Author Topic: Do you like it when things burned? Would you like if they burned better?  (Read 6940 times)

Offline Squidslinger Gilder

  • Member
  • Salutes: 287
    • [TBB]
    • 31 
    • 34
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Yeah I've chemmed mobulas that were under a constant assault with flames. Just one on the balloon was enough to keep the ship alive and unable to be killed until allies arrived to relieve it.

Part of that problem is due to the insanely long buff time of Chem. 20 sec? Come on. Think it should return to it's original -40% chance of ignition if your putting a buff on that lasts that long.

Against standard flamer there is just no point in not chemming. But Shees....now those are different stories. Just one can eventually overwhelm a ship. Plus there is the burst effect. Takes time but it can do it simply by the extra explosive dmg. Add 2 of them into the mix and it becomes worse. 3 can be a nightmare.

Offline RearAdmiralZill

  • CA Mod
  • Salutes: 144
    • [MM]
    • 31 
    • 44
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Think this belongs in the gameplay thread, but Ill let the OP decide.

The last time we buffed banshees, it was a mess. I think it's just getting overshadowed by other guns right now (ie. arty) because it really does do what it's designed to. Sets fires, provides explosive damage, and easy to shoot rockets.

All of that said, even I can agree with 6 instead of 8 stacks for guns to boot people off. That's a small enough change that I wouldn't imagine requiring heatsink ammo like the old days, but it'll be a better option to consider.

Offline Captain Smollett

  • Member
  • Salutes: 122
    • [Duck]
    • 11
    • 14 
    • View Profile
By all means Zill, feel free to please move this to gameplay.

Much appreciated.

You think by now I'd know where to post.

Offline Crafeksterty

  • Member
  • Salutes: 73
    • [GwTh]
    • 17 
    • 28
    • 45 
    • View Profile
Mhh... Maybe i actualy agree here, but poeple mostly talk about getting booted out of a gun.

For that, just lower the stacks of fire it rquiers for the gunner to be booted.
Which may cause gunners or engineers to bring heatsink as an ammo type if they are up against fire.

Right now were at 8 stacks of booting a gunner off?
How does 6 stacks sound? 5?

Offline Queso

  • Muse Games
  • Salutes: 126
    • [Muse]
    • 13
    • 25 
    • View Profile
Having flown a squid a ton, and having run crew on some ships with flame and incendiary ammo some more today, I would agree that it takes a ridiculous amount of actual flame to kick someone off a gun. With a squid I can't rely on not being fired upon even after sticking the flame against guns for a good long time.

Offline Jazzza

  • Member
  • Salutes: 16
    • 3
    • View Profile
    • Website
I remember the early days of Guns Of Icarus Online when flames wrecked ships. The only way you could win against someone using a flamethrower was to use one yourself.

They with shitty days. I'd prefer not to have them return.

Offline Sammy B. T.

  • Member
  • Salutes: 154
    • [Duck]
    • 23 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
No one as best as I can tell advocates a return tot he one stack kick. However, there is a reason why many players don't know the fact that 8 stacks of fire on a gun will kick a person off the gun, it almost never happens without having already broken the gun, or causing so many issues across the ship.

I'd say move the number to 5. That way, mines can kick people off guns.

Offline ramjamslam

  • CA Mod
  • Salutes: 63
    • [SAC]
    • 35 
    • 45
    • 38 
    • View Profile
I'd say move the number to 5. That way, mines can kick people off guns.
Yea that's a good point, mines should be disrupting the crew like that.  I could even see a certain amount of impact damage, or even any damage within a small amount of time kicking people off guns for a second.

Offline Spud Nick

  • Member
  • Salutes: 130
    • [✦✦45]
    • 40 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
The real problem with fire weapons is that they can be completely nullified by chem spray. Until that is worked out fire weapons will always be a little under powered.

Offline Squidslinger Gilder

  • Member
  • Salutes: 287
    • [TBB]
    • 31 
    • 34
    • 45 
    • View Profile
I remember the early days of Guns Of Icarus Online when flames wrecked ships. The only way you could win against someone using a flamethrower was to use one yourself.

They with shitty days. I'd prefer not to have them return.

Those days were awesome. Best damn days the game ever had. Engineers had to be on their toes and quick with extinguishes. Pilots had to learn to fly evasive. Gunners, actually had a reason for existing. But it wasn't just flames that were powerful, a lot of other guns were too. It was the time before the game entered it's neutering phase where the ships you flew actually felt like big lumbering hunks of steel, not tin foil battleships, and moved at decent speeds, no like a whale with charlie horse.

Ahhh...good times.

The real problem with fire weapons is that they can be completely nullified by chem spray. Until that is worked out fire weapons will always be a little under powered.

Been saying it since Chem was changed and I'll keep on saying it.

Offline Captain Smollett

  • Member
  • Salutes: 122
    • [Duck]
    • 11
    • 14 
    • View Profile
Assuming chem spray and extinguisher aren't altered, I think lowering the stacks needed to eject someone off of a gun is a great way to to make fire useful again.

This way people are forced to choose what to chem spray and what to do on the ship.

Chem spraying the balloon, hull, engines and guns will likely result in having much less time to shoot.  Basically people will have to choose between keeping their guns up and firing or keeping their ship up and flying thereby making the flamethrower and carousal more menacing.

Offline HamsterIV

  • Member
  • Salutes: 328
    • 10 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
    • Monkey Dev
I would also like to see the flame stacks to kick lowered. The only reliable way to kick some one off their gun with out breaking it is the flare gun. You have to be a pretty crack shot to pull that off. Unfortunately any mechanic that will force a gunner off their gun until an engineer can come by will make the gunner a less desirable class than it is now.

Offline James T. Kirk

  • Muse Games
  • Salutes: 182
    • [Cake]
    • 19 
    • 25
    • 43 
    • View Profile
    • The Cake Official Website!
Maybe heatsink could auto-load into your gun and extinguish it if you get kicked off and get back on?

Assuming you have it, of course.

Offline HamsterIV

  • Member
  • Salutes: 328
    • 10 
    • 45
    • 45 
    • View Profile
    • Monkey Dev
That is a brilliant idea Kirk. What if flame did not kick you off the gun but made it impossible to shoot, but possible to reload? So instead of flames disabling guns it would force gunners into sub optimal ammunition.

Offline The Cunning Linquist

  • Member
  • Salutes: 2
    • [AFNC]
    • 39 
    • 45
    • 31 
    • View Profile
I would love to see the stacks reduced to 5 or 6 to kick.

As a note, I think if this happens then the stacks that chem spray removes should be reduced to two.  Otherwise, it would only take 2 sprays to fix a gun.  Currently, it takes 3 sprays to bring stacks from 8 to 0 with chem spray and I think that's good to keep the extinguisher as a viable option.

Now, in all reality this probably wouldn't be that relevant since I find when I'm engineering stacks hang around 1 or 2 or fly past 12.  Then there's the dreaded flare... But I like that this game presents options and variance in builds so I would hate to see the chem spray become THE equipment of choice because it can handle red guns too.