Popsicleman Jun 5 @ 10:25am
Incendiary ammo on flamethrowers
Time and time again, I see people load up incendiary ammo into flamethrowers, hoping that the increased ignition chance will make the flamethrower's 18% ignition chance and increase overall damage. However, from what I've read, most experienced players suggest greased rounds as a method for maximizing dps. The information in the wikis/websites aren't clear about how exactly incendiary ammo applies to flamers or weapons with already present ignition chances.

My main question is: does the incendiary ammo actually increase ignition chance on flamers?
My second question is: If so, does it increase it additively, or multiplicatively? (is the ignition chance 18+25 = 43% per particle or is it 18*(1+.25) = 22.5% per particle)

Because if it does increase ignition chance additively, it does make it so that incendiary ammo is a viable alternative that cuts down range even more and makes the clip smaller but allow more fire stacks (.43*(1-.3)) =.301 vs. (.18*(1+.6)) = .288

For the math I used the values in guns of icarus wiki (ignition chance for normal flamer = .18, ignition increase by incendiary = .25, attack speed decrease by incendiary =.3, attack speed increase by greased = .6)
Showing 1-13 of 13 comments
< >
[ITA]gobbibomb Jun 5 @ 10:28am 
18+25. :))
good morning!
Last edited by [ITA]gobbibomb; Jun 5 @ 10:28am
Lцсїап º¹ Jun 5 @ 10:45am 
It doesn't really make logical sense, that's for sure. Incendiary ammo for a flamer thrower, are you telling me flamer wasn't already incendiary?

Burst is a bit confusing too, I have to assume it has no effect either since flamer isn't shown as even having a "burst damage".
Popsicleman Jun 5 @ 10:52am 
I would assume burst does nothing, as the flamer works by having the particles pass through objects and do damage, which means that burst would try to increase particle size, which should do almost nothing. It by definition has no AoE damage afterall.

Also I agree. How the hell do you make flames flamey-er?
Fendelphi Jun 5 @ 11:11am 
Greased hits per second(based on Hits per minute): (800x1.6)/60 = 21.3

Incendiary hits per second(based on HPM): (800x0.7)/60 = 9.3

If we then add "whole %-charges" we will have(Greased: 21.3x0.18 = 3.8) and (Incendiary: 9.3x0.43 = 4) per second(Greased is rounded down, and Incendiary is rounded up). So both will roughly apply 4 charges per second, with a small advantage in stacking fire charges to Incendiary.

The actual flame has better range on the Greased and deals more direct damage per second.
(Greased: 21.3x0.8 = 20.4 fire damage per second. Incendiary: 9.3x1.2 = 11.2 fire damage per second).

So Incendiary is an alternative, as it does provide sligthly higher numbers of firestack per second(luck based, as you can still fail to ignite 3 out of 4 with some bad luck, or be lucky and ignite 5 out of 5 times).
But I still prefer the better range and "up front" damage of the Greased(more hits evens out RNG for firestacks) for instant crisp.
Fendelphi Jun 5 @ 11:13am 
Originally posted by Popsicleman:
I would assume burst does nothing, as the flamer works by having the particles pass through objects and do damage, which means that burst would try to increase particle size, which should do almost nothing. It by definition has no AoE damage afterall.

Also I agree. How the hell do you make flames flamey-er?
You could say that you inject a special fuel that burns an even Hotter flame, increasing the chance that the fire "sticks" on the ship.
FlintMask Jun 5 @ 11:24am 
Well, looks like the math has been solved for you so I'll just give my opinion.

I prefer either Greased rounds or Lesmok for the flamers.

With Lesmok if your steering well you can use the flamer out of range of the opponents flame and that is very beneficial. On the goldfish it also give you the ability to get a firing arc with the front gun and side flamer much easier.

If I'm planning on quick passes close range however I like Greased. It still gives you enough distance if the enemy trys for a ram to get you out of position and gets you that up front damage Fendelphi was talking about.
Alistair MacBain Jun 5 @ 12:41pm 
Incendiary was already explained how it counts but still ...
The high amount of stacks of a flamerthrower doesnt come from the highest ignition chance. its the sheer amount of particles that makes this weapon a hell to fight against.
Thats one of the reason most experienced players bring greased when they aim to get close enough.
The bigger clipsize gives you (from my side of view, no numbers to prove) a higher amount of firestacks than incendiary.
Lesmok is for obvious reasons. The Flamer has such a small range that it has a hard time getting in range on broadside ships. The lesmok still provides you with a reasonable amount of stacks and pain on the enemy.

Burst is actually quite strange. It might be outdated but i know that a few patches ago burst actually made a sense on a flamethrower due to a strange interaction.
Burst used to "increase" the size of the particles (atleast hitbox wise) so you could get one particle to hit several components that are closer to each other thus allowing you to get a higher amount of flamestacks on the enemy.

But usually all you need to think about is lesmok or greased.
adran06 Jun 5 @ 1:07pm 
Originally posted by Popsicleman:
I would assume burst does nothing, as the flamer works by having the particles pass through objects and do damage, which means that burst would try to increase particle size, which should do almost nothing. It by definition has no AoE damage afterall.

Also I agree. How the hell do you make flames flamey-er?

Flamer has an INATE AoE as part of how it works at it's core. This AoE CAN be increased with Burst! It DOES make it hit a larger area! This is still a thing even now, but due to the reduction in range, it's less of a valuable tactic than it used to be.
Fendelphi Jun 5 @ 1:51pm 
Just realized that the numbers on the wiki is probably outdated.
Generally though, if what I have seen is correct, Flamers benefit even more than in my calculations, due to higher basic Ignition chance(the Incendiary bonus has lesser impact).
Systema Jun 5 @ 10:12pm 
Originally posted by Łцсїап º¹:
It doesn't really make logical sense, that's for sure. Incendiary ammo for a flamer thrower, are you telling me flamer wasn't already incendiary?

Burst is a bit confusing too, I have to assume it has no effect either since flamer isn't shown as even having a "burst damage".

There are some types of flame that, with proper chemical qualities, can be more efficient than your average flamethrower. I really don't know where I saw this but it was in some old book about weapons in Vietnam. Really strange stuff, yo'


Originally posted by Fendelphi:
Just realized that the numbers on the wiki is probably outdated.
Generally though, if what I have seen is correct, Flamers benefit even more than in my calculations, due to higher basic Ignition chance(the Incendiary bonus has lesser impact).

I thought so too. The wiki details seem a bit outdated. Either way Greased rounds seem to do the trick most of the time :D
Popsicleman Jun 6 @ 7:03pm 
Flamer has an INATE AoE as part of how it works at it's core. This AoE CAN be increased with Burst! It DOES make it hit a larger area! This is still a thing even now, but due to the reduction in range, it's less of a valuable tactic than it used to be.

Ah, I see. When I said there was no AoE, the official data as given by muse shows the aoe damage section of the flamethrower as nonexistant. Also, I would have thought the particle would be too small for the % based change to do much.
Popsicleman Jun 6 @ 7:04pm 
It's a pity the wiki seems outdated, seeing how there's no other site that gives as much information. If so, the situation may favor greased even more as muse has been giving flamer the nerf hammer for awhile now.
Alistair MacBain Jun 7 @ 5:03am 
Some vets currently work on updating the wiki but give them time. For now ill suggest using guides and the ingame manual pages for each gun.
Showing 1-13 of 13 comments
< >
Per page: 15 30 50