+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Forum: Discovery Mod General Discussion (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+--- Thread: Merge transports' nanobots into hull (/showthread.php?tid=159910)
RE: Merge transports' nanobots into hull - SnakThree - 03-06-2020
Just do it.
RE: Merge transports' nanobots into hull - SlappyTheRoach - 03-06-2020
This again.
RE: Merge transports' nanobots into hull - Groshyr - 03-06-2020
I agree. Just do it to all. Nanobots should be gone but increase shield batteries amount
RE: Merge transports' nanobots into hull - Mephistoles - 03-06-2020
Transports should not have their regens integrated into their base hull.
Mounting armour on a transport is a risk vs reward choice. By not mounting it you have a little extra space to make profit but the downside is that you will die very easily, particularly to one SNAC. If you use an armour upgrade you lose a little space but are much more survivable. This is how the dynamic should be and how it should remain.
RE: Merge transports' nanobots into hull - Prysin - 03-06-2020
(03-06-2020, 11:14 PM)Mephistoles Wrote: Transports should not have their regens integrated into their base hull.
Mounting armour on a transport is a risk vs reward choice. By not mounting it you have a little extra space to make profit but the downside is that you will die very easily, particularly to one SNAC. If you use an armour upgrade you lose a little space but are much more survivable. This is how the dynamic should be and how it should remain.
RE: Merge transports' nanobots into hull - NixOlympica - 03-06-2020
(03-06-2020, 11:14 PM)Mephistoles Wrote: Transports should not have their regens integrated into their base hull.
Mounting armour on a transport is a risk vs reward choice. By not mounting it you have a little extra space to make profit but the downside is that you will die very easily, particularly to one SNAC. If you use an armour upgrade you lose a little space but are much more survivable. This is how the dynamic should be and how it should remain.
RE: Merge transports' nanobots into hull - SlappyTheRoach - 03-06-2020
(03-06-2020, 11:24 PM)Prysin Wrote:(03-06-2020, 11:14 PM)Mephistoles Wrote: Transports should not have their regens integrated into their base hull.
Mounting armour on a transport is a risk vs reward choice. By not mounting it you have a little extra space to make profit but the downside is that you will die very easily, particularly to one SNAC. If you use an armour upgrade you lose a little space but are much more survivable. This is how the dynamic should be and how it should remain.
+1
RE: Merge transports' nanobots into hull - Grumblesaur - 03-08-2020
(03-06-2020, 11:14 PM)Mephistoles Wrote: Transports should not have their regens integrated into their base hull.
Mounting armour on a transport is a risk vs reward choice. By not mounting it you have a little extra space to make profit but the downside is that you will die very easily, particularly to one SNAC. If you use an armour upgrade you lose a little space but are much more survivable. This is how the dynamic should be and how it should remain.
Nanobots don't take up cargo capacity. Integrating the hull capacity from nanobots in to the hull of the transport would increase the durability of the transport irrespective of the armor upgrade. The armor upgrade is simply a multiplier. The risk-vs-reward aspect is still there, just with less micromanaging.
RE: Merge transports' nanobots into hull - SnakThree - 03-09-2020
It is sad that staff decided adding rule that creates ooRP situations is better solution than making this change (that could be combined with removing CD from Cruisers+) to improve transport "endurance".
RE: Merge transports' nanobots into hull - darkwind - 03-09-2020
CD to a cruiser is a crucial instrument in anti-missile defense!