Ammo opinion time

BadAsh · 2004-04-15, 01:03 AM

I think they should beef shotgun shell and 9mm bullet ammo boxes. The shotgun shell boxes should go back up to 32 shells and the 9mm should go from 50 to 100.

This would make these ammo types more consistant with the VS energy cells and the new VA ammo capacities and new 2x sniper round capacity.

Personally, I'd rather more ammo per box and be able fit other stuff in my inventory loadouts. Having to carry tons of ammo just to last a few fire fights if you are NC or TR is not really fair. Rather then nerf the VS ammo, I'd rather see the NC and TR brought up to their level.

I don't think many players would have a problem with this. Cloakers should love it along with everyone else.

This won't turn infantry into super soldiers, but might help save a few trips back to that AMS or equipment terminal and let you stay in the action. This should be your reward for lasting long enough in the first place... having enough ammo to "keep on keepin on" which is HARD enough for a grunt in the first place.

Dharkbayne · 2004-04-15, 01:05 AM

No. Considering it takes 3 shots from a Jackhammer or MagScatter to kill anything under Rexo at close range, and over 20 to kill a rexo with MCG last time I checked, it's even. If anything needs buffed, it's the MCG, 2 boxes for one clip, yet the vanu get 2 clips per box

LimpBIT · 2004-04-15, 01:08 AM

well the only thing i wanna see happen is put the jackhammer reload time back to where it used to be. The ammo can stay the same as long as they do that.

Acaila · 2004-04-15, 01:29 AM

An MCG takes 13 shots to kill a rexo at close range, which is about as likely as a JH only taking the optimal 3 shots.

I agree, buff ammo boxes. Screw this "soldiers in real life have to manage their ammo" shit. Excessive inventory micro-management is frustrating and who likes being frustrated?

BadAsh · 2004-04-15, 02:01 AM

Originally Posted by Dharkbayne

No. Considering it takes 3 shots from a Jackhammer or MagScatter to kill anything under Rexo at close range, and over 20 to kill a rexo with MCG last time I checked, it's even. If anything needs buffed, it's the MCG, 2 boxes for one clip, yet the vanu get 2 clips per box

I hear ya man, but the jack and scatter are STILL that effective even with less ammo, so that remains unchanged. And there is the fact pointed out here:

Originally Posted by Acaila

An MCG takes 13 shots to kill a rexo at close range, which is about as likely as a JH only taking the optimal 3 shots.

So a jack with 16 rounds could get 5 kills and some change (1 shot left) with 1 clip of ammo

While a MCG with 100 rounds could get 7 kills and some change (9 rounds left) with 1 clip of ammo

Could is the key word here as this will almost never happen... Add any range to a fight with the Jackhammer and it's pretty much useless... at a mere 25m the jack takes 16 direct hits to drop an Agile... what a joke... And with the MCG if you add any range and a moving target there is no way you will hit with most of the rounds you spray out.

The killing potential for each weapon is devastating, but does not have the ability to sustain such firepower as other heavy weapons (lasher, AV, sniper, Tanks, MAX units, etc.)

Plus remember the boon this ammo buff would give to cloakers and MA armed troops... now cyclers and gauss rifles could carry as much ammo as a Pulsar and the AMP pistol could get a few more kills before it runs the cloaker out of ammo.

Again, this is not a beef to weapon power... it's just a slight reduction in support reliance for infantry...

Lartnev · 2004-04-15, 07:46 AM

The AV needed more ammo, not sure infantry do apart from the MCG perhaps. I'd be indifferent to ammo changes

Dizik · 2004-04-15, 08:14 AM

I honestly have no complaints whatsoever about ammo boxes. Or anything else in the game.

SilverLord · 2004-04-15, 09:16 AM

I agree that the MCG ammo boxes need upped. It takes 20 shots to kill a rexo and thats just to kill him, thats not counting all the missed shots.

SuperSixOne · 2004-04-15, 09:25 AM

i disagree. you work with what you have. Im a support player i hafto cary around medapp / med goo / rek / cud / Pheonix/ Pheonix Ammo / Glue gun / Bank / Engy goo and im rexo. I bareley have enough room for my JH ammo so i make due and only cary two maybe three boxes if im lucky. And only two PX ammo boxes. Im fine with this because im trading my combat ability to cary support equip.

