Ammunition for weapons?

Started by Adamiks, May 12, 2015, 09:29:17 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Anduin1357

#15
Nobody can say for certain what is best but at least an explanation would help.
How would it make the game any better?


We need a better way to resolve this dilemma than continuous posting in this thread...

Johnny Masters

#16
QuoteIf you did your research, almost all ammunition is different.

If you read carefully, I said that some ammo types have minute/small differences (infer: not worthy to be translated into the game), I never said all nor that even some are, although some do, with the difference being that they are made by competing manufacturers.

For example, there's no point in having both FMJ and HP if the game's health system doesn't feature tissue penetration (damage is in a single area, unless its an explosion) nor differentiating 7.62  39 from 51 if the game doesn't feature... i dunno, recoil?

A lot of ammo types were made to be a standard in its time/nation/conglomerate. So a standard ammo in rimworld is whatever is standard in that time and place.

I'll put some random made up numbers so, in game terms:
standard ammo: 12 damage
armor piercing ammo: 8 damage, ignores x amount of armor/ or halves armor.
high explosive damage: 8 ballistic damage + 6 explosion damage on radius
etcetera

If standard ammo is 1 part ball ammo, 1 part tracer and 1 part hollow, why not call it standard ammo and abstract all these parts?

I'm not saying your system doesn't work, just that it sounds too gun nutting / detailed for the average rimworld audience. If it works and most people find it cool, then cool.

Anduin1357

Full metal jackets deal less damage to flesh than hollow points.
Full metal jackets can pierce soft targets and proceed on through.
vs
Hollow points deal more damage to flesh due to expansion.
Hollow points cannot pierce soft targets as it disintegrates in flesh for the maximum damage.
Hollow points can better annihilate organs.


Recoil can be modelled by decreasing accuracy as the firing sustains. It just isn't implemented atm due to burst firing emulation.


Tracer rounds can affect accuracy in sustained fire at mid range.
There are different standard ammunitions. I only stated the universal (neutral against all mix) ammunition as standard.


It may seem too detailed but it is an intuitive system in contrast to x rounds per shot systems.
A comprehensive, logical system for a crucial element in whether your colony lives or dies. Fitting.

Jimyoda

#18
-1
A nice idea at adding realism but presents a logistical nightmare. It'd be a logistical headache because we'd need ammo in each caliber. Do you really want to manage ammo for each weapon? And where are you going to get the ammo from? Traders? You can't rely on having the right kind of trader at the right time, with the enough of the right kind of inventory and you having enough silver to buy what you need. Perhaps instead of getting ammo from a weapons trader, colonists craft it. Now you have to deal with managing bills for different types of rounds, having enough raw materials, and having to make sure a colonist is there working on the bills. We all know how hard it can be to get a colonist to work on bills reliably.
It also breaks the mechanic of battles with ranged weapons. I say that if colonists can exhaust their ammo then so should enemies. In a long battle either you run out of ammo and get overrun, or, the attackers run out of ammo and flee. The game then becomes stock up ammo and defend until the attackers run out of ammo. I'd set up a bank of turrets while my colonists instead of firing a single shot just stand behind cover and repair the turrets until the attackers run out of ammo. In fact I would probably just blanket turrets around my base and not even give colonists guns. Each just gets a melee weapon and builds and repairs turrets as needed. Snipers attacking outside of turret range are prevented by walls or dealt with by a mace-wielding melee squad.
Requiring ammo for ranged weapons means they run out of ammo and become obsolete.
Quote from: Rahjital on July 09, 2015, 03:09:55 PM
"I don't like that farmers chop people up."

Obviously she has already played Rimworld :P

Read the wiki. Edit the wiki. Let the wiki be your guide.
http://rimworldwiki.com/

Anduin1357

#19
Ammunition for the most basic kinds are really cheap, 5.6 mm actually costs less than 3 cents per bullet due to mass production in the USA.
Imagine a galaxy's worth. It would be dirt cheap without regulations or taxes.
I won't comment on the worth of silver because, as it stands, silver is actually very abundant in asteroid mining so...


I would go by a quota system to ammunition, an automated 'do until you have x' where 'x' is the total available secure ammunitions storage with each caliber being a set percentage by the player.


Bullets and metal... balancing for bullet per unit steel is an unknown...


