Kinetic Flayer is still not worth it and the history of Kinetic Flayer and Brain Rupture

[AC3NATOR]

@brosgw

Not normally.

that is why “depending on abilities” is written.

@brosgw

Well that would tell you how bad the blitz or blitzes are in general, and how cumbersome swapping to blitzes are.

I would not take that as a sign against blitzes, just the average player, mostly.

Blitzes on psyker should be made more interesting however.

@brosgw

I think most people who use it, use rapid fire weapons and would not want to have to swap to a blitz, enable it, swap back, and then fire.

That is why I maintain that @Mezmorki’s suggestion of “when you hit an attack against a target you Marked, you Brain Rupture them” is a good solution also.

It gives control for Flayer and it does not interfere for those who feel that a quick switch of
Blitz->Weapon Special->Secondary/Primary Weapon is too grueling.

[brosgw]

@AC3NATOR

I would not take that as a sign against blitzes, just the average player, mostly.

Blitzes on psyker should be made more interesting however.

If a majority of players don’t use them or engage with them that’s something you should look into. It’s probably a design problem.

@AC3NATOR

That is why I maintain that @Mezmorki’s suggestion of “when you hit an attack against a target you Marked, you Brain Rupture them” is a good solution also.

It gives control for Flayer and it does not interfere for those who feel that a quick switch of
Blitz->Weapon Special->Secondary/Primary Weapon is too grueling.

I think it’s good, but you could obviously run into issue where you want to tag someone to notify your team of their Prescence while flaming a corridor without using your stack on that target, or tagging someone outside your range but wanting to flay the people you’re targeting. But I think it should retain the precent to hit off not guaranteed.

[Mezmorki]

@brosgw

But I think it should retain the precent to hit off not guaranteed.

Yes exactly. Maybe we tweak the % a bit. I could see there being a 25% chance to proc against a marked target for example. Still want to be able to tag stuff without auto-proc’ing

[Mummeh]

I wonder how many times you could have made it proc with the same amount of time used to type this post out

[AC3NATOR]

@Mezmorki

Yes exactly. Maybe we tweak the % a bit. I could see there being a 25% chance to proc against a marked target for example. Still want to be able to tag stuff without auto-proc’ing

You say you want to tag stuff without autoproccing. So why have it be an uncertainty then? It is just something you cannot plan then.

[AC3NATOR]

@Mummeh

I wonder how many times you could have made it proc with the same amount of time used to type this post out

Prolly 100 times 3 of which would have mattered. Also, it was never about the amount of procs, so that saps the quip’s strength.

[brosgw]

@AC3NATOR

You say you want to tag stuff without autoproccing. So why have it be an uncertainty then? It is just something you cannot plan then.

It reduces the scope of it. So it won’t proc outside of tagged enemies.

[AC3NATOR]

@brosgw

It reduces the scope of it. So it won’t proc outside of tagged enemies.

I didn’t question what the intent of the limiting proc to the Marked target is…

I am also assuming rather that this is about targets Marked by the psyker themselves.

[brosgw]

@AC3NATOR

I am also assuming rather that this is about targets Marked by the psyker themselves.

That’s what I assume he also means although that would also be an interesting factor.

I still think health values and enemy types are an easier implementation (for fixing kinetic flayer and keeping it’s original intention).

[AC3NATOR]

@brosgw

I still think health values and enemy types are an easier implementation (for fixing kinetic flayer and keeping it’s original intention).

I’d go for the marking myself, way less code, just 1 condition check.