The Situation:
If the corridor already exists ($600) a Missile Storage costs $900, and even if crew don’t walk threw it, entering/exiting is at half speed. Or I could fill that whole space with conveyors that won’t explode for $300 and still get there faster.
Ammo/Missile Storage is explosive, so why build them in place of factories? Power Storage doesn’t have that issue. Ammo Storage and Factory take up the same space, only difference is where doors can be placed. Why ever build a Storage when you could build a Factory? You're going to need the Factory anyways. Missile Storage is moderately smaller than the Factory types, so it has that going for it.
Power Storage is used where either draw is low and it’s wasteful to carry huge 3x batteries to it (small thrusters/lasers), or fast reaction is vital (shields), for anything else there are Large Reactors providing 3x batteries that 1 crew can carry. All Ammo is carries 2 at a time. All Ammo consumers are greedy but with decent reserves, so fast reaction is not half as important as uninterrupted speedy feeding, and storage can't promise uninterrupted, it also offers no efficiency in breaking down 3x batteries the way Power Storage does.
Plenty of rooms consume power slowly, but the slowest Ammo consumer is 1.33 per second, even when adjusted for manpower, the least greedy Cannon is still more greedy than the PD, which everyone agrees is a very greedy laser.
Flak chews ammo so fast, a full storage keeps it shooting another 8 seconds, that’s 1/3rd longer than its own built-in reserves can keep it shooting. A Cannon will fire for 25 seconds off a full storage. A PD will shoot for 28 seconds on the equivalent, and a laser will last nearly a minute. Flak’s normal limitation is crew bottlenecked through its 3 door locations, because Ammo Storage isn’t even considered, multiple Factories are built right on its doorstep to keep it fed. 3 Factories will keep 2 Flaks shooting indefinitely if you can manage the bottlenecks, so why not build them.
Conclusion:
Because energy draw is typically low and onsite production is expensive, players run off stockpile and the occasional refill, with only multiple of the greediest ions needing dedicated power generation, even shields can be fed from stockpiles rather than reactors.
Because ammo draw is not low and ammo production as cheap both onsite and off, guns and rockets cannot use the same strategy, and production rate increases only rarely make a difference in that math.
At the same time though, we don’t want to make Ammo into a Power clone, we want Ammo to be interesting for it’s on design considerations. That is the hard part, and I’m afraid I don’t have much to offer there.
Possible Solutions:
Storage doesn’t explode. That would incentivize Storage over Factory in dangerous places. If you’re worried about lore, add a note that the walls are armored because explosions are bad and in big empty rooms there’s plenty of space for excess metal. Let them still start fires when they die, or add another note about built-in fire suppression where you know fire is going to be.
Beefier factories. If Storage is small enough to armor up and still be smaller than Factories, then storage can be placed where Factories can’t and still be safer. Storage is already small so this means beef up Factories. At current, Ammo Factory is the biggest offender, it’s the same size as it’s storage, and at only 2x2 you can fit it anywhere. Look at Power; To be comparable, a ‘Large Ammo Factory’ would have to produce 20/s. I don’t see much Power Storage being used in conjunction with Small Reactors, it’s the Large Reactors that get Storage.
Different capacities. Either raise the carry capacity, raise storage capacity greatly, or lower the production/consumption rate. Each option changes the relationship between producer, transport, storage, and consumer.
Discussion:
What are your thoughts? Have I summed the current situation up adequately? Do you have any better suggestions?
