Fire bug;

measles

<div class="IPBDescription">Just look at that range!</div>
I really see the FT as being as powerful at this stage as what the ONOS is going to be in the next;
Any noob can get one and cause incredible damage without fail.. Where are the physics to this weopon?
Where is the reality?
'If you play with fire, you are going to get burnt'

The Kharaa have so many weak spots, whereas the marines have only to aquire SG and FT to claim victory.

*BORING*

KuBaN

You've asked this <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=112949&view=findpost&p=1836832" target="_blank">question</a> previously, and it was <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=112949&view=findpost&p=1836848" target="_blank">addressed</a>.

Feha

I dont think he means the actuall bug, I think he tries to imply that the range must be a bug because its so realistic, and dont have the gameplay ft usually do, where its made as a short range, long term gun.

I agree that the range is too big, when I am alien it feels as if it reaches me way before the particles is in range (hard to spot when they originate from you), and it seems op that it can reach over 5 meters in the first place xD.

luns

it does have big range, in fact hiding on the ceiling won't even help. range must be reduced, aside from all the bugs and problems already offers, it just ruins ns2. (its the ns2 lightsaber where aiming isn't required but rather waving it around)

measles

<!--quoteo(post=1837250:date=Mar 15 2011, 09:17 AM:name=KuBaN)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KuBaN @ Mar 15 2011, 09:17 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1837250"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You've asked this <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=112949&view=findpost&p=1836832" target="_blank">question</a> previously, and it was <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=112949&view=findpost&p=1836848" target="_blank">addressed</a>.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Thanks KuBaN, for pointing <u>that</u> out!
Although, this thread is not any one single question, but a simplified topic on the direction and progress of the flame-thrower weopon.

<!--quoteo(post=1837256:date=Mar 15 2011, 10:42 AM:name=Feha)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Feha @ Mar 15 2011, 10:42 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1837256"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I dont think he means the actuall bug, I think he tries to imply that the range must be a bug because its so <!--coloro:#00FF00--><span style="color:#00FF00"><!--/coloro-->*un*<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->realistic, and dont have the gameplay ft usually do, where its made as a short range, long term gun.

I agree that the range is too big, when I am alien it feels as if it reaches me way before the particles is in range (hard to spot when they originate from you), and it seems op that it can reach over 5 meters in the first place xD.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Indeed.
Also, there should be a scaling down effect on the level of damage to the distance of the stream.
I am aware that the increased time exposed to flame increases the amount of time you remain alight, but the hotter, more devestating portion of the flame would be the area a little in front of the (weilding) marine. Leaving a small gap of (harmless spewing gas at the very nearest of the muzzle. Say.. the width of a skulk?

Feha

Actually, the word is realistic, not unrealistic. People have been over this many times, real flamethrowers shoot far (sure there is models that dont go far, but the ones you actually would use in a war is the liquid ones, and they do go far).

measles

My bad;

Shilorius

<!--coloro:#FF0000--><span style="color:#FF0000"><!--/coloro-->-1<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->

The flamethrower is nerfed enough.
In my opinion it is okay that a tier2 weapon (which costs 70 carbon to research) burns away tier 1 aliens. and it is to weak to fighta Fade (Tier2) in 1v1 battle. I don't see any problems with this.

Only the "fire through wall"-bug should be fixed..

ScardyBob

<!--quoteo(post=1837389:date=Mar 16 2011, 09:14 AM:name=Shilorius)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Shilorius @ Mar 16 2011, 09:14 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1837389"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--coloro:#FF0000--><span style="color:#FF0000"><!--/coloro-->-1<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->

The flamethrower is nerfed enough.
In my opinion it is okay that a tier2 weapon (which costs 70 carbon to research) burns away tier 1 aliens. and it is to weak to fighta Fade (Tier2) in 1v1 battle. I don't see any problems with this.

Only the "fire through wall"-bug should be fixed..<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

This.

Lvl2 weapons should do a lot more damage against Lvl1 aliens. Also, the wall bug is very exploitable.

Papayas

<!--quoteo(post=1837389:date=Mar 16 2011, 05:14 PM:name=Shilorius)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Shilorius @ Mar 16 2011, 05:14 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1837389"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--coloro:#FF0000--><span style="color:#FF0000"><!--/coloro-->-1<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->

The flamethrower is nerfed enough.
In my opinion it is okay that a tier2 weapon (which costs 70 carbon to research) burns away tier 1 aliens. and it is to weak to fighta Fade (Tier2) in 1v1 battle. I don't see any problems with this.

Only the "fire through wall"-bug should be fixed..<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I completly agree with this.

The flamethrowe is fine.


I have a problem with the Shotgun though. As said before:

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The flamethrower is not what kills fades, shotguns are.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->




The flamethrower should not be nerfed as:

-Skulk + Night vision = Flamethrower
-It kills Tier 1 aliens easily

Harimau

IMO switch flamethrower and shotgun position. Flamethrower tier 1, but reduce against DI/chamber effectiveness (add a tier 3 upgrade that increases anti-structure power); shotgun tier 2.
I've gone into more detail on this in another thread.

Papayas

<!--quoteo(post=1837547:date=Mar 17 2011, 11:34 AM:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau @ Mar 17 2011, 11:34 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1837547"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->IMO switch flamethrower and shotgun position. Flamethrower tier 1, but reduce against DI/chamber effectiveness (add a tier 3 upgrade that increases anti-structure power); shotgun tier 2.
I've gone into more detail on this in another thread.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

You love you "Tier 3 upgrade that increases anti-structure power" idea don't you?

But, I completely agree though.


Good points:

-Shotgun at tier 2 would make it less unbalanced as it <b>should</b> be good against Tier 1. I would still like to see the fade to become better though. I can't hit with it...

-Flamethrower at Tier 1 would be good and prevent the DI spam over the nodes to give them a slight advantage. Would need a damage nerf because a Tier 1 burning away other Tier 1s in about 2 seconds is imbalanced.