FlattestGuitar Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 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. Ive never used the toxic rounds, they might actually need a buff, considering they're only viable against organic targets. AP rounds are already in the game, so the conversation on them makes no sense. Normal Saber rounds will crit an unarmored target in three shots, I dont see the point in adding HP rounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Professor Cupcake Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 I'm pretty sure EMP rounds would cause a massive amount of collateral damage, so they might be a risky idea. That... actually sounds like a really good thing. Not only would it force a certain amount of discretion when using them, it also gives a few more "tactical" options for their use. I'm thinking like, shorting out APCs for a while, discharging a chunk of power in a SMES when hit, disabling machines for a while (possibly permanently, needing to be dismantled and rebuilt to be fixed). Hm... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlattestGuitar Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 My point is they're either going to be OP or useless. There won't be any middle ground, as they either EMP nothing or everything around them. Still, I don't think anybody really minds OP stuff in ss13, so I prolly wouldn't mind seeing them added. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Professor Cupcake Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 They'd have to be something super exclusive. Only available after significant research perhaps. Also, Nuke Ops. They should totally get a mag or two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlattestGuitar Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 ...something something just make them a traitor item? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NTSAM Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 We have EMP slugs and they're available to science, they work like Ions but ballistic. If we're gonna have bullets that are even more damaging and don't need a shotgun then it should be traitor-only. Giving more "i win lol" stuff to science is a no-no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plotron Posted February 3, 2016 Author Share Posted February 3, 2016 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlattestGuitar Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 Ballistics getting more types of ammo is a buff to ballistics. 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. Normally when you're shooting someone you want them to die and them losing limbs is a secondary obejctive. 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plotron Posted February 3, 2016 Author Share Posted February 3, 2016 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlattestGuitar Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 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. Good point with borgs and mechs though, although you could just use normal EMP bolts to make them die way faster, as they also have AoE. I don't mind new things being added to the game, no matter how niche their use is, but it seems like coding this type of ammo would be a major pain considering it would have to deal a special type of damage to only robotic limbs and more damage to borgs and mechs. If anything I'd go with ammo that just spawns a normal EMP blast wherever it hits. Make it super expensive to make and you've got yourself new exciting !FUN! things in the game and a massive nerf to HONKs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NTSAM Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 still emp shells do just that flattest, and science can make them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlattestGuitar Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 Yeah, but they're complicated as fuck to make and they only work with shotties. How else will I BDSM with an IPC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NTSAM Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 no more science buffs pls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plotron Posted February 3, 2016 Author Share Posted February 3, 2016 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HereticChurch Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 As an aside, I think it'd be really simple to add Hollow Point ammo. Simply giving something a negative AP value will make the round deal even less damage through armor, but regular damage with no armor. Setting the damage value to 40, but AP to -50 would make attacking armored opponents hard, but mowing down civvies very easy. At least, I think I read that the system works like that on the TG pulls... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts