| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Jim Raynor
   |
Posted - 2003.08.15 12:30:00 -
[1]
Medium Ammo .05mp3
Large Ammo .25mp3
Why 5x the size of Medium? Shouldn't it be more like 2x the size? I seem to be devoting over half of my cargo space for ammo and missles, doesn't seem right.
Might want to tweak this.
------
ROBBLE ROBBLE |
wigster
|
Posted - 2003.08.15 12:41:00 -
[2]
The sizes are about right as you need to calculate volume.
|
Valeria
|
Posted - 2003.08.15 12:46:00 -
[3]
I agree, can only fly around with 2200 units, which lasts for an hour or so. Annoying when you make a 20+ jump trip out to hunt NPCs.
Your 425mm Prototype I Gauss Gun perfectly strikes some nublar, wrecking for 1155.0 damage. |
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2003.08.15 12:49:00 -
[4]
It might be mathametically correct but from a game standpoint I think it's kind of annoying to have to devote over half of ones cargo hold to ammo.
------
ROBBLE ROBBLE |
Muaddid
|
Posted - 2003.08.15 13:24:00 -
[5]
small ammo 0.01m3
medium ammo 0.05m3
large ammo 0.25m3
makes sense... its just that the BS's cargo arent 5times as big as the cruisers'
On vacations (need a new sig too) |
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2003.08.15 13:30:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Jim Raynor on 15/08/2003 13:35:47
Still have to devote over half my cargo hold to ammo and missles.. you seem to glance over that. Devoting half of ones cargo space just to ammo is kind of well... lame?
Because really, this game needs yet another reason not to use large turrets, really, it does.
------
ROBBLE ROBBLE |
NTRabbit
|
Posted - 2003.08.15 14:20:00 -
[7]
Considering you are flying a warship and not a cargo vessel perhaps you might want to consider using ALL of your cargo space for ammo instead of just half of it. Thats what it is there for.
--------
#eve-online irc.stratics.com - Former official IRC channel (Legacy)
#eve-online irc.coldfront.net - Official Unofficial IRC channel
WE R 4TW! |
Revolution
|
Posted - 2003.08.15 14:52:00 -
[8]
large ammo does fa dmg when you compare it to medium, so why is it 5x as big?
|
Milos Oberonov
|
Posted - 2003.08.15 15:16:00 -
[9]
 Quote:
Edited by: Jim Raynor on 15/08/2003 13:35:47
Still have to devote over half my cargo hold to ammo and missles.. you seem to glance over that. Devoting half of ones cargo space just to ammo is kind of well... lame?
Well, as you kill NPCs and grab their loot, you should be using up ammo, right? Leave port with a cargo hold full of ammo, and return with a cargo hold full of booty.
The trick is knowing when to quit. 
"Those who beat their swords into plowshares will one day plow for those who don't." -T. Jefferson |
Luther Pendragon
|
Posted - 2003.08.15 15:34:00 -
[10]
But having to carry ammo is supposed to be a drawback of ammo weapons. At least for the small and med, I think they take too little space...
____________________________________
Taggart wants YOU. Join TTi!
*waves his hand in your face in the jedi way* |
Entity
|
Posted - 2003.08.15 17:19:00 -
[11]
For long deep-space NPC hunting sessions, I'd use medium guns.
IMO Large weapons are more suited for short PVP combat where you're not going to use a cargobay full of large ammo anyway.
Of course, if you use lasers, you don't have to worry about this at all. It is why I use a heavy mod beam to pick off pirates when I'm mining.
 |
Ulstan
|
Posted - 2003.08.16 01:52:00 -
[12]
The message seems to be clear. Use Medium turrets intead of Large ones.
Equivalent damage, lower powergrid requirements, lower cap requirements, lower ammo size.... what fun!
|
Jarjar
|
Posted - 2003.08.16 01:54:00 -
[13]
Quote:
The message seems to be clear. Use Medium turrets intead of Large ones.
