Increase Ammo Counts

[Lestat]

That's not really how an argument works. You don't assume things from what I didn't say. If you wanted, you could have asked, and I would have told you.

What we will do is let the people decide.

Mining is easy. If you're a decent pilot in an engineered ship built for combat mining, it's easy in a HazRES too. But let's not get away from the real topic of my thread that you still haven't addressed:

The issue is not that combat has become too difficult. The issue is that it is simply taking longer to kill combat NPCs, and a simple ammo increase would help alleviate this problem in lieu of a total rebalancing.

You are right it takes longer to kill an NPC. But we have Options to collect materials so you can stay LONGER in a combat zone. My 75 to 100 refill is great. But I learn to refill them before my Combat binge. If you want to spice up mining do it in a High or Haz sites. You can mix mining with combat.

Good luck.

 

[Red Zephyr]

Given the inadequacy of the material collection option as a solution to creeping health pools, let's request a moderate increase to ammo pools.

 

[aDuz]

i dont like the new cz rules at all. you kill about 6 ships now and then the cz ends. used to be able to stay for ages and make worth while amounts of combat bonds.
now your lucky if you come out with 400k and need to go replenish ammo

 

[ToyTen]

I do think it wouldn't be a game-breaker to increase, moderately as OP suggests, the amount of ammo on some weapons, frag cannons come to my mind, too. For the sake of variety of weapons choices one would want to use (enhancing the gaming experience).

 

[dm06]

Seems this is a right time to learn new tactics (because old one is not effective any more) and learn to use fixed weapons among with plasma accelerators.

 

[Sylow]

-- Cannons currently have 120 shots. Increasing it to 180 shots (+50%) would not break the game. Those additional 60 shots won't make synthesis completely irrelevant. It won't alter the difficulty curve. It's won't alter DPS numbers. It's just a convenience. By the way, I think the huge has only 100 shots. 150 is not too much to ask.

.
Generally, when I field cannons, they are there to bust power plants. And they usually last me long enough. There's other weapons where I run out of ammo first.
.

-- Shock Cannons have 240 ammo. For a weapon that shoots like a multi-cannon, that drains pretty quickly. They can't be engineered. No wonder they don't see much use. Even bumping it up to 360 shots might not fix that. 480, though?

.
On this one, my impression is based on videos only. I consider unlocking this weapon over Xmas, before that, I can't speak of first hand experience. But yes, based on the videos, I would also say that this weapon needs its ammo supplies to be buffed.
.

-- Enforcers have 1000 shots. Normal multi-cannons have 2100. Bumping it up to 1500 on Enforcers would still maintain an ammo difference.

.
When you compare this weapons rate of fire and damage to normal C1 multi cannons, the Enforcer doesn't look so bad. And unlike normal MCs, it doesn't have a spin up time. (My Chieftain could carry a much more effective weapons load, but I just can't get myself to replace the Enforcers there... )
.
Outside of these details: I haven't been in a CZ yet in 3.3. But I've done some wing assassination missions and some HazRes touring. I didn't feel a significant impact on my ammo supplies there. I guess at some time i'll look at CZs. But either it is a CZ specific problem, or I haven't encountered it yet.
.

 

[Red Zephyr]

Seems this is a right time to learn new tactics (because old one is not effective any more) and learn to use fixed weapons among with plasma accelerators.

Plasma accelerators are my favourites! It's always a good time to use those. I'd like to use them even longer too, with just a little more ammo.

 

[Red Zephyr]

Outside of these details: I haven't been in a CZ yet in 3.3. But I've done some wing assassination missions and some HazRes touring. I didn't feel a significant impact on my ammo supplies there. I guess at some time i'll look at CZs. But either it is a CZ specific problem, or I haven't encountered it yet.

The broader issue has been the increase of ship health due to changes in engineering and buffs to shields, like the regen rate of Bi-Weaves. It's been mostly a PvP problem, since that's where the fat Cutters are, and I'm not the first person to request an increase in ammo.


