Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.97a is out! (02/02/24); New blog post: Simulator Enhancements (03/13/24)

Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: A Veteran's Insight On Guns  (Read 3432 times)

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3071
    • View Profile
A Veteran's Insight On Guns
« on: September 05, 2021, 04:21:27 PM »

I was motivated by a recent thread started by Randaru (https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=22634.0) to create my own overview of the guns in starsector. I used slightly different criteria to asses weapons, and hopefully I was able to capture more of the important factors that determine a weapons usefulness. The criteria I went we with are:

 -> Anti shield/armor: these two categories are faily obvious, a measure of how effective against different targets the weapon is. Hull and armor are grouped together because the residual armor mechanic generally means that weapons must be effective against armor to be effective against hull            
-> Burst/Frontload: A measure of how well the weapon outputs damage over a short time period. Burst weapons weapons naturally have high front load, but weapons with very high damage output can also be effective at outputting high levels of short-term damage            
-> Output: A measure of how well a weapon can deal damage long-term. Mostly sustained DPS for guns and ROF for missiles            
-> Sustainability: How well can this weapon be fired for extended periods of time, in terms of flux cost for guns, and ammo/total damage potential for missiles            
-> Cost/Availability: How easy this weapon is to fit in a loadout (OP cost) and how easy this weapon is to find/buy/obtain            
-> Utility: The Value that this weapon brings outside of pure damage. Notabily Ion damage, but also beneficial (or harmful) interaction with the AI, PD capability, and range considerations            
-> Versatility: A measure of how well the weapon does multiple jobs            
-> Overall Usefulness: My subjective opinion of how useful this weapon is, along with comments explaining

I wrote out all my grades and comments in a google sheet that I've linked below:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1k_OJ-8Sen-h9Vz_gbl90xwdKM33dUpUMGngyA6L1Ngs/edit?usp=sharing

I'm sure people will disagree on some things and I'm interested in hearing feedback. I did my best to give all weapons a fair shake, even ones i don't like that much. Maybe this could be useful reference for newer players once we've refined my opinions a bit ;D.
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7174
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: A Veteran's Insight On Guns
« Reply #1 on: September 05, 2021, 04:48:26 PM »

Nice writeup! I don't 100% agree, but it strikes me as mainly solid.

A few points for us to fight over:

I disagree with is the S rating for the sabot types: I agree they are good, but they don't rate S for me and its always better to have mixed sabots + HE than pure sabots. For the small slot I'd rate Reapers as better than sabots (probably A++ and A, though its really hard not to give small Reapers an S) while for the medium I'd put them at the same (A for each: Reapers maintain 2 OP/reaper and jump ammo by x5, but sabots go from 1.333 OP/sabot to .833 and get x4 - just a better deal). Getting shields down is only half the battle and requires followup.

I also disagree with the Breach's rating because I think its 'sustainability' should be higher: both versions have a lot of ammo (and an on hit effect that makes them more effective at anti-armor than their rated damage indicates). I think its a very different niche than other anti armor/hull weapons because its not also a finisher, but its a useful anti-armor missile for a ship that has other followups/a lot of heavy kinetics that can do hull themselves. Maybe a C total ranking?
Logged

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3071
    • View Profile
Re: A Veteran's Insight On Guns
« Reply #2 on: September 05, 2021, 05:48:23 PM »

Nice writeup! I don't 100% agree, but it strikes me as mainly solid.