Equivalent damage, lower powergrid requirements, lower cap requirements, lower ammo size.... what fun!
I'm not getting 140-390 damage hits with my 250 gausses.
|
xeno calligan
|
Posted - 2003.08.16 04:05:00 -
[14]
Forgive my rusty physics, but I thought e=1/2*m*v^2, so since the mass is proportional to the volume, the damages (e.g. using a kinetic impact weapon) should also be proportional to the volume and not the caliber. Thus with the current volumes, the damages should be 5 times larger for large weapons, no?
As an aside: I use a thorax for NPC hunting, and I set out with my cargo loaded with medium antimatter ammo (above 5000 rounds in cargo). In a battleship, I'd get perhaps twice the cargo and twice the damage per round, but use 5 times the cargo per round, so the damage to cargo ratio is worse than for cruisers. Wasn't battleships supposed to be support themselves for extended periods of time?
|
Digital Sin
|
Posted - 2003.08.16 04:48:00 -
[15]
thats why i just trashed my 425mm rails. they have horrible tracking, i dont have any vortex stabilizers, and my thacyons take zero ammo, fire farther, better, do more damage, do it while tracking 3x better, and have a higher ROF. that, and they just sound SO much more powerful. a 425mm railgun makes a little "thwack" and you see this little spitwad exit the turret. they have to make this thing sound like the railgun from the movie "eraser". while i know you would prefer hybrid, jim, at the moment the large hybrid and projectile need a bit of tweaking. energy is fine though.....
"To be content,to be comfortable, is to be complacent. No one learns anything from pleasure..pain on the other hand is a most efficient instructor" |
Dragon Emperor
|
Posted - 2003.08.16 05:35:00 -
[16]
Quote:
thats why i just trashed my 425mm rails. they have horrible tracking, i dont have any vortex stabilizers, and my thacyons take zero ammo, fire farther, better, do more damage, do it while tracking 3x better, and have a higher ROF. that, and they just sound SO much more powerful. a 425mm railgun makes a little "thwack" and you see this little spitwad exit the turret. they have to make this thing sound like the railgun from the movie "eraser". while i know you would prefer hybrid, jim, at the moment the large hybrid and projectile need a bit of tweaking. energy is fine though.....
yeah, 425 need tweak, but remember 1 disadvantage for tachyon, it use too much cap..... don't tell me i need train skills... i have energy opt/mgt both at 4, controlled bursts at 4, and amarr bs at 3, training to 4 right now, I still have serious problem for continue use of 4 tachyon.
|
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2003.08.16 11:49:00 -
[17]
Basically ammo volume increases vastly compared to cargo space on ships.
Compare a Moa to a Scorpion:
Moa - 250
Scorpion - 550
Basically a Scorpion has a little over one half the cargo space of a Moa.. yet the ammo you use for your Moa takes up five times less volume. Sure you can use medium guns on a battleship, and at this point, you probably should in most instances.. but when large turrets are "fixed" I imagine they will become much more popular.
The current ammo sizes pose a problem for ships that use large turrets that require ammo. I'm aware that ammo is a "disadvantage" but reloading in combat is a "disadvantage" and having to carry any ammo at all is a "disadvantage" does having 1,000 rounds of large ammo in your cargo hold using up a half of your cargo capacity have to be a "disadvantage" too? Clearly this should not be the case. That's not even including missles, which take up a bunch of space too.
Clearly Battleships need larger cargo holds or large ammo should take up less space, in my opinion.
------
ROBBLE ROBBLE |
Valeria
|
Posted - 2003.08.16 12:02:00 -
[18]
If Large ammo is gonna take up 25 times more cargo than small, then it should do 25 times more damage as well. But that would suck, so just make it so small is 0.01, medium 0.02 and large 0.04...
Your 425mm Prototype I Gauss Gun perfectly strikes some nublar, wrecking for 1155.0 damage. |
Ulstan
|
Posted - 2003.08.16 14:51:00 -
[19]
"I'm not getting 140-390 damage hits with my 250 gausses"
Maybe not, but then, you fire faster with a 250 gauss.
