Should Flame Throwers explode?

Should Flame Throwers explode?

Discussion about the game and its default mods.

Should Flame Throwers explode?

Yes, the explosion should also damage
12
41%
Yes, but only visual
11
38%
No
6
21%
 
Total votes: 29

User avatar
anjew
Posts: 521
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2014 4:16 am

Post by anjew » Tue Dec 27, 2016 3:26 am

ShadowAssassin wrote:
Soviet vs Soviet is a possible match up you realise?
Yes, I know. Don't talk to people like they are stupid, you should show more respect.
Don't say stupid things then. Or tell people what to do for that matter.
ShadowAssassin wrote: What I meant is that pillboxes can more easily defend against a split formation. Flametowers will only kill 2 grens in this case, before the reload delay.

Of course, if grenadiers are send in a packed formation, then it's the same, due to the chain reaction. But that's not how they should be used IMO.
I don't think it's as big a deal as you make out. The pillbox only has 1 extra range of the flamethrower, so regardless what defence structure is in position, according to you these grenadiers will get through.
Image

ShadowAssassin
Posts: 44
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2015 8:12 pm

Post by ShadowAssassin » Tue Dec 27, 2016 3:44 am

What does it even have to do with range ? I'm talking about rate of fire and reload time.
(+ the range argument goes into my way anyway ...)

Try to understand what people are saying, before calling them stupid.

I've repeated twice what I said about *split position*, i.e. targeting 1 thing from differents angles. For instance, you can more easily take down a power plant if coming from different angles, against soviets, than against allies.

Understood, clever boy ? Not gonna explain a 4th time.


But once again, I've no idea why we're discussing that here. Sorry abc013 if topic is going completely off rail. Last comment from me on this subject.

User avatar
anjew
Posts: 521
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2014 4:16 am

Post by anjew » Tue Dec 27, 2016 8:57 am

ShadowAssassin wrote: Try to understand what people are saying, before calling them stupid.

I've repeated twice what I said about *split position*, i.e. targeting 1 thing from differents angles. For instance, you can more easily take down a power plant if coming from different angles, against soviets, than against allies.

Understood, clever boy ? Not gonna explain a 4th time.

But once again, I've no idea why we're discussing that here. Sorry abc013 if topic is going completely off rail. Last comment from me on this subject.
I understand what you are saying, it seems you don't. This problem is caused specifically by the lack of range of flametowers causing a 1 cell blind spot on the opposite side the structure is place. Not the other bullshit, that just contributes. Try it for yourself
Flame towers however are not the single counter to this, nor are pillboxes. A smart player will bait a bad placement and attack a different structure you cant defend. Does that make the strategy overpowered?

What you seem to be saying is that this would be caused by giving Allies grenadiers when it already exists and can be dealt with by scouting and building a couple infantry. I don't care about grenadiers, i can see them working for both sides but it will give Allies even more type units.

Regarding FlameTowers and Flamethrowers. Cosmetic explosion is my opinion, I almost feel the same way for grenadiers too
Image

User avatar
Doomsday
Posts: 199
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2016 11:45 am
Location: Helsinki

Post by Doomsday » Tue Dec 27, 2016 10:08 am

I think Grenadiers are a hard unit to balance in their current form because of their aoe explosiveness on death. It makes them extremely high skill cap unit because of micro required to keep a group of grenadiers in loose formation at all times. If we remove explosion on death and rebalance their cost, I bet we would see them being used more even if their raw power was nerfed.

User avatar
Materianer
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2016 8:27 am

Post by Materianer » Tue Dec 27, 2016 11:35 am

Yes of course they should explode
and yes of course they should do a slight damage to nearby units.
The damage should of course not be so strong that they kill each other like the grenadiers do, but an only visual fire effect would be a bit .... strange
If you let 5 flamers stay in 1 cell it's your own fault and should be punished like it was in original RA.

User avatar
Materianer
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2016 8:27 am

Post by Materianer » Tue Dec 27, 2016 11:47 am

Doomsday wrote: I think Grenadiers are a hard unit to balance in their current form because of their aoe explosiveness on death. It makes them extremely high skill cap unit because of micro required to keep a group of grenadiers in loose formation at all times. If we remove explosion on death and rebalance their cost, I bet we would see them being used more even if their raw power was nerfed.
Grenadiers

I dont think that it needs so much skill to do that, if you got a big group of them its hard of course but ctrl X is a good option to seperate them a bit then.
You dont need many of them to demolish an enemys base fast and for small groups its easy to seperate them and they are definitly an early game killer

Why not reduce the damage instead of remove explosion?
They should be a bit more expensive then wich would make an early nadersrush harder to manage.

User avatar
AoAGeneral1
Posts: 597
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2015 6:11 pm

Post by AoAGeneral1 » Tue Dec 27, 2016 12:02 pm

A few problems arise when you add explosion deaths to units.

First one is they become very situational and limited to their use. This scenario happens and happens only then don't build them anymore. It was the same problem that happened to flamers in CNC95. If the grenadiers had their explosion removed you would see some more use out from them.

Second thing is you alienate the unit build combos that RA already rarely has. Some players have infantry mixes of minigunners, e3, flamers, etc and are a good and smart unit combination. If the flamers explode you won't see this anymore because they will start killing infantry packs. Reducing the flamer explosion damage will still harm e3 to much due to their lower HP pool.

Strongly against explosion damage.

User avatar
3.Lucian
Posts: 53
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2016 12:32 pm
Location: Brisbane

Post by 3.Lucian » Tue Dec 27, 2016 1:33 pm

I actually bothered joining just to reply to this.
Hello!
Let me preface this by saying I only play Russia.

Yes, they should explode, of course they should explode!
Yes, explosion damage should be a thing. Its a wonderful mechanic, just waiting for us to find a way to balance it.

