Upcoming Flamethrower Improvements

[Amineri]

Just finished up some rework on the flamethrower targeting mechanics. These should help make the flamethrower feel more like a flamethrower and less like a bit shotgun.

FINAL UPDATE: This is live in 1.1 patch to Long War 2

UPDATE:
---- BUGS:
---- Rewrote flamethrower targeting for better performance when more tiles are affected (e.g. Incinerator + Roust) Should only drop a couple of FPS when targeting now in this case (~200 tiles)
---- Fixed bug where flamethrower was applying rocket launcher environment damage when being fired. Flamethrower should no longer directly deal any environment damage when fired.
---- BALANCE:
---- World fires now deal 10 environment damage after burning out instead of ignoring destructible toughness entirely. Configurable
---- Slightly reduced initial flamethrower damage on all tiers
---- Reduced chance to directly apply burning effect from 75% to 60% for flamethrower/firestorm, and from 33% to 20% for Roust
---- Reduced % of tiles set on fire from 85% to 50% for flamethrower, and from 25% to 20% for Roust. Firestorm is unchanged.
---- QOL:
---- Targeting now happens half a vertical tile higher, making it easier to hit adjacent enemies, plus tiles close to unit will not be able to set on fire as often
---- Placing cursor on enemy while targeting will no longer cause flamethrower to aim up in into the air.
---- Targeting will now show a vertical cone to help visualize that the flamethrower is affecting tiles in a 3D cone.

Preview now shows step-out, and allow targeting from behind full-cover.


Flamethrower targeting from above, in action.


Flamethrower targeting no longer uses only straight-line LOS, but allows pathing around corners to hit units in cover.

[warbrand2]

thank you. the flamethrower really needs this stuff.

I have 4 technicals and all 4 of them are rocket set cause the flamethrower felt well useless.

[JLtheking]

Alright! Good job guys!

[rakoon79]

Rather irrelevant to the topic, but any chance of including Commander's Choice to the package by default for the upcoming patch? (perhaps replace the tutorial button when starting a campaign with a switch to turn on/off?)

[Amineri]

Rather irrelevant to the topic, but any chance of including Commander's Choice to the package by default for the upcoming patch? (perhaps replace the tutorial button when starting a campaign with a switch to turn on/off?)

With improved modding support for XCOM 2, we're planning on doing a lot less integrating of optional stuff for LW2 compared to LW1.

[Hunter]

I am hoping this ensures that the Flamethrower will now damage aliens behind modest cover. At the moment, if they are behind a tree, for example, and enveloped in flames, they suffer no damage.

[Amineri]

I am hoping this ensures that the Flamethrower will now damage aliens behind modest cover. At the moment, if they are behind a tree, for example, and enveloped in flames, they suffer no damage.

This is one of the main goals of this change.

[ORIONOX]

Rather irrelevant to the topic, but any chance of including Commander's Choice to the package by default for the upcoming patch? (perhaps replace the tutorial button when starting a campaign with a switch to turn on/off?)

With improved modding support for XCOM 2, we're planning on doing a lot less integrating of optional stuff for LW2 compared to LW1.

Yeah, but the only other guy who's working on providing a commanders choice mod(that I know of) is having some troubles getting it to work with the way stats work with "hidden potential" and "not created equal." Maybe you guys could offer him some insight since he's already laid the ground work for the mod.

[Hunter]

I am hoping this ensures that the Flamethrower will now damage aliens behind modest cover. At the moment, if they are behind a tree, for example, and enveloped in flames, they suffer no damage.

This is one of the main goals of this change.

Fantastic

[Bantichai]

Awesome and thanks for responding to my question in a previous post

[Hazelnut]

Excellent - very good news, because as it is currently I always specialise in rockets. I've used flamethrower once in about 20+ missions, it's simply too situational to have a conga line within range. Few missions don't see a rocket being used.

[Genius384]

Thanks for the updates, Pavonis team!

[rifleman]

Any good news to Spark?
Spark starts with Shredder Gun, which is less cooler that Rocket and Flamethrower. I hope Spark could get some love. Just adding new toys, like the old days of LW1. I know, that will cost lots of resuource, but adding some item without model is OK.

[Postmaster]

Wow you read my mind with these improvements. I was just thinking the flamethrower was weak because it couldn't hit a unit in full cover even if the enemy was right there. You read my mind! However even with the targeting changes I still can't see myself taking any flamethrower perks.