As someone else detailed nicely elsewhere on this board, the difference in the DoT between a 250 guass and a stock 425 is about 0.8%.
Maybe things will get better when we get access to 425 gauss.
|
Digital Sin
|
Posted - 2003.08.16 19:02:00 -
[20]
yes, i think they have to up the tracking speed of 425mm railguns. they simply cannot hit anything, especially when you throw in close range ammunition like antimatter L. the stuff really is useless if it gives the gun a 20km range and the gun cant even track at that distance.
by the way i have 5300 capacitor and four 11.6% eutectic rechargers equipped on my apocalypse. if i run the guns nonstop then yes, it WILL drain the capacitor. but currently the firepower is so outstanding that anything i open up on will be dead in under 10 seconds.
"To be content,to be comfortable, is to be complacent. No one learns anything from pleasure..pain on the other hand is a most efficient instructor" |
Gafton
|
Posted - 2003.08.16 20:56:00 -
[21]
use lasers
Ding Dong The Witch Is Dead. |
Gafton
|
Posted - 2003.08.16 20:56:00 -
[22]
use lasers :)
Ding Dong The Witch Is Dead. |
Aronis Contar
|
Posted - 2003.08.17 02:12:00 -
[23]
I use lasers, so I don't really know what the situation with ammo using weapons is, but a "Ammunition Stacking" skill would sure be neat. -x% ammo size per level. Allows to stuff more ammo into the guns and the cargohold.
Ciao, Aronis!
|
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2003.08.17 04:10:00 -
[24]
Quote:
use lasers
If I flew a Amarr ship, I'd use tachyons. I don't see much use of using lasers on a Scorpion though, they would drain the capacitator too quickly. The Apocolypse has a much larger capacitator and a bonus to laser cap usage which the Scorpion clearly does not.
Hybrids or projectiles are the way to go on Caldari ships imo.
------
ROBBLE ROBBLE |
Jarjar
|
Posted - 2003.08.17 22:06:00 -
[25]
Bump.
I was thinking to try some Ion Blasters, and I came to think about this thread...
My Moa held 5000 rounds of M ammo, my Megathron can only hold 2700 L's, pretty annoying.
I'd suggest 0.1m3, possibly 0.15.
|
Trapline
|
Posted - 2003.08.18 02:20:00 -
[26]
Think about this for a second. Has it occured to anyone that this is meant to encourage variation in fleets? IMO you should be FORCED to use a mix of frigates, cruisers and a small number of battleships. They are meant to support each other, but people just say, sod that, id rather mine for ages longer and just buy 10 battleships than use 4 frigates, 4 cruisers and 2 BB. Kinda sucks in that one area, I was envisioning grand battles with each ship type performing its own unique role. Oh well, you just gotta work with what ya got I spose.
|
Ana Khouri
|
Posted - 2003.08.18 03:37:00 -
[27]
What has this to do with the ammo sizes?
free speech not allowed here |
Robotek Hybrid
|
Posted - 2003.08.18 03:50:00 -
[28]
I think ccp is trying to imply with this that ppl fill up module space with tracking enhancers etc. and the low cargo of BS is so that they dont replace the haulers. The best way in my opinion is tue slightly lower ammo size ( ie: .20 for large ammo) and make the cargo slighty larger ( ie: scorpian goeas up to 750) thats seems to be the mose reasonable
--------------------------------------------
|
Dragon Emperor
|
Posted - 2003.08.18 05:13:00 -
[29]
give ammo a seperate space, let cargo hold really be cargo hold. battleship SHOULD hold millions of ammo if not more.
|
Praetorion
|
Posted - 2003.08.18 08:05:00 -
[30]
Agreed. Large ammo volume is simply an annoyance factor.
|
Roloco
|
Posted - 2003.08.18 15:14:00 -
[31]
Edited by: Roloco on 18/08/2003 15:24:25
Quote:
give ammo a seperate space, let cargo hold really be cargo hold. battleship SHOULD hold millions of ammo if not more.
