Flamers!
Re: Flamers!
It's not about exploring or not, it's about researching the weapon that your scout use in order to be efficient.
Heretic 2.3 improver and proud of it.
Re: Flamers!
Ok, so i guess nobody minds the incendiary damage problem being fixed (on the code side). So i think the right question to ask now is what exactly we expect to see when it's fixed. A few random thoughts:
- We may turn flamers into a purely anti-personnel weapon, similar to what has been there before the incendiary damage bug was introduced. This allows four obvious factions (mg/cannons, mg/rockets, flame/cannons, flame/rockets) of pretty much the same value.
- As an update to the previous idea, we may want them to be some sort of all-rounder weapon in a sense opposite to that of cannons: bad against structures and specially walls, good against bunkers, more or less good against borgs (but not as good as machineguns) and effectively countered by tracks (but not as effectively as machineguns); this is a relationship similar to the relationship between rockets and cannons. This will turn flamer/cannon faction into a completely inflexible spam faction that will eventually die both against pure cyborgs and pure tracks, but will be still effective against mix of those.
- We may give a huge importance to the thermal armor layer, so that presence of flamers heavily forced body choice (bug vs. cobra, scorpion vs. python, mantis vs. tiger) rather than propulsion choice.
Maps | Tower Defense | NullBot AI | More NullBot AI | Scavs | More Scavs | Tilesets | Walkthrough | JSCam
Re: Flamers!
@NoQ i prefer all items
i can suggest following steps:
1) set to zero constant hardcoded damage from flamers, part 3 of complex flamers damage
(because it making flamers stronger on earlier stages of game)
2) add propulsion/structure modifiers to incendiary damage formula (at least we can add it to flamers)
current formula: incendiary damage 100% to all types of propulsion and all types of buildings
* this change can require to change some stats (probably flamers will become too strong to cyborgs)
------------
and i suggest 2 more steps
1) nerf hover propulsion ~reduce HP 15% (this should help to make flamers more balanced)
* flamers on hovers are very strong
2) make research path for inferno more complex (it requires too few prerequisites)
i can suggest following steps:
1) set to zero constant hardcoded damage from flamers, part 3 of complex flamers damage
(because it making flamers stronger on earlier stages of game)
2) add propulsion/structure modifiers to incendiary damage formula (at least we can add it to flamers)
current formula: incendiary damage 100% to all types of propulsion and all types of buildings
* this change can require to change some stats (probably flamers will become too strong to cyborgs)
------------
and i suggest 2 more steps
1) nerf hover propulsion ~reduce HP 15% (this should help to make flamers more balanced)
* flamers on hovers are very strong
2) make research path for inferno more complex (it requires too few prerequisites)
Re: Flamers!
Which means it's ok for you to throw away the current situation (flamers are equally strong against all propulsions), anybody else likes that?i prefer all items
This may no longer be the case once modifiers are fixed, and i see no problem with some weapon being better on a certain propulsion. So let's focus on quality problems instead of whether flamers should be nerfed or not.* flamers on hovers are very strong
Maps | Tower Defense | NullBot AI | More NullBot AI | Scavs | More Scavs | Tilesets | Walkthrough | JSCam
Re: Flamers!
1) Add "poison time", "poison damage" and "poison animation/pie" to the weapon stats. It's missing right now and hardcoded only for flamers burning...
2) Convert flamers weap mod into anti-wheel. Instead of being so much the same as anti-personnal.
3) Yes, the armor layer should be fixed. (armor of heavy bodies being half the mean direct damage of all usable weapons). Both for thermal and kinetic.
4) Wait and see after such change.
2) Convert flamers weap mod into anti-wheel. Instead of being so much the same as anti-personnal.
3) Yes, the armor layer should be fixed. (armor of heavy bodies being half the mean direct damage of all usable weapons). Both for thermal and kinetic.
4) Wait and see after such change.
Heretic 2.3 improver and proud of it.
Re: Flamers!
There is no such thing as wheels ... right?Convert flamers weap mod into anti-wheel.
