+- 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 - JorgeRyan - 04-07-2018
Iif you're worried about transport pirates not being able to repair with nanos on the fly, why not remove nano's and buff armour for large transports only? 4-5k ships (or maybe even >3k). They are the most common ones that newbies rush for, to get the maximum haulage. And it means that smaller ships still get to repair themselves.
RE: Merge transports' nanobots into hull - LaWey - 04-07-2018
(04-07-2018, 10:26 PM)ronillon Wrote: 10 nanobots means 6000 HP repaired.This is why it good for snubs, but this is not significant against anti-capital weaponery. Few seconds more, few seconds less, or even without difference if you couldnot repair hull more then SNAC hit.
With AU it means you survive 2,5*6000=15000 damage more.
With CAU8 it means you survive 4*6000=24000 damage more.
So I would say 10 nanobots can be significant.
NPCs do not seem to drop enough of them though, at least that is my experience.
RE: Merge transports' nanobots into hull - LaWey - 04-07-2018
(04-07-2018, 10:29 PM)JorgeRyan Wrote: Iif you're worried about transport pirates not being able to repair with nanos on the fly, why not remove nano's and buff armour for large transports only? 4-5k ships (or maybe even >3k). They are the most common ones that newbies rush for, to get the maximum haulage. And it means that smaller ships still get to repair themselves.
Agreed with this suggestion fully.
RE: Merge transports' nanobots into hull - Sand-Viper - 04-07-2018
(04-07-2018, 09:43 PM)R.I.P. Wrote: (Heck why stop there, just remove nanobots on all ships and buff all hulls to compensate) Fair enough right? If transports get it, all fighters/bombers should to, every ship should instead of just certain types. That away no ship anywhere can tractor up nanobots!
I'm going to admit, for one who is being extremely stubborn and bullheaded, I will play devil's advocate for a moment and point out that you may be onto something here, although I'm not sure if all ships should lose nanos.
But, let's assume we do this for all classes across the board.
All SHFs would suddenly be able to survive a direct hit from a SNAC, even when only sporting a generic Armor Upgrade. A select few VHFs, depending on how many hitpoints they have, would also be able to survive. An SHF is basically a SNAC-magnet, so allowing them to survive one direct hit would honestly be welcome in my mind, though I'm certain that others may have a different opinion. At the end of the day, the SNAC is an anti-transport/capital weapon, and being able to SNAC a snub is a tribute to the bomber pilot's skill, luck, or both.
I'm not sure if HFs or LFs getting nano fusions is great, though. Being able to one-shot an LF with even an MR seems like it's working as intended.
Some gunboats sporting a generic Armor Upgrade would suddenly be able to survive a double Nova hit. This would be a welcome change to gunboat pilots, but would others appreciate such a boon in PvP? I leave that up for others to discuss.
Cruisers paired with a Repair Ship would probably become absolutely ridiculous in PvP, since their max health would aid the Repair Ship in keeping the ship going far longer than normal (Although, the same could be said for any ship class with a Repair Ship, it's just that cruisers are widely seen as the perfect solo-play ship class).
I'm still up for nano merge for transports, even if it's a partial one. Possibly for SHFs, since I feel with them losing bomber torpedoes, they ought to have some sort of benefit besides being able to mount two missile or fighter torpedoes. I will admit that I am no expert at PvP and have not fought an SHF recently, but their sheer size makes flying one a death sentence the moment a bomber shows up to a fight.
I do love a good discussion!
RE: Merge transports' nanobots into hull - SnakThree - 04-08-2018
(04-07-2018, 09:43 PM)R.I.P. Wrote:(04-07-2018, 11:01 AM)SnakThree Wrote:(04-07-2018, 10:36 AM)ronillon Wrote:(04-07-2018, 10:28 AM)Galaxian Wrote: But it wouldn't matter either way?
Plus transports' ability to survive would really go up.
Whether it matters or not is a matter of yours and everyone else perspective. Accidentally it is a topic of this discussion.
The only thing it would change regarding survive ability, is that transport could survive a bigger blow at one time (1 torp or something). But it does not change the amount of damage they can survive overall. (they will still die on second hit)
I feel like this is all about Pirates being able to do less damage when they want to. In which case, reduce damage, increase fire rate and ammo count, as has been proposed already.
P.S.: Isnt everything about pirates these days?
Hey, I am proposing an idea that could prevent trader deaths. While it is related to piracy, it's much more pro-trader suggestion. You forgot to take into account, that changing SNAC mechanics would affect much bigger part of PvP than just bomber vs trader.
My idea stems from personal experience of facing all-or-nothing situation against unarmored newbies. I want to pirate them for some credits, but their refuse to yield because they don't see damage done against them. This change could bring them to such position where they might lose 66% hull after one SNAC and reconsider their choice. Which is win-win for everyone. Newbies don't get insta-killed, pirate gets paid a bit, everyone leaves a bit happier than current situation.
If a trader is not going to pay, they are just not going to pay no matter what, this makes no sense to me, but whatever they will still die no matter what. Just cause a few of you feel like hitting a transport with a SNAC is going to make them pay out cause you drop them down to little hull i do not feel they need to change more in this game. If they do not pay, they are not going to pay after you "almost" kill them, so you might as well just have the ease of one shotting them and moving on. Sorry i feel there is something else to this, like maybe someone was in a fight with a transport and the transport happened to survive by sucking up some nanos and upset them or something. Sorry been this way for years and just suspicious that NOW someone wants it changed?
