Jump to content

Plotron

Members
  • Posts

    1,191
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Plotron

  1.  

     

    You either have the ID in the PDA while using cartridge functions, and risk losing your ID or you have the PDA in your pocket and lose a pocket slot.

     

    The new sprite also makes it incredibly obvious whether or not an ID is in a PDA, which functionally removes ID hiding which was an exceptionally useful traitor/non-traitor tactic of hiding important ID's.

    Oh yes.

    I also like using examine to determine whether someone has an ID or not. PDA is not everything.

     

  2.  

    The incindeary ammo is not Dragon's Breath, it's a type of ammo for the Saber - normal bullets that deal less damage, but add fire stacks.

     

    Saber is very special, it appears.

    Who the hell added that to Protolathe back in the days?

     

  3.  

    Ballistics getting more types of ammo is a buff to ballistics.

     

    I'm merely suggesting an ammo type here, not a specific way of putting it in the game. Currently it's as much of a buff to ballistics as a pulse rifle to energy guns.

    There's no point to implementing this type of EMP ammo, becuase we have incendiary ammo, which just sets your targets on fire, being miles better than just a small amount of localized burn damage.

    Does it put borgs and mechs on fire?

    You're assuming that these two ammo types would have to compete with each other and that doesn't have to be the case.

    As far as I'm aware, incendiary is available as shotgun slugs. I can't imagine giving incendiary ammo to pistols or rifles, for instance - in this case there would be no incendiary ammo for EMP to compete with.

    I honestly don't see how this type of ammo would be at all useful, considering you can't really count on ALL your enemies having robotic limbs.

    Neither can you always count on incendiary ammo to do the trick.

    Which is exactly why you've got normal ammo - you can swap the magazines to adapt to the situation.

    There has to be a drawback to using specialized ammunition, in much the same way ion rifles do jack shit to pure organics.

     

  4.  

    I really don't think ballistics need any buffs. They're insanely powerful when compared to energy weapons and are a nightmare to fight against regardless of who you are and what you're wearing.

     

    I'm pretty sure EMP rounds would cause a massive amount of collateral damage, so they might be a risky idea.

     

    You guys don't read my posts at all.

     

    I'm not talking about buffing ballistics, I'm talking about specialized sidegrades so people can have more tactical options.

     

    EMP ammo would not cause EMP effects, it would deal localized burn damage if it hits a synthetic part, a borg or a mech. This would come at an expense of reduced brute damage. That being said, this burn damage would probably bypass normal armor.

    There's as much collateral damage as with any other weapon in the game, melee or ranged.

     

    AP rounds would deal relatively low damage unless it was used on heavily armored enemies - or thick-skinned Mechs 'n shit. You can't have the best of both worlds.

     

    We have EMP slugs and they're available to science, they work like Ions but ballistic.

    Not even close to what I've proposed.

     

  5.  

    As far as I am aware EMP ammo wont work because even Ion rifles/Carbines use an Ionbolt, which causes an EMP effect in the area, so it will not be specific to one target.

     

    Don't tell me our current code doesn't allow for ammunition that deals two types of damage simultaneously.

     

  6.  

    dude as long as the EMP shots aren't a simple overused "fuck you you're dead" to IPCs that sounds rad

    It's just some additional burn damage that is applied to the body part that got hit at the expense of reduced overall brute damage output.

    When you add up the damage, it should be about 5 dmg higher than if you were to get hit with a normal bullet. Situation-specific.

     

    Wait, don't we already have AP ammo for the Saber that you can print in the protolathe?

    I wish I knew what that does.

     

  7.  

    There is a thing called overpenetration, which could be relevant.

     

    Could be lame if it involved RNG.

    It could be scaled according to how far you went into negative numbers. By taking the absolute value, we could come up with some kind of another variable.

     

    Balancing ammo by plain damage is going to be hard enough IMO.

     

  8.  

    If it causes an EMP within the area (even if it is one tile)

    It only deals additional burn damage if it hits a robotic part. It's localized.

     

    AP should maybe have a lower chance to stick inside the victim too.

     

    Not sure if it'd be good to have such a complex system.

    The ammunition would be balanced by damage primarily.

     

  9.  

    This also has the added dynamic of increasing the effect with heavier armour, and avoids having to worry about values going below zero.

    I'm just worried about scaling. But yes, I think that's the way it's most commonly implemented. We could have different tiers of AP ammo. I just like the idea of completely nullifying someone's armor - that won't be really possible with the multipler method.

     

    You could also flip this the other way, with HP-style rounds. Increased flat damage, but they apply a multiplier that increases the target's armour, making them pretty much useless against armoured targets.

    Brilliant.

     

  10.  

    1. Armor Piercing Ammunition and Weaponry

    The ammo we use currently only deals a flat amount of damage that is reduced by armor you wear, meaning that in order to defeat the heaviest of armors you need the heaviest of weapons that will very easily dispatch unarmored targets.

     

    But what if we had piercing armor that would simply ignore some of the armor? For instance you have armor with value 30 of bullet damage reduction (which translates to 30% AFAIK). If we were to shoot it with hypothetical AP ammunition with AP value of 10, it would take 10 off the 30 armor and ultimately the incoming damage would be reduced by 20%, not 30%.

    If you had no armor, it'd be 0 - 10, and since we don't want negative armor values it'd equal 0; the AP aspect of the bullet would do nothing. Unless you wanted to model overpenetration, that is.

    Simple formula: dmg = dmg*(100-(Armor-AP)) * 0.01

     

    What would be the tradeoff? Simple, AP ammo could be less effective against unarmored targets as it'd deal less flat damage and the AP aspect would not apply.

     

    Another good thing is that you could have robust armor-piercing weapons that'd dispatch 60+ armor guys just as if they were unarmored, whilst keeping damage to unarmored or lightly armored people in check - imagine a transphasic bullet with 80-100 AP value that would kill everyone equally as well.

    It could deal low damage, for instance 10 or 15, but still be more robust against heavy targets than a 20 dmg gun.

     

    Let's say that someone has 70% armor. The 10 dmg 80 AP transphasic bullet would deal 10 dmg.

    A standard 20 dmg bullet would only deal 6 dmg at this point. These two shots would both deal 10 dmg if the target had just 50% armor. This means that there are moments when you'd prefer AP over non-AP, and vice versa.

     

    Same could be applied to melee weapons, too! Some weapons could have natural AP properties, for instance high-caliber guns.

     

    2. EMP (anti-electronics) Ammunition

    What if we had EMP ammunition that would deal bonus damage to mechanical/synthetic/robotic parts? Not the same as an ion bolt, for sure, but it'd be something less specialized and more universal. Let's say that a normal bullet deals 15 damage. If you had a synthetic target (IPC, AI, Borg, Mech), you could get yourself EMP ammo that deals 10 normal (brute) damage and bonus 10 EMP (burn) damage to electronics. In this case the EMP ammo would be slightly more effective against the target you want to kill, meaning that you can have ammo tailored to your needs.

     

    The gun would still work against organics, it'd just be less effective against them in case your plan went wrong. It's a good compromise.

     

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Terms of Use