Re: Usefulness of the bigger mounts
 

Well, using a Quantum V for comparision:

Normal mount 100 damage, 40kt
Large mount 200 damage, 60kt
Heavy mount 300 damage, 80kt
Massive mount 500 damage, 120kt

Using equal tonnage of all of them or 240kt of weapons, so:

6 Normal, 400 damage
4 Large, 800 damage
3 Heavy, 900 damage
2 Massive, 1000 damage

Using a 50% to-hit chance and comparing Large with
Heavy:

large probabilites and damage:
0: .0625 (0)
1: .25 (200)
2: .375 (400)
3: .25 (600)
4: .0625 (800)
average hits: 2 average damage: 400

heavy probabilities and damage:
0: .125 (0)
1: .375 (300)
2: .375 (600)
3: .125 (900)
average hits: 1.5 average damage: 450

[ March 10, 2004, 20:51: Message edited by: Phoenix-D ]

Re: Usefulness of the bigger mounts
 

Shouldn't it be: 0.125% for 3 hits with the Heavy mounted weapons? It should be equal to the probability of having no hit. If I am right, and if my calculation is correct, it should be 1,5 hits on average for 450 damage on average. (Which would make sense with a 50% chance to hit after all) But I may be wrong given my poor maths skills.

Re: Usefulness of the bigger mounts
 

The easiest way to calculate the best gun is to divide damage with tonnage. Example:

500 dmg
------- = 4,1666...
120 ton

300 dmg
------- = 3,3333....
90 ton

Bigger ratio = better gun. Of course I haven't taken into account of how much weaker the beam gets when it fires longer. Therefore I design two kind of ships. First those, who fire far and make lots of damage in far at the first round. Secondly I make ships which make best damage at point blank range. Also I diidn't take into account of how much each weapon costs in resources. That is everyone to decide whether or not to count it.

Re: Usefulness of the bigger mounts
 

You're probably right on the heavy mounts- at the moment the probability goes over one. Oops. Guess I forgot to update my calculator settings.

EDIT: fixed. Heavy still does more damage overall.

[ March 10, 2004, 20:52: Message edited by: Phoenix-D ]

Re: Usefulness of the bigger mounts
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">More hitpoints mean they are more likely to be hit and thus die first.

However, if the enemy delivers a few thousand damage to drain your shields and armor, a few extra hitpoints on a gun is nothing. Besides, your crew won't have any time to think about the ramifications of losing the guns before they are reduced to their component atoms by the rest of the volley...

Re: Usefulness of the bigger mounts
 

The key is the range....

Re: Usefulness of the bigger mounts
 

Some of you guys are comparing apples and oranges... the original post was about ship mounts, which have no range bonuses at all!

Re: Usefulness of the bigger mounts
 

Hey, I just checked the game again and

APB mineral cost is proportional to the increase in Kt size.

So the bigger mounts do more damage for less cost. (ie. less maintenance).

Re: Usefulness of the bigger mounts
 

3 factors

Maintence
Range
Damage
(actually a 4th one ) size.

Re: Usefulness of the bigger mounts
 

Mounts can add a lot of flavor to a game, but be careful, mounts can also ruin a game.