Yea that sounds good! Make ammo have its own cargo like drones. Ammo guns already have draw back by needing to reload and buy/build ammo so I say just make an Ammo hold and increace it in size according to ships so hulers wont loose there place and BB's can hold a Cr@p load of ammo like they should! 
Edit- oh yea they should range in sizes even in there own ship classes like an Apoc having say 1000 Ammo hold size and a Mega having say 1500 cus Amarr dont ues much ammo and reflect the race, but still need one ofcorse adds to another way to to look at a BB when you go to buy one (just a thought)
_______________________________
What was that? |
Jarjar
|
Posted - 2003.08.18 16:16:00 -
[32]
In that case, Amarr ships should have no "ammo hold" at all - possibly enough for 50 crystals (50m3), BUT you should be able to store ammo in the cargo hold so they're not completely limited to energy weapons.
|
Paul Dubois
|
Posted - 2003.08.18 16:21:00 -
[33]
Personally I think they shouldn't have any ammo capacity on the hybrid or projectile guns at all and just take the ammo directly from an ammo hold as per previous posts. Of course the ROF for the guns would need to be altered to compensate but I think most would prefer the guns just to keep firing until it runs out of the current ammo type. Apply the same to missile too :-) again altering ROF and allowable missile type for the various launchers.
But it would have to be a decent amount of space related to the size of the ammo/missile typically used by that type of ship.
|
Roloco
|
Posted - 2003.08.18 16:21:00 -
[34]
Some Amarr ships do ues missiles (ex. Apoc, Arbi)
_______________________________
What was that? |
Roloco
|
Posted - 2003.08.18 16:40:00 -
[35]
Edited by: Roloco on 18/08/2003 16:43:42
Sounds good! They could put in an auto reload that takes ammo directly from the ammo hold and puts it in the guns keeping the reload time so you dont have to keep on doing it your self(ex. auto repeat on items like shild boosters) so it could auto repeat load untill you run out of ammo in your ammo hold (lol i really like that ammo hold idea) Any draw back to this idea if not why dont they just do it next patch or somthing?? 
Edit- It seems easy... But hey I dont know...
_______________________________
What was that? |
Jarjar
|
Posted - 2003.08.18 16:46:00 -
[36]
Too easy. I was thinking of it as a drone bay copy. Limited space (obviously), that can only hold ammo and missiles (unless I'm forgetting something). Also, if it didn't fine ammo type X in the ammo hold, it'd search the cargo bay before giving up.
No fancy stuff like auto-reloading etc.
I don't see how ROF is related though. 
|
Roloco
|
Posted - 2003.08.18 16:56:00 -
[37]
True Just having a large ammo hold would be awsome! With somthing like that ill be happy. No need for anything fancy right now i guess... but it would be cool to see hehe
_______________________________
What was that? |
Lartfor
|
Posted - 2003.08.18 19:15:00 -
[38]
this is how i look at it right now.... Ammo using heavy weapons dont do as much dmg as lasers, u need to spend a large amount of credits buying ammo. And AND, the ammo takes up a masive amount of space.... where is the balance? seperate ammo bay will only save one of the problems about ammo using weapons. At least it is a start.
|
Dragon Emperor
|
Posted - 2003.08.18 19:19:00 -
[39]
Quote:
this is how i look at it right now.... Ammo using heavy weapons dont do as much dmg as lasers, u need to spend a large amount of credits buying ammo. And AND, the ammo takes up a masive amount of space.... where is the balance? seperate ammo bay will only save one of the problems about ammo using weapons. At least it is a start.
where's the balance? huh, laser do em and thermal dmg, everybody know it......shield hardener is the balance? no? then laser use much much more cap, cap is the balance? no? then what do you want for balance?
|
Beseb
|
Posted - 2003.08.18 20:13:00 -
[40]
Well, hybrid only does thermal and kinetic AND uses ammo, so I dunno...
I do like the idea of a seperate cargo bay. If CCP thinks it's unbalancing to auto reload out of that bay, then perhaps a left clickable button near each gun that reloads. I mean this right click -> reload thing is quite a drag.
|
Karash Amerius
|
Posted - 2003.08.18 21:05:00 -
[41]
For people that think Battleships are daily use ships, yes it is too large.
|
Daan
|
Posted - 2003.08.19 16:19:00 -
[42]
Quote:
Quote:
The message seems to be clear. Use Medium turrets intead of Large ones.
Equivalent damage, lower powergrid requirements, lower cap requirements, lower ammo size.... what fun!
I'm not getting 140-390 damage hits with my 250 gausses.
I am with my 650's, just use a webifier 
|
Riddari
|
Posted - 2003.08.19 23:00:00 -
[43]
Quote:
For people that think Battleships are daily use ships, yes it is too large.
Erm? So we just take them out on Sundays, wax them and jump back into our cruisers?
¼©¼
a history |
John Zeppe
|
Posted - 2003.08.19 23:52:00 -
[44]
Quote:
Quote:
For people that think Battleships are daily use ships, yes it is too large.
Erm? So we just take them out on Sundays, wax them and jump back into our cruisers?
Of course battleships are "daily use" ships. What do you consider them?
Use a cruiser until you get in PvP, then run away to get your battleship? 
|
Skelator
|
Posted - 2003.08.20 00:14:00 -
[45]
I have a Idea..
We have a Cargo Hold
And a Drone Bay
Why not a Ammo Hold/Armory like on the Real Naval Ships
They have us Surrounded again.. the Poor Bastards |
Presidio
|
Posted - 2003.08.20 14:31:00 -
[46]
I agree atleast they can reduce the size of ammo to that of x2 of medium ammo.
A battleship should atleast be able to hold same amount of large ammo as the cruiser can hold medium ammo.
I have been saying this all along, that patch that nerfed the weapons couple pathces back was very poorly done.
I do like the fact that the weapons are less powerfull, due to the skill and module fixes/nerfs, and combat speed is right at this moment.
Problem is lasers are supperior to all other weapons in all aspects except for cap usage.
They are the appsolute best way to go if you're hunting NPC pirates. You do have to boost your ships capacitor, and that takes some balancing so you get the optimal firepower and stamina, out of your ship, but once you get it right, no other weapon can match the performance and conveniance of not having to pay for ammo/cary it, and reload your guns.
And even in PVP lasers do most damage as well. I don't know anyone who is happy with the performance of their large hybrid or projectile turrets.
Something really needs to be done about, hybrids and projectiles. They need to be better, or else soon everyone will be using lasers if that's not already the case.
-
"Passivity is fatal to us. Our goal is to make the enemy passive."
Mao Tse-tung
|
Jarjar
|
Posted - 2003.08.26 17:13:00 -
[47]
BUMP.
Medium hybrids + medium ammo: Enough to kill 240+ NPCs with my loadout.
Large hybrids + large ammo: Enough to kill about 80.
Something needs to be done, after all they do 3-5 times the damage/shot and I'm using the same number of them. 
|
Ulstan
|
Posted - 2003.08.26 17:26:00 -
[48]
I just think battleships that rely onlarge ammo and missiles (hi raven) are going to be at a massive disadvantage compared to anyone who uses lasers and drones (which have their own bay) in terms of staying power, certainly, but also in just how much cargo you can carry in addition to ammo.
I like the idea of a separate ammo/missile bay. :)
|
Xelios
|
Posted - 2003.08.26 17:41:00 -
[49]
I thought a Battleship was supposed to be a war ship, a weapon of mass destruction, yet it can't hold enough ammo to power its guns for more than an hour? I don't mind devoting my entire hold to ammo, but if I do I expect to be able to go on a hunting trip into deep space and be able to hunt there for a few hours at least. But maybe I'm expecting too much. I guess I'll just have to take an alt down with an indy full of ammo.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |