Mechanically, I'm struggling to understand the limitations imposed on projectile weapons.
Yes, projectile weapons generally roll a die higher (e.g. d6 vs. d4) vs. an energy weapon. However, the energy weapon is rolling against EAC which is typically lower than KAC.
Energy weapons have additional effects on a critical - burn, staggered, arc, etc. Some projectile weapons get knockdown, but not all or even most of them.
So why are projectile weapon's ammo capacities so gimped? Energy weapons have the advantages laid out above yet even Level 1 energy weapons typically have 20 charges. Energy weapons also have higher-capacity batteries, compounding the disparity.
A tactical semi-auto - 9 (which admittedly, isn't terrible). To get 12 rounds in a magazine takes a level 7 weapon.
Level 1 Handcannon - 1 shot. As in musket kind of 1 shot. To get to a 6-round handcannon requires a Level 6 weapon.
Even a level 10 Combat Rifle that costs 16,500 credits only has 12 rounds.
Armory allows for extending magazines (by a mere 20%) but guess what, energy weapons get it too!
What is the design goal of nerfing projectile weapon ammo capacities?!?
Given projectile weapons inclusion and prevalence, clearly they are intended to be a viable option. I'm not even suggesting that projectile weapons should have the same capacity as energy weapons just for something more aligned with real-world firearms' capacities. I just don't get this particular design choice. It seems needlessly restrictive for no particular mechanical balance reason...or reason of any kind, to be honest.
WTHeck?
Most of it I think was leaning towards the realism of these weapons rather than mechanical reasoning. Most handguns typically hold 6-9 rounds depending on model, with as many as 12-20 on extended mags. More weigh the weapon down or risk jamming (to my knowledge, I'm by far not a firearms expert).
Also recall one other advantage mechanically projectile weapons have over energy. Higher batteries are more expensive, and required in higher tier weapons. Bullets are always the same bullets throughout, for 1 credit 3 rounds in the case of longarms.
The usage for energy weapons also tends to go up, so while the battery increases to 40, it starts using 2 charges a shot.
Mechanically, I'm struggling to understand the limitations imposed on projectile weapons.
Yes, projectile weapons generally roll a die higher (e.g. d6 vs. d4) vs. an energy weapon. However, the energy weapon is rolling against EAC which is typically lower than KAC.
Against typical enemy KAC/EACs, the Kinetic vs Energy damage per round tends to even out, unless you've got a large class based damage rider (like Operatives). So this tends to be equivalent. So you get 40% more damage from dice, but 10% less chance to hit (swinging say 60% to 50%, so effectively 20% more damage for the energy weapon) add in specialization getting more benefit from the EAC to hit and its about the same.
Energy weapons have additional effects on a critical - burn, staggered, arc, etc. Some projectile weapons get knockdown, but not all or even most of them.
So why are projectile weapon's ammo capacities so gimped? Energy weapons have the advantages laid out above yet even Level 1 energy weapons typically have 20 charges. Energy weapons also have higher-capacity batteries, compounding the disparity.
My guess is analog is worth a fair bit in the developer's eyes (so that certain Mechanic tricks and Spells don't work on them). Also, straight up immunity to kinetic damage types tends to be very rare, while immunity to say, fire, is much more common.
Lastly, at the low levels, kinetic weapons tend to be cheaper than their energy counter parts.
Take that 1st level tactical semi-auto pistol with 9 rounds. It costs 260 credits. 40 credits more for 30 extra rounds (total 39), total 300 credits at level 1.
Compare to that 1st level azimuth laser pistol, which costs 350 credits base, and another 60 credits for a spare 20 shot battery (total 40 shots), for a total of 410 credits. The laser pistol is roughly 37% more expensive.
Thats 10 credits short of affording a 1st level fusion on that tactical semi-auto pistol, like Anchoring.
A tactical semi-auto - 9 (which admittedly, isn't terrible). To get 12 rounds in a magazine takes a level 7 weapon.
Level 1 Handcannon - 1 shot. As in musket kind of 1 shot. To get to a 6-round handcannon requires a Level 6 weapon.
Even a level 10 Combat Rifle that costs 16,500 credits only has 12 rounds.
Armory allows for extending magazines (by a mere 20%) but guess what, energy weapons get it too!
What is the design goal of nerfing projectile weapon ammo capacities?!?
Given projectile weapons inclusion and prevalence, clearly they are intended to be a viable option. I'm not even suggesting that projectile weapons should have the same capacity as energy weapons just for something more aligned with real-world firearms' capacities. I just don't get this particular design choice. It seems needlessly restrictive for no particular mechanical balance reason...or reason of any kind, to be honest.
WTHeck?
As far viability in combat, if you're using typical kinetic weapons, you'll have to reload at most 1 time. At low levels, you can fire at most twice per turn. So 6 shots on a rifle means 3 rounds of combat at full fire, then reload and fire, then 2 more full attack rounds. Thats 6 rounds of combat. 9 rounds on a small arms is basically an entire fight for an operative.
Certainly in SFS, I've yet to see anyone need to reload except for grenades in the middle of combat. On the other hand, I haven't seen anyone using the automatic fire options or AoE weapons with high usage costs.
I'll also note, you can always top off a weapon using analog ammo (rounds, rockets, etc). Unless you have a Technomancer (or Technomantic Dabbler) in the party, you can't top off batteries off in the field. So if you happen to have 2 partially used batteries with only 8 charges each, you're stuck with only a 8 shot capacity in that energy weapon.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
From a realism stand point as Vicaring pointed out it doesn't make much sense and seems very arbitrary. Given the many other advantages of energy weapons, Range, ammo capacity, Targeting EAC I find less and less justification. In my personal games ive take some steps to give a boost to projectile weapons. I also believe that there are a TON of current real world ammo types that could and should be represented by giving a lot of those crit effects to projectile weapons and them being unavailable just seems like a huge over site given we have such a variety of ammo today. I was hoping to see more of this in the equipment book, but sadly they only gave us pretend sploading rounds.
Batteries can be recharged for free in most situations.
Kinetic ammo has to be payed for every time.
That makes kinetic weapons more expensive in the long run, if you ask me.
Batteries can be recharged for free in most situations.
Kinetic ammo has to be payed for every time.
That makes kinetic weapons more expensive in the long run, if you ask me.
When they wrote the book, the intent was charge half the cost of the battery when recharged, and presumably was a developer balancing point. Which was the assumption in SFS before they clarified that batteries would recharge for free between sessions.
I assume you're referring to charging the batteries on your starship more generally? Thats at the GM's discretion, and require you to own a sufficiently large ship (which is presumably left undefined on purpose). So whether your charges are free is highly dependent on campaign.
In society play, energy weapons certainly do have an ammunition cost advantage though.
I assume you're referring to charging the batteries on your starship more generally? Thats at the GM's discretion, and require you to own a sufficiently large ship (which is presumably left undefined on purpose). So whether your charges are free is highly dependent on campaign.
Yes, that's right. I suppose a GM could say the PCs don't have a ship, but the game is setup so that it is generally assumed that they do.
I assume you're referring to charging the batteries on your starship more generally? Thats at the GM's discretion, and require you to own a sufficiently large ship (which is presumably left undefined on purpose). So whether your charges are free is highly dependent on campaign.Yes, that's right. I suppose a GM could say the PCs don't have a ship, but the game is setup so that it is generally assumed that they do.
Well, its not just any ship. Can you point me to where sufficiently large ship is defined? Can you do it with a tiny racer? Small Shuttle? Medium explorer? Large Destroyer? Where is the cut off? Or is it some upgrade I missed that you purchase with BP to add to your ship that acts as a recharging station?
Of course, an enterprising Mechanic might point out ships literally can manufacture nuclear missiles on the fly, for free. Or torpedoes. Or cannon shells. Why can't they manufacture human scale ammo? Is there an ammo dispenser upgrade that matches the recharging station upgrade?
In the end its a balance consideration. If you hand wave battery charging away, there's no reason you shouldn't hand wave basic ammo away supply away. The concept is already there on the starship scale (in the form of limited fire weapons which explicitly rebuild their ammo, an unlimited number of times).
