Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Eclypze

Increase ammo stack size

Recommended Posts

Any chance that the dev team can look into increasing the stack size of some ammo?

Rage is a lvl 9 launcher, that eats 2 lvl 8 missles per shot.... the ammo only stacks to 200, is there a chance we can increase the stack size?

I remember retort ammo having a fairly large stack size, and I'm sure progens have some lvl 8 ammo that they wish stacked a little higher :)

Reason being, You cannot pack enough ammo in your holds to last you for more then a couple hours..... I would gladly accept an increase in cost to produce the ammo, if the stack size was doubled or tripled to 400 or 600 respectively.

Thanks guys!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not saying this might not be needed - just want to add that when examining the stack size of any particular weapon's ammo it's important to keep the context of all weapons in mind. Parts of the trade-offs between some weapons were always fire-rates (burn rate), stack sizes, availability of ammo comps, and cost. That's part of the balance that provides the different choices. 200 stack size for a double-shot ML does seem low on the face of it but was that part of the design intent (and, if so, is that still valid)? I honestly don't know the answer, just offering it up as a data point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One major problem with increased stack sizes.

Normally you use up ammo that frees slots for loot.

If your stack size becomes too large you will need to leave behind a lot of loot eventually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One major problem with increased stack sizes.

Normally you use up ammo that frees slots for loot.

If your stack size becomes too large you will need to leave behind a lot of loot eventually.

Not to sound rude, but your argument is a bit flawed. When I roll out, I roll with 1 stack of ammo for each Bile ML and the Wrath(800 per stack) as for those ML's that will last me 3 hours to 4 hours. I take with me 2 or 3 stacks for the Black Caster(1200 per stack) but she fires like ever 2.2 seconds(w/turbo weapons), 2 rounds, so she can eat it up but 2 stcaks tends to last 3 hours. This is a great deal due to large ammo stacks.... only 5 or maybe 6 cargo slots needed to be used. It leaves my cargo mostly empty for loot. Now, my 5th ML is my precious Z3. Her stacks come in 200's. I have to stack around 8 of that to last me the same time as less than half the stacks for the others, and its only ONE ML. She fires quick, and it's 2 rounds per shot. LvL 7 ammo should stack arond 450 instead of 200 so that it would be more on par. And this change should reflect upon all ammo lvl ranges really. LVL 9 Zets for example. 250 per stack, on a lvl 9 ML? Bad juu juu here. Even more so because all 3 components are player made... but, Im' getting a bit off subject. This same story goes for PL's as well. Larger stacks there as well please.

Some examples: Claimjumpers Reward 600 per stack(lvl 7)/Retort and Smugglers Recorse 700 per stack(lvl 8)/Bile ML's 800 per stack(lvl 9) These are GREAT examples of an awesome load out. And as the OP was saying, the Rage, which is a special ML, especially that one should have a large stack of ammo. As it stands, the rare/very uncommon weapons in game have very nice stacks of ammo to go with them. I would still be nice to see some adjustment, even if not much, to standard ammo stacks.

Often enough, I run out of space before I've even used up any ammo stacks, with exception to the Z3, and even then, its not really that fast as to make a differece. Would be much better off if the stacks were just larger from the get go instead of hoping to plan on stacks vanishing over time due to use. Leaving the battle field to go sell items once the cargo is full of good vendor items, is well worth it vs going back with no ammo and a half full cargo of goods.

More per stack = less cargo space used orginaly = more loot to be gained and longer hunting peroids before returning to restock ammo(especially if I'm searching for specific items)

Thorvald

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never played with any of the L7+ ammo using weapons (JD/JE is all I ever took past 100-ish), but as far as the low level stuff goes.. I'd be happy as a clam if ammo stack sizes were doubled across the board. Any time I've played a PW or a TE, I've had to pick a less optimal DPS weapon just to avoid having to stock up 10+ ammo stacks for a good hunting trip.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any feedback from the powers that be regarding this?

Thorvald was bang on with the point I was trying to make regarding the rage, couldn't have said it better :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

personally I think we should do away with all ammo :P

no one likes to make it

you really dont make money selling it

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got to admit having a lv8 only stack to 200 is really inconvenient and it doesn't seem like that much of an increase over say lv1 ML stacks (50). Plus it makes for bigger mess in the vault when your trying to balance out multiple guns (one gun's 10 ammo stacks = another gun's 80 stacks).

Keep in mind though, if the stack size is upped so too should be the cost/components required to make it to maintain balance. If you 'double' stack size also need to 'double' the components required/mash button price so it stays the same value for getting two stacks in one. I'm not sure this would be possible for some ammo as they require more than 3 comps (max allowed is 6 so 'doubled' on recipes that take 4 comps wouldn't fit). For anything over 3 comps they'd have to reconsider the recipes and potentially add in a comp that would price wise make up for the 'doubled' value.