A few points for us to fight over:

I disagree with is the S rating for the sabot types: I agree they are good, but they don't rate S for me and its always better to have mixed sabots + HE than pure sabots. For the small slot I'd rate Reapers as better than sabots (probably A++ and A, though its really hard not to give small Reapers an S) while for the medium I'd put them at the same (A for each: Reapers maintain 2 OP/reaper and jump ammo by x5, but sabots go from 1.333 OP/sabot to .833 and get x4 - just a better deal). Getting shields down is only half the battle and requires followup.
I don't really agree with comparing them to HE missiles because they have a different role (kinetic strike missiles). There is not competition for them in that role, but they are still S tier at it IMO. Honestly, the entire concept of a zero flux kinetic strike missile is just S tier lol. If the light needler was the only kinetic weapon in the small kinetic slot, I would definitely rank it as S tier, even though a ship with only light needlers would not be good. It's more that it's irreplaceable rather than the clear best option for the slot. Maybe that's inconsistent with my stated grade meaning, but I think it falls under 'slot context'. Idk, I could maybe be convinced to change it to A+.

I also disagree with the Breach's rating because I think its 'sustainability' should be higher: both versions have a lot of ammo (and an on hit effect that makes them more effective at anti-armor than their rated damage indicates). I think its a very different niche than other anti armor/hull weapons because its not also a finisher, but its a useful anti-armor missile for a ship that has other followups/a lot of heavy kinetics that can do hull themselves. Maybe a C total ranking?
Oh, I wasn't aware of the on-hit affect and the wiki doesn't have anything about it. Do you know what it is/how much it affects the damage? I was doing sustainability mostly based on total damage potential in the Pod. For reference raw damage numbers are:
Breach: 50*150 = 7500
Harpoon: 12*750 = 15000
Annihilator: 100*200 = 20000
Reaper: 10*4000 = 40000

which is what the D rating was based on.
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7174
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: A Veteran's Insight On Guns
« Reply #3 on: September 05, 2021, 06:46:49 PM »

Fair enough for sabots, I can agree with that logic. I wasn't thinking about it in terms of being alone in its category, but it is and its good.

For the breaches, they each have a scripted 200 extra armor damage that is not reduced by armor (don't know about skills? Would have to do testing). Its a bit funny to compute total damage using that as it doesn't help vs shields or hull but is better than it looks vs armor (because no reduction). They aren't my favorite HE type missiles because I like using missiles to finish, but as 'burst anti armor' to clear the way for high per shot kinetics (which had been hitting shield) or energy they work pretty well.
Logged

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3071
    • View Profile
Re: A Veteran's Insight On Guns
« Reply #4 on: September 05, 2021, 06:56:17 PM »

For the breaches, they each have a scripted 200 extra armor damage that is not reduced by armor (don't know about skills? Would have to do testing). Its a bit funny to compute total damage using that as it doesn't help vs shields or hull but is better than it looks vs armor (because no reduction). They aren't my favorite HE type missiles because I like using missiles to finish, but as 'burst anti armor' to clear the way for high per shot kinetics (which had been hitting shield) or energy they work pretty well.
Hmmmm, even if that was raw damage, it would only bump them to 17500 total which is marginally better than harpoons i.e. like C+ sustainability. I guess that leaves them somewhere between C+ and D, probably like a D+/C- sustainability IMO. Maybe overall a D+ as well? I agree they are better than Pilums, but maybe plums could be D- lol.
Logged

FooF

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1378
    • View Profile
Re: A Veteran's Insight On Guns
« Reply #5 on: September 05, 2021, 08:26:14 PM »

I've been playing with the Breach missiles this past playthrough and I've been pleasantly surprised. No, they are not finishers but they are fairly accurate missiles and they do at minimum 245 damage to armor per missile (assuming the 150 is reduced to 15% of total by armor). In reality, they do much more than that and that's just the first missile because the second missile will have reduced 200 armor off that cell. The Small variant doesn't strike me as all that useful because of the smaller burst size and only getting 5 shot out of it. The Medium gives you larger burst size and 10 shots.

