We have a bomb launcher, called the "Catalyzer." The charge attack fires sticky bombs at the target, and firing normal shots detonates them. They explode with tremendous damage within a relatively small radius.

The weapon also fires slow regular shots that are comparatively unimpressive.

The other bomb launcher is called the "Polaris." It's bombs only explode after a short period of time, before which they just deal a little damage. They explode more or less like a Static Flash, but do a lot more damage.

sorry i didnt really read everything you wrote but maybe like mortafire gremlin? http://wiki.spiralknights.com/Mortafire

Really, the only way to balance it against guns is to nerf it until it looks like a Catalyzer.

I'll go into some detail. The strength of guns is dealing damage at range. This strength is kept in check by halving their damage. The main strength of bombs is area damage. This strength is kept in check by a low rate of fire. Back in Beta, they could be dropped on normal attacks, boosting their rate of fire. Guess what the complaint was? You guessed it - bombs were overpowered.

Being able to shoot bombs goes to the other end of the spectrum, allowing area damage and damage at a distance. In order to keep their strength in check, either their area damage or range needs to be kept in check. Nerfing their range makes them useless. Nerfing their area damage makes them look like Catalyzers.

Actually, it's quite all right that you took an opposite stance - I had, in fact, considered a damage nerf as a possible balancing method, but it felt a little too simplistic. But after some thought, I realized that damage is the only nerf guns have. So maybe it's okay.

Another element to consider is redundancy. Bombs already have good range on their attacks; those that don't have such good range are already outclassed by bomb-guns (like Polaris vs. Static Flash). So I guess my question is, what do bomb launchers have to offer that bombs don't have already?

And what kind of damage nerf should these weapons have? Tentatively, I'm thinking 1/4 that of current bombs/swords (for comparison, guns do 1/2 damage of swords/bombs).

The gameplay of the bomb launcher is still bugging me. I'm trying to imagine using the bomb launcher, and I'm not liking what I'm seeing. If we were throwing short-radius, low-damage bombs like gremlin demos, it wouldn't seem so foreign, but...I'm balking at throwing full-radius bombs. I'm no longer seeing anything technically wrong with the idea; it's just the gameplay.

I guess it just feels overpowered.

But yeah, it's otherwise looking fine to me. :)

Maybe tweak the range of the launcher and radius of the bombs so they don't compete with guns as much...

Or...

Reduce the bomb blast radius to 1-2 squares and allow them to be launched just short of common gun range. The launcher would not fire off fully-charged bombs.

Or just scratch the launcher and have the knight throw them with a modifier key, like with dashing and bashing.

Thrown bombs would either fly to maximum distance or bounce off anything in the way, only starting the fuse when they land. Using them in the game would be very interesting, since the enemies are likely pursuing you, not conveniently standing in place waiting for the bombs to detonate. Strategies might include bumping or luring them into the bombs.

Their best uses would naturally be against slow or stationary targets, like gun puppies or packs of enemies. Most such packs of enemies appear in boss runs or danger missions.

Its main competition would be the Pulsar-line weapons, which are limited to normal and elemental damage types. Throwing bombs would give you access to all damage types, in addition to the varied bomb explosion styles themselves.

Would the ability to throw bombs render the Pulsars obsolete? I know that Pulsars have the advantage of instant damage, but is it sufficiently relevant to keep it useful?

Bombs get wonderful at end game, trust me. The only issue is the lacking of armor selection :c

@Varo: Hey, don't give up on it just yet! I was warming up to the idea. It just needed to be tweaked is all. I asked about the Pulsar in order to help work the kinks out of the idea. I mean, if we leave the bomb-throwing mechanic as-is, it might slightly outclass the Polaris, but not by enough to warrant its disuse (IMO).

@Waffleconecake: we discussed that problem earlier. 1/4 to 1/5 the damage of corresponding swords should keep it balanced. I would advise reading the whole thread before commenting on it again. I know, we all get a little lazy and fail to read it all (I do that too), but we kinda need to break the habit. It's only considerate.

@Hexzyle: I'm not sure what your point is. If it's similar to my Catalyzer/Pulsar argument, I'd advise reading the thread again more closely, as that issue was worked out.

@Stane: that would turn it into a dumbed-down Pulsar or Catalyzer, which we agreed was undesirable.

I know, I'm just adding my unneeded opinion (wink)

That sounds great in theory, but I'm not convinced that aggro is so easily manipulated with damage rates at 1/4 that of swords.

This is nothing like that. You didn't read the thread, did you?

1) you throw 2) 1/4 damage bombs 3) one at a time or 4) three at a time with VERY short radius and even lower damage, 5) and they bounce off anything they hit before activating the fuse.

This is nothing at all like Pulsars.