Usefulness of the bigger mounts

[Karibu]

Of course, some special weapons are not worth of using heavy or massive mounts. For example computer virus and crew subverter. Computer virus 3 makes 60 damage to master computer at normal mount. It means that it would destroy 3 master computers at one shot. Nobody puts 4 master computers in same ship.

IIRC Crew subverter 3 receives its max damage in heavy mount (120 if I do not remember it wrong), which means that its chance to convert enemy ships is 120%. No need to use bigger percents of greater mounts.

[Wardad]

Originally posted by Karibu:
Of course, some special weapons are not worth of using heavy or massive mounts. For example computer virus and crew subverter. Computer virus 3 makes 60 damage to master computer at normal mount. It means that it would destroy 3 master computers at one shot. Nobody puts 4 master computers in same ship.

IIRC Crew subverter 3 receives its max damage in heavy mount (120 if I do not remember it wrong), which means that its chance to convert enemy ships is 120%. No need to use bigger percents of greater mounts.

The larger mounts give a longer range. The added range can be very important.

[Wardad]

Originally posted by Alneyan:
While designing a few Light Carriers, something stroke me when doing a small calculation about the compared efficiency of the Heavy and Massive Mounts. Here are the increases in damage compared to the previous mount:
- Large Mount compared to no mount: +33% damage for the same space.
- Heavy Mount compared to Large Mount: +12,5% damage for the same space.
- Massive Mount compared to Heavy Mount: +11,5% damage for the same space...

I just looked into this Last night.

30Kt APB base size, normal damage = X
+15Kt for Large mount, damage = X + X
+15Kt for Heavy mount, damage = X + X + X

So you always buy the base size.
You pay half the base size for every mount upgrade.

[ March 10, 2004, 16:18: Message edited by: Wardad ]

[Alneyan]

Oops, I should have specified I was talking about ship mounts and not base/unit mounts. While the latter does give extended range, the ships granted to ships do not. (If memory serves right, some base/unit mounts also give increased accuracy)

Obviously, bigger mounts are compulsory for bases and weapon platforms (or satellites if you do want to research Satellites III) given their impressive bonuses, but I don't find them that much more useful for ships. On the other hand, Massive mounted weapons cost exactly as much as regular weapons, so it doesn't hurt to use the biggest mount. Having less weapons packing a bigger payload means your weapons are a bit more vulnerable, but it also helps if you want to repair your ship, so I guess I was too wary. (Who said "paranoiac"? Shhh, they are out to get you)

[Fyron]

I have found it better to just go with the heavy mounts over large ones even in low hit situations. Sure there are slightly fewer hits sometimes, but each hit does more damage, so at worst it balances out using Heavy instead of Large.

[ March 10, 2004, 16:56: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

[Wardad]

Well, I do not have the game in front of me...

But, The mounts also increase the damage resistance.

If I remember this rightfor ships:

ABP 30Kt Normal mount = 30Kt damage resistance
ABP 45Kt Large mount = 60Kt damage resistance
ABP 60Kt Huge mount = 90Kt damage resistance

So your actually less vulnerable with the bigger mounts. It is like adding armor to your weapons.


BTW1: Previously when I wrote "base size", I meant the "normal size".

BTW2: SATs have a Large Mount that increases range.

BTW3: I may use the higher levels of the Special Weapons for the increase in range, even if the damage is overkill.

[ March 10, 2004, 18:06: Message edited by: Wardad ]

[Phoenix-D]

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 ]