To put a Medium Breach into perspective, a 5-round burst that all hit one cell would completely strip any ship with less than 1425 armor. It would take an unmodified onslaught down to 440. Of course, the comparison would be against a Harpoon Pod which completely strips an Onslaught after the 3rd missile. However, you only get 3 bursts out of a Harpoon Pod and you get 10 out of a Breach Pod. If you fire Breaches right after the first shield drop, you can count on most ships being completely stripped of armor on that side. That pays dividends later on. Or to put it another way, Breaches are body blows while Harpoons/Torpedoes are head shots: the latter might score a KO but the former makes a protracted fight a lot shorter. I do agree that when you have an opening, you want to swing for the fences and finish the fight but Breaches allow you to soften more ships for yourself or your fleet.

As for the rest of the list, the only S-tier weapon in my mind is the Cryoblaster. I don't think Sabots are quite S-tier, "A" to "A+" definitely but not S. There are "best in class" weapons that do what they do very well but because of high OP costs, short ranges, excessive flux cost, etc., I can't think of any that get into "broken" territory (which is kind of what S-tier is). Even the ones that I want to mention: Plasma Cannon, Heavy Needler, Light Needler/Railgun, Dual Flak, etc. all have drawbacks.

I'm a proponent for the Phase Lance. Yes, it's wasted on shields but its murder against armor. I wish it was treated more like a Strike Weapon in the AI's hands but I don't complain too much. The alternative is a Pulse Laser and that absolutely will not hurt heavy armor. I rate both the Pulse Laser and the Phase lances very similarly, just on opposite sides of the same coin. Both are kind of generalists (Phase Lance is surprisingly effective against fighters) but one specializes in shields while the other against armor. Both are solid "B" options but overshadowed by the Heavy Blaster which is better than both if you can afford it. Ion Pulser is more specialized but its burst nature lends itself to some ships more than others. It's great on phase ships and Hyperions but I find its short range lacking for anything that lumbers. It also really likes to waste its ammo on fighters. I think "A-/B+" range is fair but it's not that much better than the Pulse Laser/Phase Lance, more of a different role than anything.

One observation: the highest graded HE non-missile is a "B-" (Heavy Mortar and Hephaestus). I find that pretty telling. Kinetics are valuable no doubt but there isn't a single HE option in the game better than a B-? Off the top of my head, the Heavy Mortar is an A-, the HAG is a B+, the Hellbore is closer to a B, Heavy Mauler is a B, LAG is a B-, Assault CG is definitely a C, and the Light Mortar is C-/D+.
Logged

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3071
    • View Profile
Re: A Veteran's Insight On Guns
« Reply #6 on: September 05, 2021, 09:50:08 PM »

I've been playing with the Breach missiles this past playthrough and I've been pleasantly surprised. No, they are not finishers but they are fairly accurate missiles and they do at minimum 245 damage to armor per missile (assuming the 150 is reduced to 15% of total by armor). In reality, they do much more than that and that's just the first missile because the second missile will have reduced 200 armor off that cell. The Small variant doesn't strike me as all that useful because of the smaller burst size and only getting 5 shot out of it. The Medium gives you larger burst size and 10 shots.

To put a Medium Breach into perspective, a 5-round burst that all hit one cell would completely strip any ship with less than 1425 armor. It would take an unmodified onslaught down to 440. Of course, the comparison would be against a Harpoon Pod which completely strips an Onslaught after the 3rd missile. However, you only get 3 bursts out of a Harpoon Pod and you get 10 out of a Breach Pod. If you fire Breaches right after the first shield drop, you can count on most ships being completely stripped of armor on that side. That pays dividends later on. Or to put it another way, Breaches are body blows while Harpoons/Torpedoes are head shots: the latter might score a KO but the former makes a protracted fight a lot shorter. I do agree that when you have an opening, you want to swing for the fences and finish the fight but Breaches allow you to soften more ships for yourself or your fleet.
I haven't played that much with breaches, but when I did, it just felt like they really struggled to to get through PD, and they don't hit the same cell very much because they meander a lot. It just felt like they didn't do enough to justify the slot.

I guess a big part of the ratings was that I feel like annihilators are better than breaches, maybe I could bump annihilators to C+ or B- and breaches to C-/C idk. They just feel so un-impactful in comparison to all the other options you can use in the medium missile slot.

