yes if rockets have mass they should have thrust so they acelerate over time with a top speed too

so smaller rockets ar lighter do less damage and accelerate faster but have a low top speed

heavy rockets are heavy and pack punch but accelerate slow and have a high top speed

this would be really cool because then we could easely integate different ammo with different mass thrust payload ect ect ect

the heavy port rocket launcher could have two types of ammo

jackhammer
acceleration:slow
top speed:high
fireing rate:high
payload:medium
ammo:12

screamers
acceleration:fast
top speed:fast
fireing rate:slow
payload:high
energy:60/shot
ammo:16

ect ect ect

something similar for missiles

It's 'etc.', short for 'et cetera'.

Problem with this idea is when someone flies a valk with two suns and a neut into battle. They fire their rockets early, dropping their weight down to somewhere close to the weight of a valk with one neut and gaining all the advantages of lightness. The rockets are supposed to be a crippling factor once you run out of ammo. How would you like to take on a prom with a GT that becomes 2 tonne lighter when it's fired its flares, or a 3500kg valk.

well i guess that the weight of the rockets adds to the weight of the launcher so that when its empty the ship would weigh what it weighs now when rockets are equipped.

Which would add on more weight for anyone using ammo weapons.

Martin: I think you're painting it too dark. Today, energy weapons are the most used. This would propagate more diverse layouts, and more people would use projectile weapons, thus eliminating the disadvantages. If ammunition could be dumped as well, you'd have interesting options.

I'm still in favour of the ammunition having individual weight.

However, to balance things, fully loaded launchers should be heavier than they are today.

I'd like to see more ammo-based weps.

I don't buy the argument that it can't be done without server lag.

example:

take a neutron blaster. add another energy bar, make it so that this energy bar doesn't recharge. Poof, ammobased wep.

----------

Furthermore, counterstrike, and all the other FPS's out there use insane amounts of ammo-based weps, you're telling me the best we can do is rockets?

--------------

Back to the topic at hand,

I've always felt that ammo-based weps should have mass. It will definitely require rebalancing, but it would be a nice feature.

Also, reload from cargo would be an interesting feature... but that might require another thread.

I remember that (reload weapons from cargo) having been discussed already, but with no conclusive result.

But what Shape said about conversion of already existant weapons with no ammunition limit to weapons that do have them is actually very interesting, since limited ammunition also limits the time a ship can be combat-effective, requiring people to make more strategical and tactical decisions (which is a good thing, in my opinion).

Agreed toshiro, and I think I made the thread on reloading from the cargo, and it kinda died for some reason.

is the current targeting system even capable of dealing with weapons that have acceleration vectors? if not, then this idea isn't likely to go far...

And yes, ammunition should have its own mass, especially things like rockets and missiles... it should also be possible to ESJ in some scenarios, allowing trading or fighter ships to lighten their load on the fly by sacrificing their ordnance.

what's wrong with dumping some of your weight in a fight by firing off early? If you don't take the time to aim your shots properly you will gain little advantage over just not carrying the extra weapon weight at all.

Launchers would still have significant weight, obviously, and more than enough balancing can be done by tweaking the ratios.

People already have the option to fly single-neut valks, so that's not an excuse.

Problem with this idea is when someone flies a valk with two suns and a neut into battle. They fire their rockets early, dropping their weight down to somewhere close to the weight of a valk with one neut and gaining all the advantages of lightness. The rockets are supposed to be a crippling factor once you run out of ammo.

The point is that obviously once you eject your rocket launchers, or all ammo, or whatever, you have less weapons available to you than when you first began the fight. It's not a coincidence that people tend to fill up their ships with as many weapons as they can fit; it's definitely advantageous. Granted, yes in your scenario the valk would still have one neut, but how dangerous is a valk with one gun? A third as much as one with three guns?

Would you rather be in a valk at 90% with one gun or would you rather be in the valk at 20% with 3 guns.

Those rockets had to go somewhere.

I'll take the Valk at 90% thanks.

I'd rather be in the Valk at 90%, even with 1000kg, unejected sunflare launchers. That doesn't make any sense.

The masses would obviously have to be redone. You can argue an ultimatum, and inevitably find one specific point where one change in the game will have one certain advantage, but crap, that's life. Besides, this or not, changes they are a comin'.