Since this could affect game eco/balance/recipes its probably a suggestion better left for once we have most things stable enough to actually tell the potential impact of such changes. Plus might be good to wait until everything that should be in game gets added back in, new guns might obsolete some of those 200 stack using guns. This probably does merit some looking into probably on a per recipe basis in the future though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anything having an increased size to stacks makes no difference at all if you don't leave base without a full or nearly full hold.

Often enough, I run out of space before I've even used up any ammo stacks, with exception to the Z3, and even then, its not really that fast as to make a differece. Would be much better off if the stacks were just larger from the get go instead of hoping to plan on stacks vanishing over time due to use.
Try find the right balance of ammo slots over cargo slots then you won't have so many problems with ammo not freeing up space.

More per stack = less cargo space used orginaly = more loot to be gained and longer hunting peroids before returning to restock ammo(especially if I'm searching for specific items)

Leaving base with more free cargo space but the same amount of ammo is not going to increase time spent hunting. As you already said you currently have too much ammo to free slots quick enough for loot. So I'm not sure where the "bit flawed" argument is at.

The only benefit would be for lowbies kiting rediculously high hp mobs, where you may use several stacks of ammo to kill just one mob. In that case you indeed do get to hunt (or kite) for longer periods. But is that what this thread is about?

Edited by Tyran
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any chance that the dev team can look into increasing the stack size of some ammo?

Rage is a lvl 9 launcher, that eats 2 lvl 8 missles per shot.... the ammo only stacks to 200, is there a chance we can increase the stack size?

I remember retort ammo having a fairly large stack size, and I'm sure progens have some lvl 8 ammo that they wish stacked a little higher :P

Reason being, You cannot pack enough ammo in your holds to last you for more then a couple hours..... I would gladly accept an increase in cost to produce the ammo, if the stack size was doubled or tripled to 400 or 600 respectively.

Thanks guys!

Just one little fix on your post, the Dragons Rage uses lvl 7 ammo not lvl 8, but I do agree that the older lvl 9 ML's do need a boost in stack size especially the ZET ML since it uses lvl 9 ammo it needs to be on par with the newer ML's like the wrath, bile etc. etc. The only problem I would see is next you have people complaining that the Type A or Z3 needs an increase, but I would only increase the the lvl 9 ML ammo stack no matter what lvl ammo they use just because of balance reasons as you don't need to increase the lower lvl ML's stacks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

I hate to be a spoilsport but there will be no change in ammo stacks at the moment.

When we are much closer to having this game finished we can look at the ammo stacks and how they balance out. Keeping in mind that we also have to consider the cost and availability of the comps.

Riia

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I might stick my oar into this discussion:

I think that a matrix of availability of comps vs. ammo level vs. weapon level (cf. a Claw of the Dragon, L8 with its ammo, Claw slugs, L6) vs. stack size would be fairly appropriate.

On one end of the scale would be ammo that is fairly cheap and easy (Ogun MLs and Ogun missiles, for example) with comps available from vendor: small stacks (I think 130 per stack?)

On the other end, would be elite ML and PL ammo, requiring 200% PM-only or loot-only/non-manu comps... those should get HUGE stacks (2000+)

Of course, I would really like to see stacks simply sized up by level, in multiples of 60 (see my PW bias poking thru here? lol)

The multiple of 60 generally guarantees that it will break down evenly for PWs (divide by 6) JDs/TEs/PEs/PTs (divide by 5) and everyone else (divide by 4) and divide by 3 for PL using JEs.

MLs

L1: 60

L2: 120

L3: 120

L4: 180

L5: 180

L6: 240

L7: 240

L8: 360

L9: 600

PLs:

L1: 180

L2: 240

L3: 360

L4: 480

L5: 540

L6: 600

L7: 720

L8: 960

L9: 1200

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tyran, they're talking about high level ammo having too small of a stack size, how would this help a lowbie who can't use that ammo?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LoL Gobblu, a lowbie can be anything that hunts something much BIGGER.:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea i had was not changing how much manufacturing gave but let us stack the stacks. For example you manufacture crossbow rounds that have 300 in a stack after your done making 4 stacks you can combine those into a single stack of 1200. The component cost is the same and you could have it just pull 300 to reload a gun.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I definitely like Sylla's idea, if it's possible. I dunno, if the manufacturing terminal is set to simply create a full stack (regardless of the actual numbers), or if they can set those two numbers independently.

If it is possible, I would think it would still need to have an upper limit of some kind. Maybe the maximum combined stack could be set as 2x the biggest L9 stack for example*, so that there's diminishing benefits as you increase tech level. (*applied seperately to MLs and PLs, naturally)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(notices his post was downrated... but with no explanation? )

It's easy to punch the red button, but I'd love to know why I'm "hated". :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I definitely like Sylla's idea, if it's possible. I dunno, if the manufacturing terminal is set to simply create a full stack (regardless of the actual numbers), or if they can set those two numbers independently.