You mean it should be bad against cyborgs? You mean it should be bad against tracks?
Since there are not much different weapons in the flamer line (at least until lasers), i don't see much sense in using the thermal armor in the same way that we use regular armor, that is, for damage vs. ROF decisions. Instead, i think, it should regulate the anti-flamer vs. anti-kinetic properties of the body.Yes, the armor layer should be fixed.
Maps | Tower Defense | NullBot AI | More NullBot AI | Scavs | More Scavs | Tilesets | Walkthrough | JSCam
Re: Flamers!
flamers also strong on half-tracks (depend on enemy's weapon)NoQ wrote:and i see no problem with some weapon being better on a certain propulsion
in my opinion, hover propulsion break balance in warzone
reasons:
1) hover tanks very fast even with heavy weapons and bodies = weight\engine layer broken!
hover tanks receive 50% speed bonus in most cases
2) hover tanks can cross water - only this fact should make hovers weaken
in my experience hover tanks is best choice in most of games
ah possibly hovers balanced in duel games (to prevent some objections)
but in team games hovers are OP in most cases... ah all that i've said before
IMO, hover propulsion is key feature which gives power to flamers
i mean: hovers make flamers like universal weapon
if we nerf flamers more, they just can become underpowered and useless
better change indirect factors like hover propulsion, body balance, research paths
NoQ:
flamers + cannons = selfdamage from medium and heavy cannons = bad
yes, you can avoid that damage by using HPV, but in sum this combination is not good
with that mix of weapons you need carefully operate them all time
i'd like make flamers weaken to particular propulsionsNoQ wrote:Which means it's ok for you to throw away the current situation (flamers are equally strong against all propulsions), anybody else likes that?
why you telling in propulsion terms
flamers are sensitive to sizes of targets, to number of targets
agreedIluvalar wrote:1) Add "poison time", "poison damage" and "poison animation/pie" to the weapon stats. It's missing right now and hardcoded only for flamers burning...
i dislike to make cyborgs stronger, flamers now serves as limiter of cyborgs, particularly large masses of cyborgs very vulnerable to flamers and i like itIluvalar wrote: 2) Convert flamers weap mod into anti-wheel. Instead of being so much the same as anti-personnal.
i see cyborgs as good support units and good way to surprise enemy, if we nerf flamers to cyborgs, then cyborgs will become primary army (i saw that in iluvalar's NRS-mod and i did not liked it)
misunderstoodIluvalar wrote: 3) Yes, the armor layer should be fixed. (armor of heavy bodies being half the mean direct damage of all usable weapons). Both for thermal and kinetic.
heavy bodies are OP now and better way to fix it is impoving medium and light bodies
that change also acutomatically will improve flamers, how about flamers as anti-light weapon?
agreedIluvalar wrote: 4) Wait and see after such change.
Re: Flamers!
What problem? 47% are happy with flamers as they are. Aren't you just tinkering now?NoQ wrote:Ok, so i guess nobody minds the incendiary damage problem being fixed (on the code side). So i think the right question to ask now is what exactly we expect to see when it's fixed. A few random thoughts:
- We may turn flamers into a purely anti-personnel weapon, similar to what has been there before the incendiary damage bug was introduced. This allows four obvious factions (mg/cannons, mg/rockets, flame/cannons, flame/rockets) of pretty much the same value.
- As an update to the previous idea, we may want them to be some sort of all-rounder weapon in a sense opposite to that of cannons: bad against structures and specially walls, good against bunkers, more or less good against borgs (but not as good as machineguns) and effectively countered by tracks (but not as effectively as machineguns); this is a relationship similar to the relationship between rockets and cannons. This will turn flamer/cannon faction into a completely inflexible spam faction that will eventually die both against pure cyborgs and pure tracks, but will be still effective against mix of those.
- We may give a huge importance to the thermal armor layer, so that presence of flamers heavily forced body choice (bug vs. cobra, scorpion vs. python, mantis vs. tiger) rather than propulsion choice.
