get close to me. This is basic piloting with strategy, not necessarily a flamer counter.
Example: Enemy Spire has flamethrower and 3 more guns to back it up.
Same as before. Don't give the enemy the opportunity to even use it.
Last Example and very often mentioned: Triple-quadritruple Flamer Squid Trifecta of Fire.
Squid with their high manouverbility can counter almost any ship in close range. If it gets close to me I will be forced to tank the fire if I can't kill it from the very beginning. While tanking I hope my ally gets my message and goes for the squid. The squid with its low armor health will naturally escape, this is where it loses flamer arcs and I can effectively concentrate on shooting it down.
Double flamer squid? Go long range and camp in a corner is the easiest counter strategy. You don't even need anti-fire tools for it.
If you think that is just stupid: Charging headfirst into a flak spire while at least 1km away is stupid. Long range is a tactic and squids are known for not being good at long range. This will lead to victory.
Argument #2: With the new power of the flamer a 3rd engineer with either chem spray or fire extinguisher is obligatory, at least on certain ships that to some are hard to repair in general.
Since it never actually became harder to counter the flamethrower Argument #2 lacks arguments. The real problem here is that more people have started using it and you are just not used to the amount of flamethrower, does not used to keep up with perma chem spray.
Let me tell you that before the buff Flamer was still devastating once a chem spray has been forgotten or missed. Again, only more people use it, thus you will meet the flamer in situations where you once thought you wouldn't meet a flamer. Get used to it.
This is like the artemis hype all over again. Too many people used the artemis thus everybodies guns and engines were down, even from a longer distance. It eventually led to death. The artemis then got a nerf in which it didn't really get weaker, but harder to use.
The flamer is a close range gun and close range gun are usually easy to use, the best counter to it is long range. This applies for all close range guns like the famous gat/mortar combo.
Argument #3: Less experienced don't know how to deal with flamethrower.
Again this was a problem before, but now that this gun actually gets used, it deserves to be mentioned.
I stated that we have to rely on tutorials on this one. Of course not everybody takes a look at them. But from personal experience I can say that I am glad to have a decent tutorial showing all the basics I need to know to play this game correctly. When I started playing this game, the tutorials lacked content. I had no idea what my pilot tools did, because I had yet to earn the ability to read the description. And some point I got it down, read the forums for guides, asked other player what to do and learned. Now people say I am a good pilot. You start every game low and you have to learn stuff to become better.
Biography aside, it is up to the new players wether they want to learn how to play this game correctly or just have fun by doing what they want to do.
The latter is often not widely supported, but I feel MUSE does its best to enable this feature. If somebody decides quit playing this game because of one gun that they have yet to learn how to counter, it does require some tuning, without a doubt. Maybe this gun just requires such a high amount of teamwork to counter that it should be locked for less experienced players, but is certainly doesn't deserve another nerve regarding % of stack, damage in general and range.
Concerning Argument #3 I have to be honest: I have no idea what do to in this situation. All I can say is that the gun is fine as it is and changing it's ease of use is no ease task, since it is close range and in close range everything is easy to use (e.g.: Hit the balloon with a carronade, hit the hull with gat/mortar. Not the hardest things in the world).
To summerize a bit of what I wanted to say and maybe a bit more stuff, I dunno:
- Every gun needs to be countered, the flamer only has it's own tools for it.
- And Fire extinguisher usually isn't the way to go against a Flamethrower, so there is only 1 tool being used that has been used for forever.
- Fire Extinguisher might need a buff
- If counter is successful: Flamer is useless and can render an entire ship useless (Double Flame Pyra)
- Strategy is always a counter to flamer (long range), which does not negate the usefulness of the gunner
- The gunner himself can use heatsink to not worry about his main gun or other guns getting set on fire.
This does replace an engineer circle of chem spray for guns only. But it also depends on the gunner to know when best to use heatsink, if the pilot is busy.
- A flamer squid catching you of guard is like a mine or burst Hwacha hitting you while you are off guard. Stuff is destroyed and without help from your ally eventually kills you. "How to teamwork"
- Flamer was always devastating. Because of the the lack of use nobody ever paid it any heed.
- Subconcious/Psychological bullshit going on where excessive use of flamethrower gives it special powers, which it doesn not possess
- More nerf might push the flamer back to the corner of never used guns
- New players have to learn the game in order to defend their fun, somewhat. If you happen to not know how to shoot a gun in (example) counter strike, you will not have fun.
Please consider that it was rather late when I wrote this and thus might lack some clarifications here and there.
896
The Gallery / Re: Tournament Logo
« on: May 05, 2014, 02:45:13 pm »
What a coincidence, I am Daniel too!
But really now, I actually like it. It gives of a certain feel, you know? More excitement! MORE EXCITEMENT
However, it appears less Guns of Icarus related. The colors are the same, but it looks more greek-like to me than GoIO-like.
I would take it...
But really now, I actually like it. It gives of a certain feel, you know? More excitement! MORE EXCITEMENT
However, it appears less Guns of Icarus related. The colors are the same, but it looks more greek-like to me than GoIO-like.
I would take it...