As for the rest of the list, the only S-tier weapon in my mind is the Cryoblaster. I don't think Sabots are quite S-tier, "A" to "A+" definitely but not S. There are "best in class" weapons that do what they do very well but because of high OP costs, short ranges, excessive flux cost, etc., I can't think of any that get into "broken" territory (which is kind of what S-tier is). Even the ones that I want to mention: Plasma Cannon, Heavy Needler, Light Needler/Railgun, Dual Flak, etc. all have drawbacks.
I think sabots are legitimately broken, not just best in slot. Zero flux burst kinetic damage is insane already, and you can't even drop shields without getting emp'd, the 2 stage deployment makes them mostly impervious to PD, and they have decent ammo. I don't see the downside. Sabots and cryoblaster are the only weapons I have rated as overall S tier so I'm pretty sure we agree on that. Cryoblaster is currently S++++ tier although that's a bit of a meme :P.

I'm a proponent for the Phase Lance. Yes, it's wasted on shields but its murder against armor. I wish it was treated more like a Strike Weapon in the AI's hands but I don't complain too much. The alternative is a Pulse Laser and that absolutely will not hurt heavy armor. I rate both the Pulse Laser and the Phase lances very similarly, just on opposite sides of the same coin. Both are kind of generalists (Phase Lance is surprisingly effective against fighters) but one specializes in shields while the other against armor. Both are solid "B" options but overshadowed by the Heavy Blaster which is better than both if you can afford it. Ion Pulser is more specialized but its burst nature lends itself to some ships more than others. It's great on phase ships and Hyperions but I find its short range lacking for anything that lumbers. It also really likes to waste its ammo on fighters. I think "A-/B+" range is fair but it's not that much better than the Pulse Laser/Phase Lance, more of a different role than anything.
I rated pulse laser B+, phase lance B-, ion pulser A-, heavy blaster A, so I think we are on the same page? At least it seems like I could land on those grades more or less following your comments.

Phase lance has kinda low DPS, and I just find it tends to be more risky weapon since you generate a big spike of flux in your own ship when you use it. It always feels like it takes too long to kill things with it when I use it. All of that firmly bumps it to B for me (maybe B+ with pulse laser), and then AI issues get it to B-. I think Ion pulser is a clear step up from pulse laser/phase lance for me because it does so much ion damage, and then is still solid anti-shield and big burst damage too. Shutting down your enemies weapons is worth a lot in my book. Ion pulser isn't a gun I put in every slot, but I tend to have one in a majority of my high tech loadouts so I feel like it's gotta be an A tier. Idk, maybe I could see ion pulser at B+ with pulse laser, but I really think Ion pulser is at least a little better.

One observation: the highest graded HE non-missile is a "B-" (Heavy Mortar and Hephaestus). I find that pretty telling. Kinetics are valuable no doubt but there isn't a single HE option in the game better than a B-? Off the top of my head, the Heavy Mortar is an A-, the HAG is a B+, the Hellbore is closer to a B, Heavy Mauler is a B, LAG is a B-, Assault CG is definitely a C, and the Light Mortar is C-/D+.
I agree that it's telling, I think HE weapons are really lacking DPS compared to energy options (which also get some skill boosts), and Missiles do a ton of work now that you can get triple ammo, so ballistic HE is just less good these days IMO.

I could maybe give heavy mortar a flat B, but it's definitely not very good against heavy armor, and has mediocre DPS, I can't see going to A. It's just not that good of a weapon, no way it's a top tier choice.

Heavy Mauler I'm really not seeing the argument for higher grade. 137 DPS in a medium weapon is not enough for a B. It's a niche weapon that's only useful for 1000 range kiting builds, otherwise it just doesn't have the stopping power to kill things.