At baseline the rocket is so useful, good range, damage, hurts everything. The flamethrower still has poor range and you really need to be up in the enemies face to even be able to hit them. Looking through the perk tree, it looks like by the time a flame specialist reaches max rank, they would actually be useful. The problem is that the rocket is useful without any ranks at all, on top of everything you add all the rocketeer perks, it's a no brainer.

I think the flamethrower needs +1 range and baseline and the perk that adds range should add +2 tiles range. In addition, it should panic at baseline too (maybe replace that perk with 'fire and steel?') If being on fire doesn't cause advent to panic then nothing should. With these changes, I could see flamethrower builds then being viable.

Ultimately, it's not a question of if a flamethrower is good, it's a question of how it stacks up to the rocket perks which, as it stands, far surpass the flamethrower. Just look at MSGT rank, an extra rocket that blows away cover or an extremely situational ability where the technical must be alone and surrounded by enemies at close range. No contest.

[Amineri]

However even with the targeting changes I still can't see myself taking any flamethrower perks.

Our criteria here isn't whether everyone feels like they are balanced. Different players have different play-styles, after all.

The best we can hope for is that some players love them, some players think they are terrible, and some players find both rockets and flamethrowers each situationally useful.

[gimrah]

This great and frankly needed. Flamethrowers feel pretty week at least early on. The combination of small cone and not penetrating cover makes them very situational. Most times I take out technicals, I put an SMG on them so they might be able to use the flamer but it usually doesn't pan out and it just means their contribution to the mission is limited to firing 1 rocket.

Curling around cover is a nice feature. I was also thinking you could have them flow over half cover.

[GavinRuneblade]

Love this change. Given that flame throwers were one of the top choices for dealing with pillboxes it had struck me as very weird that they didn't work against units in cover.

If I may request going the full distance and make them ignore cover completely. From

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flamethrower

It is primarily used against battlefield fortifications, bunkers, and other protected emplacements. A flamethrower projects a stream of flammable liquid, rather than flame, which allows bouncing the stream off walls and ceilings to project the fire into blind and unseen spaces, such as inside bunkers or pillboxes. Typically, popular visual media depict the flamethrower as short-ranged and only effective for a few meters (due to the common use of propane gas as the fuel in flamethrowers in movies, for the safety of the actors). Contemporary flamethrowers can incinerate a target some 50–80 meters (160–260 ft) from the gunner; moreover, an unignited stream of flammable liquid can be fired and afterwards ignited, possibly by a lamp or other flame inside the bunker.

[xwynns]

I already specced into the flamer every time, even before this change. They take a lot of skill to use properly (conceal ambush), but wow can they turn an otherwise impossible mission into a relatively easy one if pulled off correctly. Or just wipe you entirely if you get spotted trying to setup an ambush.
Sounds like Long War to me!

[gimrah]

I already specced into the flamer every time, even before this change. They take a lot of skill to use properly (conceal ambush), but wow can they turn an otherwise impossible mission into a relatively easy one if pulled off correctly. Or just wipe you entirely if you get spotted trying to setup an ambush.
Sounds like Long War to me!

One the one hand I know you are a top player. On the other I don't buy this at all.
- There are lots of good ways to ambush from concealment already (notably a rocket).
- Even with SMG you can't get that close.
- Taking lots of time is often not viable on a timed mission.
- High risk / high reward strategies do not sound very long war to me!

So I conclude you've managed to make it work somehow, but on a risk-adjusted basis you'd still have been better off doing something else. But I'm very happy to be schooled on how I'm wrong!

[Amineri]

Love this change. Given that flame throwers were one of the top choices for dealing with pillboxes it had struck me as very weird that they didn't work against units in cover.

If I may request going the full distance and make them ignore cover completely. From

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flamethrower

It is primarily used against battlefield fortifications, bunkers, and other protected emplacements. A flamethrower projects a stream of flammable liquid, rather than flame, which allows bouncing the stream off walls and ceilings to project the fire into blind and unseen spaces, such as inside bunkers or pillboxes. Typically, popular visual media depict the flamethrower as short-ranged and only effective for a few meters (due to the common use of propane gas as the fuel in flamethrowers in movies, for the safety of the actors). Contemporary flamethrowers can incinerate a target some 50–80 meters (160–260 ft) from the gunner; moreover, an unignited stream of flammable liquid can be fired and afterwards ignited, possibly by a lamp or other flame inside the bunker.