- Shadow Wolf TJC
- Regular
- Posts: 1047
- Joined: 16 Apr 2011, 05:12
- Location: Raleigh, NC
Re: Flamers!
I agree. Perhaps we could add some sort of engine multiplier value for each of the propulsions? Like, for example, giving tracks a large multiplier and hover a small one, in addition to a weight multiplier?Reg312 wrote:1) hover tanks very fast even with heavy weapons and bodies = weight\engine layer broken!
hover tanks receive 50% speed bonus in most cases
Creator of Warzone 2100: Contingency!
Founder of Wikizone 2100: http://wikizone2100.wikia.com/wiki/Wikizone_2100
Founder of Wikizone 2100: http://wikizone2100.wikia.com/wiki/Wikizone_2100
Re: Flamers!
as far i remember we have different modifers for each propulsion and terrain type (terraintable.txt)Shadow Wolf TJC wrote:Perhaps we could add some sort of engine multiplier value for each of the propulsions? Like, for example, giving tracks a large multiplier and hover a small one, in addition to a weight multiplier?
problem in hardcoded 50% speed bonus, in result many tanks moving at maximum speed
Re: Flamers!
If you keep the 10 propulsion choices, you can make the flamers specialized vs wheel and still make them good vs legs. Just as AP are good vs wheel right now.Reg312 wrote:i dislike to make cyborgs stronger, flamers now serves as limiter of cyborgs, particularly large masses of cyborgs very vulnerable to flamers and i like itIluvalar wrote: 2) Convert flamers weap mod into anti-wheel. Instead of being so much the same as anti-personnal.
i see cyborgs as good support units and good way to surprise enemy, if we nerf flamers to cyborgs, then cyborgs will become primary army (i saw that in iluvalar's NRS-mod and i did not liked it)
NoQ : AW are opposed to structures in my mind, while AP is opposed to track.
Reg : Stop referring to your pre-V100 NRS experience. I saw a lot of thing that I didn't liked (and solved) in NRS as well .
I'm too much used to dev with an autobalance that run after me . Sorry if it's not clear, I meant : increase the heavy bodies armor but increase their price accordingly. So it would start to be weak vs weapons that exceed the mean damage because the armor wouldn't worth it.Reg312 wrote:misunderstoodIluvalar wrote: 3) Yes, the armor layer should be fixed. (armor of heavy bodies being half the mean direct damage of all usable weapons). Both for thermal and kinetic.
heavy bodies are OP now and better way to fix it is impoving medium and light bodies
that change also acutomatically will improve flamers, how about flamers as anti-light weapon?
Heretic 2.3 improver and proud of it.
Re: Flamers!
Can you use incenTime, incenDamage and incenRadius for this purpose? (Yes, for some reason we also have a separate, hard-coded burn damage for tiles that are on fire. Not sure why.)Iluvalar wrote:1) Add "poison time", "poison damage" and "poison animation/pie" to the weapon stats. It's missing right now and hardcoded only for flamers burning...
Re: Flamers!
hm? you saying like that parameters "incenTime, incenDamage and incenRadius" are unused.. or i misunderstoodPer wrote:Can you use incenTime, incenDamage and incenRadius for this purpose? (Yes, for some reason we also have a separate, hard-coded burn damage for tiles that are on fire. Not sure why.)Iluvalar wrote:1) Add "poison time", "poison damage" and "poison animation/pie" to the weapon stats. It's missing right now and hardcoded only for flamers burning...
hard-coded stuff should be re-coded more softly
Re: Flamers!
Per, not exactly, it's not the same thing.
The burning effect we are talking about follow the victims like a poison in other games.
While the incenTime, incenDamage and incenRadius is an area of effect that stay on the ground.
We could have weapons that have the burning effect without any area of effect, or vice-versa.
The burning effect we are talking about follow the victims like a poison in other games.
While the incenTime, incenDamage and incenRadius is an area of effect that stay on the ground.
We could have weapons that have the burning effect without any area of effect, or vice-versa.
Heretic 2.3 improver and proud of it.
Re: Flamers!
Ok, I'll see if I can un-hard-code that soon.