Hellbore has the same problem as Heavy Mauler: low DPS compared to other options. I also think about relative ratings: I don't think hellbore or hephaestus are as good as mjolnir which I think is no better than a B, and I'm not convinced hellbore is as good as hephaestus which has a B-. Idk maybe hellbore is better than gauss and haephestus. We are also talking about 'overall' ratings which are influenced by what ships you tend to use. If onslaught what the only ship with a large ballistic slot, then hellbore would be higher rated for me. At the end of the day, I think missiles + Mark IX and maybe mjolnir is most of what I use and gets the job done, but even more seriously, I'm using ships with large energy slots instead :P. It will be interesting to evaluate next patch when low tech things get buffed.

I gave assault chain gun a C+ so we are on the same page there.

LAG does 40 damage per shot... Even with HE boost, it's not very good against armor, and then it's worse against hull. It's like barely even better than a railgun against hull/armor, I'm actually pretty sure railgun is better against very heavy armor since both will be at the max damage reduction and railgun has higher DPS. It also has terrible range. There's no universe where it's better than a C, and I think D is more appropriate. I think it's almost never worth wasting a small slot and 160 flux/sec on a 40 damage per shot HE weapon. At least the light mortar costs no flux giving it a niche. You will never kill anything with LAG outside of frigates, and low tech and midline definitely can't afford to spend so much flux on such a bad weapon.
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7174
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: A Veteran's Insight On Guns
« Reply #7 on: September 05, 2021, 10:42:09 PM »

In terms of anti armor LAGs will always be better than railguns even if at minimum reduction, just because at minimum they do .15 of 320 = 48 dps while railguns do .15 of 83.5 = 12.525 dps. Its true that their penetration is bad: with no skills at play they do minimum armor damage at 453 armor (minimum damage for railguns is at 283). For anti hull its 80 penetration vs 50, so they are better but not by a huge amount (vs 1000 armor depleted = 50 residual LAGs do 98.5 DPS for 160 flux while railguns do 83.5 DPS for 150). Of course railguns are always good against shields so they are always good, while LAGs are really only useful as anti-fighter and anti-frigate guns, and acceptable up to anti-destroyer level, for early game fights. So if those are the expected targets for the mount, it performs pretty well. Not what I'd call a "great" weapon or anything, but against those targets it does its job as anti-armor/anti-hull. And its only a 5OP weapon vs 8OP. I'd rate the weapon as a B in its use case: its just that its use case goes away as the game goes on.

As an example: when I can't find railguns/needlers for the front smalls of a Hammerhead I will use 2 LAGs + 2 Heavy Autocannons. The LAGs do fine. Not amazing or anything, but they deal with smaller targets well and overall damage numbers between the two variants are about the same. The variant is notably better at dealing with non-shielded fighters and worse at dealing with shield tank nimble frigates (exactly like you'd expect just looking at which damage types are on the turrets vs hardpoints).

Its interesting to compare lags to pulse lasers, which also fall out of use a bunch vs heavier targets because of penetration: a pulse laser at 100 penetration reaches minimum damage against 567 armor, and do 45 dps for 300 flux. So against those heavier armors, LAGs are just as good while costing ~half as much flux and half as much OP. Of course the pulse laser is decent vs shields  (and lags half as efficient) and a little bit better vs hull: 200 dps for 300 flux vs 50 residual armor (same scenario as before), slightly more efficient.
Logged

Vanshilar

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 585
    • View Profile
Re: A Veteran's Insight On Guns
« Reply #8 on: September 05, 2021, 11:35:43 PM »

I find these weapon/ship threads very interesting and I'll comment more later when I have time! But briefly, I just want to note that the Breach script does 200 damage to armor, unaffected by armor reduction; in other words it directly does 200/15 or 13.333 damage to each of the 9 inner cells and 200/30 or 6.667 damage to each of the 12 outer cells, without going through the damage reduction formula. However, it only affects armor (not hull).