Turrets eat ammo like hell the way it's implemented atm. Fact is, turrets has always been unbalanced. It has free AI where it should not have and so on. If anything, it would have either crappy range and damage firing 5.6mm through .45 ACP or expensive shots but high damage and range with 5.45mmR through 12.7mm and maybe 20mm.
It might then get balanced.


Anyways, even if you do manage to blanket turrets, artillery, rockets and self propelled grenades/mortars would pound your defenses.
And also, I'm advocating for sidearms in addition which means a tec-9 to said melee fighters would either kill or it's going for additional balancing for melee shields.


Yes, I expect you to either preset your colonists to take a particular gun and ammo setting or equip them all personally. Makes for a good story, yes? The more detailed, the better. Within reason.


(Shhhhh... I even implied abstraction to calibers only, don't make it have the subtype distinction of things like .22 short - LR - ELR - hornet) Be kind.

Veyda

Let's step aside for a moment and take a look at Rimworld's spiritual predecessor - Dwarf Fortress.

Bows & arrows. Blowguns & blowdarts. Crossbows & bolts. Quivers.

+1.

Adamiks

Quote from: Anduin1357 on May 12, 2015, 03:44:09 PM
How would it make the game any better?

This would add realism and SMGs for example would be better than now because have big clip but on another hand sniper rifles add huge dmg and have huge range but a small clip so in general this would add some extra differences between weapons and of course some strategy - no killboxes anymore (because ammo in turrets too).

BetaSpectre

Personally I feel like guns are too weak ATM and adding a "nerf" would break the balance between melee and long ranged weapons.

If guns did 10x damage I wouldn't mind seeing this though.
░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░─╤▌██ |
░░░░░░░░─╤▂▃▃▄▄▄███████▄▃|
▂█▃▃▅▅███/█████\█[<BSS>█\███▅▅▅▃▂
◥████████████████████████████████◤
                           TO WAR WE GO

Anduin1357

@Adamiks I was talking about other suggestions for the ammo mechanic.
The benefits of ammo was never in doubt.

@BetaSpectre It is not a nerf per se but a change in how guns work.
Obviously SMGs and PDWs will benefit most for base defense from being able to spam more rounds than the burst fire mechanic.

Snipers would be more expensive per shot on average but hey, so would HMGs and all that mounted heavies.
You could make individual shots deal more damage to certain enemies and stuff, so you could get a damage buff depending on ammo type.

billycop32

sorry, but i'm gonna go with unlimited ammo. pouch types to augment the guns are fine, but having ammo is taking it a bit too far into the micromanagement level.
not to mention early raids would be a lot harder if not impossible.

Anduin1357

Why would early raids be impossible when you get starting ammo plus the poor first raider's gun and ammo...?
It's not micro, it's macro until you decide to do something special.
Read the automated part.

LittleGreenStone

Quote from: JimmyAgnt007 on May 12, 2015, 12:16:28 PM
personally i find mortar ammo tedious enough as it is.  ammo for guns would be terrible for micromanaging.  if we only controlled a single person then sure, but not when we can have a dozen or so. 

that being said, an item like an 'ammo pouch' that a pawn can wear, would let them fire faster without any penalty.  keeping it more abstract.  though i wouldnt want to sacrifice the armor or any other clothing slot for it.

Or the slot shields go. Neither clothing, nor armor.

Anduin1357

#27
Edit: Further elaboration using a better method of input.


Why not just group such things like ammo pouches and utilities as part of an unending line of accessories that can mostly be worn without attire conflicts.


I have no idea why melee-fighter anti-ballistic shields are implemented since it breaks the concept of having a backup weapon as such with longsword w/ pistol as the shield might make the guy basically invincible. I'll leave it at that.


Ammo pouches could make for more magazine capacity and faster access to the pouch also means faster reloads and corollary higher volume of fire. There would always be a weight to ammunition though, causing your colonist with extra ammunition to suffer carry weight related stress and medical conditions... That being said though, 9mm is always lighter than 7.62mm


An incentive at last to give your non-combat colonists personal defense weapons instead of some assault rifles that totally would hamper their work speed and movement! :P

Toggle

Turrets would require ammo... And if we crafted we would need gunpowder... The amount of different types of ammo, having to require a trader for it, the fact guns already can be less popular then melee weapons with all things considered... -1 no thank you.
Selling broken colonist souls for two thousand gold. Accepting cash or credit.

Latta