Usefulness of the bigger mounts

[klausD]

I think mounts in the default game (among several other things) are very disbalanced. They make damage soaking devices like emissisive armor almost irrelevant and I dont use them in my games. A little bit more play testing by MM would have been fine.

klausD

[Wardad]

Originally posted by Alneyan:
The cost is not altered by using mounts,...

Yes.
The cost effectiveness is altered by using the mounts. More bang for the buck. More damage resistance for the buck.

The larger ships have less overhead then an equal tonnage of smaller ships, because of the bridge (or Master Computer), engines.

The larger ships are more cost effective by spreading benefits over a larger tonnage of weapons. Typically used componants like Combat Sensors, ECM, Stealth Armor (defense bonus), Scattering Armor (defense bonus), fuel storage (engine damage reserve), Shields, Self Destruct, Security Stations, and PD add important benifits.

The mounts make the larger ships an even better deal by increasing the firepower per ton of weapons.


The special weapons make it hard to defend smaller ships. Defending against boarding parties, ion dispersers, seekers, fighters, shield depleters, all compete for room with the weapons. A well defended small ship will not have enough fire power.

[Alneyan]

Oh, you were talking about cost efficiency, while I thought of base cost. Sorry for any misunderstanding. (Although the increase in damage given by the Heavy and Massive Mounts isn't that great compared to a Large Mount, it does exist.) As for increased damage resistance, it might be a curse as well as it makes these weapons more vulnerable. But having one or two hundred more hitpoints isn't going to matter if your ship is destroyed in a single volley, nor will it be a problem if the weapons are shut down before all other components.

Using a given hull size is a whole different topic, and one that has been heavily discussed I gather. My concern was not about using bigger ships (say, a Battleship), but rather about the usefulness of using Heavy Mounts compared to the previous Large Mounts, available for all warships starting from the Light Cruiser. (Can you guess I am biased against the Massive Mount, and so the Baseships?) And of course, my problem was to determine whether a +12,5% increase in damage per kt was worth the increased vulnerability of the weapon systems. I am now minded to believe it is, mainly because it doesn't cost anything to use Heavy Mounts instead of Large Mounts, and skirmishes aren't exactly frequent.

*Grumbles* I should really get back to working on something besides my scheming efforts.

[Wardad]

If small skirmishes were frequent, the increase in damage resistance would be more important not less important.

It takes more hits to destroy the ship before targeting the next one.

With a enemy using a "Fire until all weapons are destroyed" strategy it should still help.

Weapons without fuel are useless.
Weapons without combat sensors can be useless.
If smaller weapons gives you a greater chance of losing fuel and sensors before the weapons, just what have you gained?

[ March 11, 2004, 20:48: Message edited by: Wardad ]