So even at minimum it'll do at least 245 damage (150 HE damage, minimum 15% = 45 vs armor, plus 200) against armor. By comparison, a phase lance burst against an Onslaught (1925 armor, heh the sim one) does around 251 damage when the armor is full. So if the Breach is the first hit against said Onslaught, it's doing virtually the same damage as a phase lance shot. (However, as the armor gets lower, the extra 200 damage starts being worth less compared to a regular weapon.) So against a very "hard" target that has high armor, the Breach can be pretty good.

However, this scripted damage is only to armor, not to shield nor hull. So it's not very versatile; it's only useful during that window when the shields just went down but before the armor is stripped.

Also, this scripted effect does *not* get recorded by Combat Results (at least not the version that I have), so you can't really gauge how useful it was using the mod. You can't assume that every breach hit did this extra 200 damage since it might have hit shields or hull.
Logged

Amoebka

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1318
    • View Profile
Re: A Veteran's Insight On Guns
« Reply #9 on: September 05, 2021, 11:49:32 PM »

You know, I was going to comment how sabots are the most overrated weapon in the game, but I guess that title goes to breaches now.  :D

These damn things are slow and short-ranged. They do negligible damage to shields, meaning that AI is going to flicker them 100% of the time unless it's overloaded. And if it is overloaded, you would be better off dumping harpoons into it anyway. Even when they do land on armor, every once in a cycle or so, stripping armor is the least important aspect of combat. It's defeating hull against the residual armor that's usually the problem, not the armor itself.
Logged

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3071
    • View Profile
Re: A Veteran's Insight On Guns
« Reply #10 on: September 06, 2021, 12:21:53 AM »

LAG is definitely better at actually stripping the armor. I was more thinking about hull damage when I said railgun might outperform LAG. I'm wrong about that too, LAG does 76 hull DPS vs railguns 60 to onslaught armor, and 100 hull DPS to the railguns 83.5 against 1000 armor. IDK, I just think it's not actually that good at what it's supposed to be good at. It reminds me a lot of the pre-buff assault chain gun that I ranted about until it got buffed :P.

I'd rate the weapon as a B in its use case: its just that its use case goes away as the game goes on.
I would agree with this, but for me, the use case is basically gone within 1-2 hours of starting a campaign. I probably progress more quickly than the average player, but for like 95% of the time I play the game it is nearly useless. I don't think 'being passable against frigates' is enough for me personally to give it anything above a C.  There are so many other things that are passable against frigates too, it's just poorly solving a problem that doesn't need any more solutions IMO. I will give it a C instead of a D+.

As an example: when I can't find railguns/needlers for the front smalls of a Hammerhead I will use 2 LAGs + 2 Heavy Autocannons. The LAGs do fine. Not amazing or anything, but they deal with smaller targets well and overall damage numbers between the two variants are about the same. The variant is notably better at dealing with non-shielded fighters and worse at dealing with shield tank nimble frigates (exactly like you'd expect just looking at which damage types are on the turrets vs hardpoints).
I would run 1x heavy auto cannon (or preferably a heavy needler) + 1x heavy mortar + 2x tac laser. 2 HAC + 2 LAG is 700+ flux/sec. I think hammerheads max dissipation is in the high 400s- low 500s. I don't consider that safe.

You know, I was going to comment how sabots are the most overrated weapon in the game, but I guess that title goes to breaches now.  :D

These damn things are slow and short-ranged. They do negligible damage to shields, meaning that AI is going to flicker them 100% of the time unless it's overloaded. And if it is overloaded, you would be better off dumping harpoons into it anyway. Even when they do land on armor, every once in a cycle or so, stripping armor is the least important aspect of combat. It's defeating hull against the residual armor that's usually the problem, not the armor itself.
I'm just going to ignore your blasphemy against our lord and savior the sabot for the moment.