If it is possible, I would think it would still need to have an upper limit of some kind. Maybe the maximum combined stack could be set as 2x the biggest L9 stack for example*, so that there's diminishing benefits as you increase tech level. (*applied seperately to MLs and PLs, naturally)

Not to bring in other games, but I played FFXI for 6 years and in that time one of the things Square-Enix added to the Ranger class was something similar to the above. For the longest time arrows and bolts stacked to 99, but eventually they introduced items called quivers that when used would generate one stack of 99 arrows and the quivers themselves stacked to 12 allowing for 12x the ammo carried then before. I don't know what is all in the realm of possibility, and I know this is just going to be those "Wouldn't it be cool if" things that the Dev's can't get to for ages. But maybe the same thing could be done? Have some device or station that converts a full X number of rounds of ammo into 1 stackable (of a certain limit. Maybe 5-10) unit like Crossbow Rounds into Projectile Ammo Case (Crossbow). Kinda like Sylla's idea but a little different. The ammo used to make a Case would have to be of the same quality of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there is also another angle here that maybe we are not considering... and I am not saying this is right... but it is still a consideration (and puhlez no jenpie responses as you are biased)... at any given point in time there are only 50 to between 200-300 players on (right now 86)... and I know a percentage of that are dual boxers... so unless you have grand plans (plans... not delusions) of having a user base in the 10's of thousands... does it really make difference if we increase stack size?

do you think going live will attract that many more thousands of users... I am sure we will pick up some players that are intolerant of pwipes... but really, do you see this as a threat to wow and the mohawk grenade... or eve or any other game... have you been getting concerned inquires from the sony ps3 group?

so I say increase it all to 999 or just make ammo unlimited... if that is what the player base wants...

KEEP READING...

think about this as well... this is more of a convenience than anything else... this has nothing to do with raids as a full hold of ammo will last a raid (unless its a raid of one)... so what are we talking about... some extra credits per hour? has anyone actually figured out what the credits difference is...

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there is also another angle here that maybe we are not considering... and I am not saying this is right... but it is still a consideration (and puhlez no jenpie responses as you are biased)... at any given point in time there are only 50 to between 200-300 players on (right now 86)... and I know a percentage of that are dual boxers... so unless you have grand plans (plans... not delusions) of having a user base in the 10's of thousands... does it really make difference if we increase stack size?

It changes the whole dynamic of the economy, by allowing people to stay out longer there's a chance some high end items become more available and thus devalued, besides jenpie should have the right to respond if you want your post to be taken seriously, ammo or no ammo. :) It doesn't take tens of thousands, what you see each night are the loyal folks that want to play 300-400 people or so. However, at previous points in time we've had more than 5,000 unique user accounts. But they are just people that don't want to deal with the testing. They want the game to just work.

do you think going live will attract that many more thousands of users... I am sure we will pick up some players that are intolerant of pwipes... but really, do you see this as a threat to wow and the mohawk grenade... or eve or any other game... have you been getting concerned inquires from the sony ps3 group?

Many more "thousand"? I have no idea, but it will attract more than you'd think. A threat to other games? Not as long as we try to make it like Live, we'd have to update the engine and graphics to keep it viable in the current market.

so I say increase it all to 999 or just make ammo unlimited... if that is what the player base wants...

highly doubt this is something the player base unanimously wants, I could be wrong though. Either way, not gonna happen unless it can be justified in terms of how it affects the economy, this isn't as simple a change as many of you are thinking it is because of all of the waves it makes for the economy. We want to try to avoid that eventuality where things are like the live server and everyone has 70 bazillion credits.

KEEP READING...

think about this as well... this is more of a convenience than anything else... this has nothing to do with raids as a full hold of ammo will last a raid (unless its a raid of one)... so what are we talking about... some extra credits per hour? has anyone actually figured out what the credits difference is...

My thoughts in bold, obviously.

Convenience leads to boredom. There has to be something to keep people from staying at the same camp indefinitely, thus ammo it is.

Dear god man... you sound like.... william.... shatner.... :D

If you want to convince Riia and Aschera to change such a thing you're going to need mathematical proof that it's a small change, not an impassioned argument. :)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Making ammo/doing away with ammo would be a real hit to the economy. All those ammo ores that keep JE/PS/TS in business mining would be gone and pointless. Yes, they'd still have ores for one time builds on engine/reactors/sheilds/weapons...but once you got it built why buy more? Miners would lose a major part of their market. I'll assume people who chose miner classes 'like' mining (I know I do) and I 'like' having a reason to go do it besides just refine and vendor. In addition to this you would be removing a major money sync that help keeps the economy from getting over inflated. Summery short, the ammo needs to stay.