The difference now is that more NPCs are starting to use prismatic shields and engineered modules, and are therefore getting deeper health pools too. I figured now would be the time to request this change, since more players will now be effected by it. This health creeping was seen in the new Pirate Activity instances in 3.2. Those pirate ships were engineered, and like I've said elsewhere in this thread, they had a nice increase in difficulty, but mostly a big increase in time-to-kill. Now we're getting sturdier NPCs in CZs too, but with lower bond payouts. We need to stay in these instances longer to get the same rewards, but our ammo limits are not carrying us as far as they did before.

More ammo isn't even the best solution, but it's the easiest to implement if FDev doesn't have time yet to do a total balance pass.

 

[ToyTen]

Seems this is a right time to learn new tactics (because old one is not effective any more) and learn to use fixed weapons among with plasma accelerators.

I play fixed already gimballed go on not good convergence HP's in general.

 

[Velixar]

why are you wasting ammo taking down shields? isn't that was lasers are for? `Could it be that that we need to rethink our loadouts instead?

Well all ammo hardpoint configuration sounds so great. But losing 80 % of your ammo on shields sounds like a waste of ammo to me. I'm so glad I mix my weapon builds. Like lasers/ammo builds. Yes my combat might be slower. But I can stay in combat a lot longer.

 

[aDuz]

quick tip for bullet sponge npc's in CZ is just knock out the drives, let it float helpless so your AI team finish them while your taking out the next ships drives. much faster

 

[Daynen]

Simple solution: Optional internal module that increases ammo storage. Scale it up generously based on size somehow. Now we have ways to bring all the ammo we want AND we're making a worthwhile sacrifice for it.

Problem solved. You're welcome.

 

[Sylow]

Simple solution: Optional internal module that increases ammo storage. Scale it up generously based on size somehow. Now we have ways to bring all the ammo we want AND we're making a worthwhile sacrifice for it.

Problem solved. You're welcome.

.
Not so simple, but an actual solution: finally smack down a lot of over the top engineering. I mean, that's the actual point of this thread: NPCs slowly catch up in shield capacity to what players field since engineers are around. Mind you, the NPCs are still leagues behind. Things could be much worse. But even by just closing the gap a little bit, people find it more cumbersome to defeat those NPCs. Imagine how things would look like, if FD would dare to really close the gap and give NPCs the same equipment as fully engineered players field.
.
Thus the solution should not be to increase ammo supplies. It should not be to add an ammo storage module. Synthesis is also just a crutch and doesn't address the real problem.
.
As it's quite likely that NPCs will gain even more engineering in the future, the core problem really should be tackled: Much too high power scaling based on engineering. And yes, changing that would require some hard nerfs. But it'd be really beneficial for the health of the game.
.

 

[nanite2000]

Agreed OP! As an alternative, how about an Ammunition Store as an optional internal module that would increase your ammo supply depending on the module size (like a Shield Cell Bank).

It wouldn't enable you to destroy enemies any more quickly, but it would give you more longevity in a combat zone. It also forces the player to make a tactical decision - sacrifice an internal slot for additional ammo?

 

[Velixar]

Agreed OP! As an alternative, how about an Ammunition Store as an optional internal module that would increase your ammo supply depending on the module size (like a Shield Cell Bank).

It wouldn't enable you to destroy enemies any more quickly, but it would give you more longevity in a combat zone. It also forces the player to make a tactical decision - sacrifice an internal slot for additional ammo?

Only if we can target ammo storage and have your ship destroyed.

 

[nanite2000]

Only if we can target ammo storage and have your ship destroyed.

I'm really not a fan of that idea, sorry.

If they did that, they'd also have to do it for any ammunition based weapon for consistency (because why should they be any different)?
Secondly, no one with any sense expecting to go into combat would choose to equip their ship with a targetable component that could destroy their ship.

The module would be DOA.

 

[trollson]

Want more ammo today?

Tomorrow you'll still want more ammo.

 

[Red Zephyr]

Want more ammo today?

Tomorrow you'll still want more ammo.

Probably, but there is an amount that is reasonable to ask for in the interest of game balancing (or whatever semblance of that FDev is prepared to do).

Honestly, though, I'm not interested in infinite ammo, or quintupling what we have now. ~50% is not a huge increase, but it's enough to help weapons stay viable.

 

[scctldq123]

Yes please, I cringed hard everytime I see the shock cannon ammo count

 

[Dave1029]

I think having synth regen ammo for all weapons of that type rather than just one would be sufficient.