897
Gameplay / Re: 1.3.6 Hotfix Flamethrower
« on: May 05, 2014, 02:38:14 pm »It is if that change means you need to run all primary engi and sacrifice trifectas and even simple bifectas because a balanced weapon needed its ability to put stacks down tripled.
You don't need to. Aren't you famouse for playing Junker and not letting enemies know your current positions? Isn't that effectively fighting the flamethrower? And what about your ally? Does he have to watch you helplessly die in fires? Come on man, let's be real, this is not the end of the game, it has yet to ruin everybodies fun and certainly it's not the only gun used in the entire game.
Just sit back for a second and watch the community play. You have been complaining about it the second the patch came out and even after the nerf came. I wonder, have you even tried play this game the same as before? Is that really not possible?
I still believe it doesn't matter. The gun got more useful and not more gamechanging. The old flamerthrower had the same problem, but because of chem spray people didn't care too much, why care now? What has changed?
898
The Gallery / Re: Tournament Logo
« on: May 05, 2014, 12:07:03 pm »
I say 1.3 and 1.4 are the best out of Tanya's collection.
The G's and I's in these circle are just not enough to resemble "Guns of Icarus", however this is where 1.3 and 1.4 succeed. Your font, font alignment, image placement and color; it all reminds of the original "Guns of Icarus"-Logo and thus reminding everybody what this "Hepheastus Challenge"-thing is for and about.
The circle is certainly nice and is a nice idea, but what did you have in mind for that circle? To look pretty? It vaguely reminds me of this leaf crown that the old greeks used to have on their head, but that's it.
As nice as these look, Hepheastus also stands for fire, lava, some metal that is glowing hot in the process of being turned into something new. DrPanda has visualized this very nicely, but then again, that is a picture and not a logo...
What I want to suggest to you, Tanya, is: Bring that Fire into play for the logo. Even though the color is a nice choice, it lacks a second one. Currently it's a dull logo, missing that something extra to make it complete, that something extra to make it hot!
The G's and I's in these circle are just not enough to resemble "Guns of Icarus", however this is where 1.3 and 1.4 succeed. Your font, font alignment, image placement and color; it all reminds of the original "Guns of Icarus"-Logo and thus reminding everybody what this "Hepheastus Challenge"-thing is for and about.
The circle is certainly nice and is a nice idea, but what did you have in mind for that circle? To look pretty? It vaguely reminds me of this leaf crown that the old greeks used to have on their head, but that's it.
As nice as these look, Hepheastus also stands for fire, lava, some metal that is glowing hot in the process of being turned into something new. DrPanda has visualized this very nicely, but then again, that is a picture and not a logo...
What I want to suggest to you, Tanya, is: Bring that Fire into play for the logo. Even though the color is a nice choice, it lacks a second one. Currently it's a dull logo, missing that something extra to make it complete, that something extra to make it hot!
899
Gameplay / Re: 1.3.6 Hotfix Flamethrower
« on: May 05, 2014, 02:15:02 am »dem i hope it is as clear to you as it is to me that we are saying the same thing
which is honestly no surprise to me since the Ryder's and wolves have a standing history of agreement
Just so you know, I am Daniel.
900
Gameplay / Re: 1.3.6 Hotfix Flamethrower
« on: May 04, 2014, 08:54:28 pm »
Because you cannot have just 1 engineer keeping everything save from it. You need at least 2, if not 3 on certain ships, to keep everything fireproof and still shoot at the enemy. The Gatling as well as the Carronade could be dealt with, with 1 engineer respectively and at times even with help of the pilot. The gunner in the meantime has all the time to shoot at whatever is in sight.
The flamer, as stated before, requires much more effort to be dealt with. But then again, who says the effort isn't worth it?
Think of what the enemy has to sacrifice: A gun slot for a gun that you can counter, a gun that you can render useless. Another aspect in which the flamerthrower is unique: The crew actually can fight against this gun. Every ship that has a flamethrower either has to be ready to fully rely on it's other guns or has to catch its opponent off guard to be useful for the team.
This is, of course, purely competitive, if you get caught off guard and thus get set on fire, something went wrong. Otherwise you are prepared to block the gun entirely. High risk for high reward. Either it works or it doesn't.
Concerning normal matches, and I am saying this again just to make sure, we have to rely on the tutorials teaching new players what to do in case of fire.
Does this end the discussion? Please let us be more professional and refrain from moving in circles or does somebody have something to say that hasn't been stated before?
The flamer, as stated before, requires much more effort to be dealt with. But then again, who says the effort isn't worth it?
Think of what the enemy has to sacrifice: A gun slot for a gun that you can counter, a gun that you can render useless. Another aspect in which the flamerthrower is unique: The crew actually can fight against this gun. Every ship that has a flamethrower either has to be ready to fully rely on it's other guns or has to catch its opponent off guard to be useful for the team.
This is, of course, purely competitive, if you get caught off guard and thus get set on fire, something went wrong. Otherwise you are prepared to block the gun entirely. High risk for high reward. Either it works or it doesn't.
Concerning normal matches, and I am saying this again just to make sure, we have to rely on the tutorials teaching new players what to do in case of fire.
Does this end the discussion? Please let us be more professional and refrain from moving in circles or does somebody have something to say that hasn't been stated before?