Honestly I think Sylla has the best idea that wouldn't impact the economy to much, yet still give more space to ammo users. Of coarse you wouldn't want to up the ammo stack size to much, but the number's in Seeker's post look pretty fair.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anything having an increased size to stacks makes no difference at all if you don't leave base without a full or nearly full hold.

Try find the right balance of ammo slots over cargo slots then you won't have so many problems with ammo not freeing up space.

Leaving base with more free cargo space but the same amount of ammo is not going to increase time spent hunting. As you already said you currently have too much ammo to free slots quick enough for loot. So I'm not sure where the "bit flawed" argument is at.

The only benefit would be for lowbies kiting rediculously high hp mobs, where you may use several stacks of ammo to kill just one mob. In that case you indeed do get to hunt (or kite) for longer periods. But is that what this thread is about?

Have you ever played an ammo using class? TE's for example have 35 cargo slots(at lvl 135). Between items I use to swap out for activated buffs, and ammo, I will used at the moment atleast half that cargo space alone. 5 slots used for items for those buffs. At the least, 3 stacks of Bile ML ammo(1 per ML), 2 Stacks of Caster ammo(could maybe make this 1 stack for 1ML), as I said once before and to be sure I have enough Z3 ammo to last the same ammount of time as those few stacks for the other ML's, I need 9 stacks(all this for about 2 hours of solid hunting). So, 19 cargo slots for ammo and items out the door. The reason I joined this argument was because the ammo stacks for the Bile ML and Caster are GREAT examples of what they should all be for lvl 9 ML's. The ammo stacks should scale with ML, not ammo lvl. I should not have to use 9 to 12 cargo slots to keep my single LVL 9, Z3 ML loaded with ammo so that it keeps pace with my other launchers. There should be a set standard on ammo stack sizes. As it stands the whole reason they get bigger is for the simple reason mobs get harder to kill even in relation to more dmg output by the weapons. As for cost relation. LvL 7 Z3 stack of ammo uses 4 components, lvl 8 may use 5 and 9 use 6 ... just add components to the build list. I loose vault space in the process, but that would be the cost/vaule of having a larger ammo stack. This would also if anything keep the economy balanced as it would yet increase ammo costs for the inflated stack size.

The bottom line is not about gathering loot, but staying in the field of combat longer before needed trips to go build more ammo which happens more often than one might expect. When I'm being real picky about what stuff I want to keep its not always a problem with running out of space, but it does mean leaving behind lots of stuff to rot, or floating in space. As this is quite simple, more cargo slots open at the begining does mean staying out longer. Either a) I'm out of ammo or b)Im out of space for loot. I'd rather have a full cargo of items and then be out of ammo, then half my cargo full of loot, and a lot of ammo still in the way. And this is all subject to what drops from the mobs. Some days are poor, and you can go through a ton of ammo without getting much, and some times, its the opposite.

This argument is also really directed towards the TS and PS classes that can not make ammo... its 100x worse for them as they have to use valuable vault space to store ammo that should instead be used for holding raw components for making components.

And you cant really get away with kiting really high lvl mobs as a lowbie ... you get to many 0's for dmg ... I guess as a JE, you dont try attacking anything to much higher lvl than you, so you may not see that. Its so impractical to go more than 8 lvls higher than your CL that you waste a great deal of ammo doing it. The return is also not worth the effort.

This is about convienence. Nothing more. In some cases, such as the PS and TS, its much more. Or with certain ammo types, as the Zet ML, where its small stacks with harsh player made ammo component requirements, but otherwise, its about how much time is spent running back for more ammo.

With Riia's post however, I'll not think about this again until live and then we may be able to slip in some adjustments at that point of the games development.

Thorvald

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the one idea from Sylla is Awsome too .... that works just as well! Stacking, stacks of ammo would be uber!

Thorvald

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea, I use a few weapons that have 50 per stack ammo I wouldn't mind having larger stacks.

It would be easy to say use beams :D

But Character interaction and The base registration now comes into play in reguards to running out of ammo. Now your saying Whaaaa??

Currently, base registration happens when you dock or click Base Registar. IMO this needs to change. Why ?

Character interaction (All classes all races) Use A JE or a JD (return to base) in your Group to WH you or Summon you and A JD to the nearest station weft now dock at the station get your ammo, use the JE's or JD's talent to get you back to your hunting grounds nearest Registered station or Weft.

Registration should only happen when you want to register not when you dock.

In real life your not going to go to a bordello and have it be called home. (Well some of you might) :)

Use the talent of all the races decide what station or hunting grounds your going to use and Your done problem solved.

Have you hugged a Jenquai today ?

They do shower you know, its not a myth.

Progens taste just as good as a good Jenpy does with some Fava beans and a nice Chianti.

I know I know too much work, too much love and too much thought Lol :)

Phorlaug...(JD)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...