So the reason I don't just make them ignore cover completely is that we don't want them to shoot flames through solid walls.

The pathing allows them to bend around cover, so it can ignore cover assuming the distance around the cover is short enough (that is, less than the flamethrowers' range).

[GavinRuneblade]

That is a good point. Shooting through walls would be weird.

[admo]

However even with the targeting changes I still can't see myself taking any flamethrower perks.

Our criteria here isn't whether everyone feels like they are balanced. Different players have different play-styles, after all.

The best we can hope for is that some players love them, some players think they are terrible, and some players find both rockets and flamethrowers each situationally useful.

I think flamethrower is great, I am looking forward to your change because it is so difficult to figure out what the flamethrower will do until you run the soldier up. I doubt this would work but the dream is the same way Firaxis adjusted sword attacks: the move and attack were combined so you knew if you were going to be able to hit the target from a spot before you committed the move.

That doesn't make a lot of sense for the flamethrower with it being ranged so I'm just hopeful for consistency and easy determination to figure out if it will or won't hit targets.

[ShockmasterFred]

I already specced into the flamer every time, even before this change. They take a lot of skill to use properly (conceal ambush), but wow can they turn an otherwise impossible mission into a relatively easy one if pulled off correctly. Or just wipe you entirely if you get spotted trying to setup an ambush.
Sounds like Long War to me!

One the one hand I know you are a top player. On the other I don't buy this at all.
- There are lots of good ways to ambush from concealment already (notably a rocket).
- Even with SMG you can't get that close.
- Taking lots of time is often not viable on a timed mission.
- High risk / high reward strategies do not sound very long war to me!

So I conclude you've managed to make it work somehow, but on a risk-adjusted basis you'd still have been better off doing something else. But I'm very happy to be schooled on how I'm wrong!

Rockets are not nearly as accurate as the flamethrower, and presumably (and I admit, I'm making an assumption here) make a lot more noise, not great if you are trying to get in and get out.
You can get very close with an SMG as I have done it multiple times to great effect.
It only takes one turn to set up a good flamethrower ambush, maybe two. Most missions this is something that can be done, especially since the flamethrower can wipe a whole pod, meaning you won't spend a turn fighting them.
High risk/high reward is most definitely a major part of long war, as to win a campaign, you will most likely have to take a chance at some point. One of the great parts of the first mod was the early landed large UFO. If that wasn't high risk high reward, nothing is.

[admo]

I already specced into the flamer every time, even before this change. They take a lot of skill to use properly (conceal ambush), but wow can they turn an otherwise impossible mission into a relatively easy one if pulled off correctly. Or just wipe you entirely if you get spotted trying to setup an ambush.
Sounds like Long War to me!

One the one hand I know you are a top player. On the other I don't buy this at all.
- There are lots of good ways to ambush from concealment already (notably a rocket).
- Even with SMG you can't get that close.
- Taking lots of time is often not viable on a timed mission.
- High risk / high reward strategies do not sound very long war to me!

So I conclude you've managed to make it work somehow, but on a risk-adjusted basis you'd still have been better off doing something else. But I'm very happy to be schooled on how I'm wrong!

Rockets are not nearly as accurate as the flamethrower, and presumably (and I admit, I'm making an assumption here) make a lot more noise, not great if you are trying to get in and get out.
You can get very close with an SMG as I have done it multiple times to great effect.
It only takes one turn to set up a good flamethrower ambush, maybe two. Most missions this is something that can be done, especially since the flamethrower can wipe a whole pod, meaning you won't spend a turn fighting them.
High risk/high reward is most definitely a major part of long war, as to win a campaign, you will most likely have to take a chance at some point. One of the great parts of the first mod was the early landed large UFO. If that wasn't high risk high reward, nothing is.

Rockets are the noisest things in the game, more so than heavy weapons which are more so than grenades and weapons fire. I'm not sure where we'll put the wiki page info yet but the mined data is here:http://www.ufopaedia.org/index.php/Sounds_(LW2)

[ArchmageMC]

I like the change to the flamethrower your doing, but can you do another one as well?

Make it so fire doesn't destroy relays.

Its so easy to just incindiary grenade or flamethrower a relay and finish those mission in 4 turns or so.