Quick observations about exploding grens:
It tends to happen quite a bit.
The explosion does a lot of damage.
It tends to kill a lot of infantry if they are around/It affects a fairly large area.

To help balance the above?
Can we just make it less likely?
Or do less damage?
Or perhaps not affect such a large area/kill so much stuff

Or an appropriate combination of the above.

I think the effect should be that there is some inherent risk to use any of your special units! But in is case, not enough risk to cause mixing them into a blob to be a quick road to failure, as is mixing in grens.

As far as game balancing goes, aren't soviets due for a nerf again sometime soon?

User avatar
SMIFFGIG
Posts: 36
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2003 6:00 pm
Location: Great Britain
Contact:

Post by SMIFFGIG » Tue Dec 27, 2016 1:41 pm

If there is only one unit in the entire game that explodes with damage when destroyed, then it should be the flamethrower infantry (minus demo truck).
The un-offical addon for Tiberian Sun
Image

User avatar
Wippie
Posts: 99
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 12:41 pm

Post by Wippie » Tue Dec 27, 2016 2:19 pm

SMIFFGIG wrote: If there is only one unit in the entire game that explodes with damage when destroyed, then it should be the flamethrower infantry (minus demo truck).
Let's think about this statement, without balancing taking in account.

It makes sense that a flamethrower explodes 100% when he gets hit by an exploding grenade, or another flame burs.
It is (un)likely ath an "x" rate that apc/migs/ranger/flactruck/tank, or when being ran over by an enemy tank etc etc. causes the flamethrower to explode.
Dogs for example shouldn't be able to make a flamethrower explode.

For grenadiers, it's a completely different story. It all depends on the state of the grenade (is the pin plugged or unplugged?) Insta-explode makes no sense at all.

scorp
Posts: 96
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 9:35 pm

Post by scorp » Tue Dec 27, 2016 11:52 pm

SMIFFGIG wrote: If there is only one unit in the entire game that explodes with damage when destroyed, then it should be the flamethrower infantry (minus demo truck).
if it leads to the unit never used (like grens) then no unit should chain-explode. Just make it a graphic effect and be done with it.

User avatar
MustaphaTR
Posts: 198
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2014 6:38 am
Location: Kastamonu, Turkey

Post by MustaphaTR » Wed Dec 28, 2016 1:53 pm

I think Grenadiers should explode and should deal high damage. As they are not really expensive, they can be used for moving in enemy blobs and letting them die. Kinda like a suicide unit. Of course you shouldn't put them in your infantry blob. I don't know about current status but maybe death explosion should also effect Vehicles and Stuctures, but not much.

In other hand maybe making Grenadiers more resistant(not immune) to other Grenadiers' explosions may be better. This would prevent chain reactions and allow you to make a Grenadier blob, but you still shouldn't use them with other infantry.

User avatar
Fortnight
Posts: 194
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2016 7:09 pm

Post by Fortnight » Mon Jan 02, 2017 4:44 pm

After doing a lot of thinking I've changed my mind. I now think Grenadier is fine on Soviet and it's also fine that they explode and deal damage after all.

At first glance it looks like Soviet has more to offer on the offence with their Grenadier / Flamethrower units but come late game the Allied Tanya easily weights just as much as the early game Soviet advantage with her C4 and dual Colt .45 pistols. However since it's the early game when Grenadiers are the most dangerous those helpful explosions do come in handy when defending against surprise attacks, feels like they are needed.

I've checked and the explosions take about a third of their team mate's health, which is more reasonable than I thought it was! In fact I think the explosion chance should be upped from the current 50% to 100% since Grenadiers have very fast run speed (another thing I didn't think about before, it's possible to kite enemies and quickly split Grenadiers apart).

With that in mind I'd like Flamethrowers to have a 50% chance to explode and deal the same amount of damage that Grenadiers do. But I would like the Flamethrowers to kill off infantry much easier than they do now. People are being sprayed with fire after all.

As for the Allied Spy the Soviet's Dog actually feels like a fair counterpart and the Soviet Hijacker of course covers the Allies' Mechanic. I'd like to see some kind of alternative purpose with the Hijacker though, just for fun and more ways to play the game.

Overall things feel pretty balanced on the infantry front after thinking about it! Soviet got the early game but Allies got the late. Its for different playstyles for sure though.

Edit: Forgot to mention the Medic on Allies, that's a very powerful unit. It's a wonder why it's not used more. Almost feels like it could be worth Grenadiers in of itself at the current price of 200 credits, but let's not go crazy.

Edit 2: Seems like Grenadiers do less damage when they explode from your own attacks (force fire). Have to test some more when they get hit by the enemy, from the looks of it the explosions weren't as harmless as I initially thought.

User avatar
JuiceBox
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2016 12:10 pm
Location: Liverpool

Post by JuiceBox » Wed Jan 04, 2017 7:54 am

In regards to the gren rush I play alot of games with my brother and I always rushed him with split grens and pist him off royally. So now he dots rifles by all his buildings early game and spreads out a few scouts. Puts an and to early shenanigans. If u get caught out with a green rush it's your own fault for not anticipating one.

IMO flamers should explode too.

Needing a flame tower I think is a suitable prerequisite and gives the opponent the opertunity to scout a possible flame rush.
"I love the smell of JuiceBoxes in the morning"
LT. COL. Bill Kilgore
Apocalypse Now

User avatar
Materianer
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2016 8:27 am

Post by Materianer » Wed Jan 04, 2017 10:35 am

I made a map just to show how this flamerexplosion could look like.

http://resource.openra.net/maps/18063/

there are 2 diffrent explosions
the normal flamer makes a damage of 15 to nearby units and the bigflamer 20
hf with testing ...

You can also see a slower mcv at start btw

Post Reply