I assume you're referring to charging the batteries on your starship more generally? Thats at the GM's discretion, and require you to own a sufficiently large ship (which is presumably left undefined on purpose). So whether your charges are free is highly dependent on campaign.Yes, that's right. I suppose a GM could say the PCs don't have a ship, but the game is setup so that it is generally assumed that they do.Well, its not just any ship. Can you point me to where sufficiently large ship is defined? Can you do it with a tiny racer? Small Shuttle? Medium explorer? Large Destroyer? Where is the cut off? Or is it some upgrade I missed that you purchase with BP to add to your ship that acts as a recharging station?
Of course, an enterprising Mechanic might point out ships literally can manufacture nuclear missiles on the fly, for free. Or torpedoes. Or cannon shells. Why can't they manufacture human scale ammo? Is there an ammo dispenser upgrade that matches the recharging station upgrade?
In the end its a balance consideration. If you hand wave battery charging away, there's no reason you shouldn't hand wave basic ammo away supply away. The concept is already there on the starship scale (in the form of limited fire weapons which explicitly rebuild their ammo, an unlimited number of times).
The issue isn't ammo supply. The issue is the ridiculously low ammo capacity of most/many projectile weapons.
The issue isn't ammo supply. The issue is the ridiculously low ammo capacity of most/many projectile weapons.
Which comes full circle to the fact that low level projectile weapons are significantly cheaper than their energy counter parts. Which I'm guessing is intended to help balances their worse stats. Along with the analog tag on some weapons (which can admittedly be added with a fusion, so its got to be worth something).
Compare Azimuth laser pistol vs Tactical Auto-pistol, 350 base versus 260.
Azimuth Laser Rifle at 425 vs Hunting Rifle at 240.
Azimuth Artillery Laser for 425 vs Light Reaction cannon for 250.
On the later two, that is enough of a difference to buy a first level weapon fusion and still have change left over.
I'll also note, some kinetic weapons actually have better capacity than their energy counterparts. Take the first automatic laser longarm, the tactical autolaser. Its gets 10 shots (40 charge, 4 per shot). The tactical magnetar rifle, the closest comparison, get 18 rounds, for 18 shots, nearly twice as much capacity 2 levels earlier.
Out of curiosity, how many shots do your characters typically take per combat? Its possible my understanding of typical combat duration is skewed somewhat low, and don't see even 6 shots being unusable (especially for an operative for example). I can't see most characters running through more than 12 shots a fight (say full attacks for 6 rounds).
Are people actually reloading in combat? Is this a problem?
Are people actually reloading in combat? Is this a problem?
In regards to projectile weapons yes my players are. Many of them have ridiculously low ammo capacities compared to real world current technology so its a stretch of the imagination to begin with and seems like an arbitrary distinction / balancing point. I mean just targeting EAC for energy weapons seems like a significant enough advantage in most cases and the disparity in damage is not that great in most cases.
Is it a huge, game shattering problem? not to my point of view but a odd head scratcher of a stance to take from a balancing stand point. if you take a step back as a whole it just makes projectile weapons seem like a underdeveloped after thought. To those who are fans of firearms and have played many other gun focused games like Shadowrun or Cyberpunk they just feel bland and less appealing and your left wondering why they didnt include all the possible options that make them much more fun and exciting.
If it's really bothering you that much just have a white hole spit out a couple of Mass Effect (1st game) style cartridges and be done with it
That is a pretty true point. I don't think a single member of our party has releaded during a combat. We're about level 3 now with every class present in our 6 person party save Solarian. Our Soldier is melee, as am I as our Envoy (offering flanking bonus along with other support) though I do have three small arms. We've had the Technomancer transfer battery charges a few times after combat but really nobody has had to reload.
For what its worth, my party of PCs have gone from 1st to halfway through 4th level. . . and not once has anyone needed to reload during a fight. Admittedly, we have one Soldier whose a melee specialist, but still.
We've had a need to reload in approximately 75% of combats. Tactical semi-auto pistols and azimuth artillery laser's, primarily.
We leverage cover whenever possible and taking multiple shots happens pretty frequently.
I think i've played most starfinder scenarios and the AP only time i've seen a fight long enough to reload is because my Envoy uses a crossbolter.
I have reloaded in combat. I didn't see a problem with that.