Weapons, engines and mods, Oh my!

[Fyron]

Technically, combat sensors are unaffected by storms. The ships just get a penalty to hit.

Seekers are the only weapons that can be unaffected by storms.

[Phoenix-D]

"You can pull into range, fire the missles and back away until the reload time is done."

And watch as they all get shot down?

Phoenix-D

[dbt1949]

I'm still pretty new here but I for one like torpedoes. I'll put about 3 of them on a destroyer and go up point blank and fire away. The A I is usually concentrating on the bigger ships which I load with weapon,engine and shield destroying type weapons as well as the null space weapons.

The torpedoes are especially effective after the enemies shields have been eliminated by the other ships.

[Fyron]

PPBs, APBs, etc. do a lot more damage than those torpedoes per kiloton though.

[Baron Munchausen]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Technically, combat sensors are unaffected by storms. The ships just get a penalty to hit.

Seekers are the only weapons that can be unaffected by storms.

Urk? I think the assumption is that even when you don't have a CS component in the ship there are combat sensors of some sort involved. The ability is named 'Sector - Sensor Interference' after all.

Explain to me how seekers are affected by storms?

[Phoenix-D]

"Explain to me how seekers are affected by storms?"

They aren't, which is what Fyron said.

"Seekers are the only weapons that can be unaffected by storms."

Since they never miss, a negative to-hit doesn't affect them. So storms have no effect.

Phoenix-D

[LGM]

I tend to favor weapons that have the highest ratio of Damage/KT Space/ROF or Damage/KT Space (First fire advantage). The problem with looking at Mineral cost of space when evaluating a weapon, is the space used has a hidden cost for the support components (ECM, Sensors, Engines, LS, Crew, Bridge, MC, etc.). If a weapon does costs 300KT less in Minerals, but does 75% the damage/KT of another weapon, the savings are probably not a good del because you need 4 ships for every 3 of the better weapon. One extra ship will cost about 4000+ KT of Minerals. Also, if you hit the ship limit in a game, optimizing your damage/KT because much more important than the cost of building a ship.

I would propose that you balance weapons by using Damage / KT Space / ROF. A highly effective weapon should have a ratio of about 2. Starting weapons should be something like .5. Weapons with special properties should have the efficiency multiplied by a factor. Make the ration times 1.5 if it skips shields and times 1.5 if it skips armor. If it skips normal shields consider it 1.5 as an early game weapon and a 1.0 as a late game weapon. Make to hit bonuses also multiply the efficiency. Currently in the game, PPBs top out over 2 and they are achieved early on. There are some Racial weapons that exceed that. When figuring out efficiency, always go by the Max damage. Range attentuation matters some, but assume players will send their ships to their highest damage range to fire. It is hard to deny an enemy from closing. If you move up to shoot first, they will move up even closer if they have to.

Another interesting thing to note: Small DUC IIIs do 5 KT of damage per KT of space! They are a very efficient fighter weapon compared to most others considering the tech to get them is easy to acheive.

Some weapons appear to be good because they have a large number, but when you divide by the big space, they are less effective (e.g. Graviton Hellbore or Torpedos). Removing Weapon Mounts might turn that affect around using Emissive armor as some have suggested.