As a big gunner, I love the idea of running in and destroying everything in sight. But I also see how there's an imbalance and if you're into PVP, quite often you're going to pick big guns over small ones. So here's the idea (all numbers just examples):
Against NPC enemies, the deterioration of their weapons starts at a low number, let's say 20%. If you fire on them with larger guns, like M60s, LSWs or minis, the damage goes up to 60% automatically because there's a good chance that one of those bullets would hit the weapon. With flamers and RLs, the damage jumps to 75%. But with small guns, the damage only goes to let's say to 40% with pistols and 45 or 50 with assault weapons. Then additional damage is added depending on how many times the enemy shoots their weapon, maybe 2 to 3%. This gives you a distinct advantage to using smaller guns when attacking NPCs.
(This last idea may already be the case, and if it is, let me know and I'll edit this)
For players, the deterioration starts as it is at the time. Another set of numbers could be used following the above example. For armor, the amount of damage could be calculated based on the type of armor and what it is supposed to absorb. So if you kill another player using laser weapons while he's wearing metal armor, the amount of damage to the armor would be minimal. If small guns are used, the damage could be slightly higher, and with big guns, the damage would be substantial. The same follows with other armors, like lasers and flamers would significantly burn CA and leather while bullets would only leave small holes. When using rockets, all armor sustains significant damage, and has the possibility of being destroyed, like it already does.