I was actually going to say something very similar about hull vs armor when talking about the light assault gun. I've started to value hull DPS over armor DPS because I've noticed that usually time to strip armor is a small fraction of the time to chew through hull.
Logged

Alliostra

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
Re: A Veteran's Insight On Guns
« Reply #11 on: September 06, 2021, 12:37:05 AM »

I feel like the proximity charge launcher is not that terrible. Sure, you might want to put something more impactful into a medium missile slot, but it deals very good AoE damage not only against fighters but also against missiles and their low velocity means that you'll usually have a few bombs in front of your ship that will destroy incoming missiles and fighters. It's pretty overpriced for what it does though and it definitely needs more ammo too if it wants to compete with non-missile PD.

Not to mention that it gets coolness points for being flingable with plasma burn.
Logged

Vanshilar

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 585
    • View Profile
Re: A Veteran's Insight On Guns
« Reply #12 on: September 06, 2021, 01:02:22 AM »

Not to mention that it gets coolness points for being flingable with plasma burn.

Man I just tried this with a Fury and...oh man this is so wrong.

In inspiration I tried this with an Onslaught, including some standard bomb bays (just for fun) and...haha screenshot attached.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Logged

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3071
    • View Profile
Re: A Veteran's Insight On Guns
« Reply #13 on: September 06, 2021, 08:10:41 AM »

I feel like the proximity charge launcher is not that terrible. Sure, you might want to put something more impactful into a medium missile slot, but it deals very good AoE damage not only against fighters but also against missiles and their low velocity means that you'll usually have a few bombs in front of your ship that will destroy incoming missiles and fighters. It's pretty overpriced for what it does though and it definitely needs more ammo too if it wants to compete with non-missile PD.

Not to mention that it gets coolness points for being flingable with plasma burn.
Yeah the F rating was more because I think the role of the weapon is not useful, rather than because I think statistically the weapon is unusable. I'm curious what you think it should be rated?
Logged

FooF

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1378
    • View Profile
Re: A Veteran's Insight On Guns
« Reply #14 on: September 06, 2021, 09:37:14 AM »

I'm not sure who is calling Breaches anything spectacular. Even in my defense of them, they're not great: just different. If a shield is about to drop, landing 4 harpoons is always going to be better but the one thing Breaches have is ammo to spare and I can use them over a protracted engagement.

I don't find stripping armor to be the least important aspect of combat. Or should I say, it's proportional to the amount of armor you're facing. Against a bunch of high-tech ships, of course its not going to be important, relatively. Against Low-Tech, getting through armor is your chief concern because until you do, your flux efficiency is garbage. Anything Kinetic is generally only 15% effective and Energy weapons (barring Heavy Blasters and such) are getting drastically reduced, as well. Even HE against shields is 50% effective but against high armor, any low/shot damage is actively costing you the flux war. Pair in Skills and this becomes more pronounced (and this will be even worse next patch).

However, once hull is exposed, I agree that hull damage is important and factors into how effective certain weapons are. Low damage/shot is still greatly reduced by residual armor. For example, against 1000 armor (50 residual) a LAG is dealing ~71 DPS for 160 flux/sec (44.5% efficient). A Railgun is ~111 DPS for 150 DPS (74%) and a Pulse Laser is doing 202 DPS for 300 flux/sec (67%). Heavy Mortar is doing 151 DPS vs. 180 flux/sec (84%). Heavy AC 143 DPS vs. 214 flux/sec (67%). Assault CG is actually decent at 300 DPS vs. 400 flux/sec (75%) but pales in comparison to the 142 DPS vs. 120 flux/sec of a Heavy MG (118%). Obviously the king is the Vulcan at 167 DPS for 25 flux or (666%!)

I look at efficiency because while I'm pounding away at hull, I'm raising my flux by the inverse of those efficiencies. Shooting an Onslaught with a LAG, even on hull is only a 31% return on flux investment. That's not a good exchange while I'm also under fire from other ships. If the LAG wasn't getting a 100 range boost next patch, I'd say that it needs a buff (but aren't a lot of Small Weapons getting a range buff?)
Logged
Pages: [1] 2