BadAsh · 2004-04-15, 11:05 AM

My issue with the ammo �problem� is that the TR and NC have a harder time with ammo supply than the VS do. Consider the following:

Jackhammer: one box of ammo = 1 clip size
MCG: one ammo box = � clip size (but the MCG has a HUGE magazine)
Lasher: one ammo box = 2 clips of ammo

Important Note #1: In addition to having 2 times the firepower the VS also are not required to carry special Armor Piercing Ammunition, so if carried this further clutters the inventories of the NC and TR grunt.

Important Note #2: The NC are further hampered if they are using MA and HA as these weapons require 2 different ammo types (Jack = shot gun shells; Gauss = 9mm rounds). The VS use one ammo type for everything and the TR�s HA and MA both use the 9mm. Therefore a NC grunt has the worst inventory jumble if trying to use a Jack for close encounters and a Gauss for longer engagements. You could end up with 4 different ammo types in your inventory (shells both AI and AP and 9mm rounds in AI and AP variations).

As a VS grunt my only real problem is with getting killed. I can fight, fall back, heal/repair, and then return to the fight.

As a TR grunt I have an additional ammo problem other then just getting killed I have a very real possibility if running out of ammo. So I can fight, fall back, heal/repair, and then return to the fight provided I still have enough ammo.

As a NC grunt I have an additional ammo problem other then just getting killed I have a very real possibility if running out of ammo. So I can fight, fall back, heal/repair, and then return to the fight provided I still have enough ammo.

So to summarize, a VS soldier does not have the same ammo problems that the TR and worst of all the NC grunts have to worry about. As NC I am finding myself running out of ammo in nasty situations. And I think it sucks to successfully dodge/survive enemy tanks, aircraft, MAX Units, snipers, and cloakers while engaging and killing several enemy infantry only to die because you either ran out of ammo or were forced to loot in a tight situation just to keep going. Meanwhile as a VS grunt I can fight for days (well not days, but surely TWICE as long) and keep on going with an identical inventory load out (ammo to stuff ratio).

This comes into play often in tuff tower fights, outdoors, and guarding the rear entrance of a base. Having to leave your post to get more ammo can cost you the whole battle by letting areas overrun.

To be fair I think the TR and NC should be allowed to carry more ammo per box. The VS would still have the advantage of versatility by not needing to carry specific AI or AP ammo. Hence my suggestion to boost shotgun and 9mm ammo box round counts. I�d much rather see this than see the VS ammo nerf some are crying for. IMHO if you are good enough to survive that long you should have the ammo to keep up the fight. Running out of ammo just sucks.

Acaila · 2004-04-15, 11:30 AM

I was making a point to dharkbayne. The chances of getting a 13 hit kill with an MCG is as likely as getting a 3 hit kill with a JH on rexo. Implicit is that neither is particularly likely at all.

ChewyLSB · 2004-04-15, 11:32 AM

But what you're suggesting is making ammo a non-existant problem. Why don't we just have infinite ammo guns then? We'd never run out of ammo if what you're suggesting goes through.

easypickings · 2004-04-15, 11:45 AM

i personaly like the fact that i can run out of ammo and have to fall back to my mag scatter with only 6 bullets in it,then to my trusty knife. i like having to kill some one to get there ammo.

but i do agree that it is alot easier for the VS,

so i guess i have to agree with the original post, even though i like it how it is, it is an unfair advantage

BadAsh · 2004-04-15, 12:31 PM

Originally Posted by ChewyLSB

But what you're suggesting is making ammo a non-existant problem. Why don't we just have infinite ammo guns then? We'd never run out of ammo if what you're suggesting goes through.

I would not consider allowing TR and NC soldiers to carry as much ammo per inventory space as a VS soldier as an "unlimited ammo" situation.

The shotgun ammo just recently went through a DEV nerf... one that I don't really recall anyone complaining that "OMGWTF the NC have too much ammo!"...

All that did was give the NC the problem the TR always had and left the VS with the "advantage".

I mean come on... let CSD (common sense dictate)... it's not that hard to achieve balance and fairness especially in areas like this that don't really require testing. This only requires the aplication of common sense logic.

TheN00b · 2004-04-15, 12:34 PM

I think that everyone, or at least most people, can agree that 9mm ammunition needs to carry 100 rounds; however, the shotgun ammo is a more tricky subject. Therefore, I propose a compromise: That shotgun ammunition packs hold 24 rounds. This would please people like me, who do not want to see the NC have a huge ammo/kill ratio, but it would also give Sweeper users 3 clips per pack and Jackhammre users 1.5 CPP. Opinions?