(Heck why stop there, just remove nanobots on all ships and buff all hulls to compensate) Fair enough right? If transports get it, all fighters/bombers should to, every ship should instead of just certain types. That away no ship anywhere can tractor up nanobots!
If you have no clue what you are talking about, could you just stop posting? Or are you just one of the guys who are against any change even if it is a beneficial change for most vulnerable group of people - newbie traders? There have been a dozen times when traders yielded to demands after they saw the damage I can inflict but that was only possible when I flew PTrans or Gunboat r when they had armour and I was in Bomber. Which is again the same issue I am proposing to solve by removing chances to be insta-killed.
Maybe you could raise a proper argument instead of talking about status quo or exaggerating that this change needs to be applied to all ship classes.
RE: Merge transports' nanobots into hull - Enkidu - 04-08-2018
Smugglers would benefit from a transport survivability buff more than lawful transports would, but yet again, escorts would be discouraged. Lawful transports still arn't going to mount their armours and a determined enough pirate bomber will use scorcher bombs from point blank, snac, and dumbfire rockets spammed into the hull if the person is trying to station run.
Besides, fast kill rates discourage station docking (and thus, interaction avoidance), so it's a feature, not a bug.
RE: Merge transports' nanobots into hull - ronillon - 04-08-2018
So I just went a tried to shoot down Bretonia Train Shetland (130.000HP so slightly under SNAC damage) with Barghest equipped with EMP cannons.
It took whole 2 minutes to destroy it using shieldbusters. So on thrusters it would travel 18k before being blown up and only 9k before it looses 50% of hull.
So it is not like cannot scare it, even if you have EMP + SNAC loadout.
RE: Merge transports' nanobots into hull - SnakThree - 04-08-2018
(04-08-2018, 12:25 PM)ronillon Wrote: So I just went a tried to shoot down Bretonia Train Shetland (130.000HP so slightly under SNAC damage) with Barghest equipped with EMP cannons.
It took whole 2 minutes to destroy it using shieldbusters. So on thrusters it would travel 18k before being blown up and only 9k before it looses 50% of hull.
So it is not like cannot scare it, even if you have EMP + SNAC loadout.
Your math is off. Bomber EMP does 320 damage per second. Assuming you had 4 of them, that's 1280 damage per second. Shetland has 130k base HP and around 210k HP that it can repair. To do 340k hull damage, not counting shield soaking up damage via regeneration or shield batteries, you would have to keep shooting non-stop for 260 seconds or 4 minutes and 20 seconds. Thrust speed is 140, that's 36k of non-stop thrust in that time.
RE: Merge transports' nanobots into hull - Kazinsal - 04-08-2018
Also, if you chainfire your EMPs, the transport's screen and hull will shake like mad and the pinging sound will hopefully drive them to reconsider not paying you.
RE: Merge transports' nanobots into hull - R.I.P. - 04-08-2018
(04-08-2018, 06:32 AM)SnakThree Wrote:(04-07-2018, 09:43 PM)R.I.P. Wrote:(04-07-2018, 11:01 AM)SnakThree Wrote:(04-07-2018, 10:36 AM)ronillon Wrote:(04-07-2018, 10:28 AM)Galaxian Wrote: But it wouldn't matter either way?
Plus transports' ability to survive would really go up.
Whether it matters or not is a matter of yours and everyone else perspective. Accidentally it is a topic of this discussion.
The only thing it would change regarding survive ability, is that transport could survive a bigger blow at one time (1 torp or something). But it does not change the amount of damage they can survive overall. (they will still die on second hit)
I feel like this is all about Pirates being able to do less damage when they want to. In which case, reduce damage, increase fire rate and ammo count, as has been proposed already.
P.S.: Isnt everything about pirates these days?
Hey, I am proposing an idea that could prevent trader deaths. While it is related to piracy, it's much more pro-trader suggestion. You forgot to take into account, that changing SNAC mechanics would affect much bigger part of PvP than just bomber vs trader.
My idea stems from personal experience of facing all-or-nothing situation against unarmored newbies. I want to pirate them for some credits, but their refuse to yield because they don't see damage done against them. This change could bring them to such position where they might lose 66% hull after one SNAC and reconsider their choice. Which is win-win for everyone. Newbies don't get insta-killed, pirate gets paid a bit, everyone leaves a bit happier than current situation.
If a trader is not going to pay, they are just not going to pay no matter what, this makes no sense to me, but whatever they will still die no matter what. Just cause a few of you feel like hitting a transport with a SNAC is going to make them pay out cause you drop them down to little hull i do not feel they need to change more in this game. If they do not pay, they are not going to pay after you "almost" kill them, so you might as well just have the ease of one shotting them and moving on. Sorry i feel there is something else to this, like maybe someone was in a fight with a transport and the transport happened to survive by sucking up some nanos and upset them or something. Sorry been this way for years and just suspicious that NOW someone wants it changed?
(Heck why stop there, just remove nanobots on all ships and buff all hulls to compensate) Fair enough right? If transports get it, all fighters/bombers should to, every ship should instead of just certain types. That away no ship anywhere can tractor up nanobots!
If you have no clue what you are talking about, could you just stop posting? Or are you just one of the guys who are against any change even if it is a beneficial change for most vulnerable group of people - newbie traders? There have been a dozen times when traders yielded to demands after they saw the damage I can inflict but that was only possible when I flew PTrans or Gunboat r when they had armour and I was in Bomber. Which is again the same issue I am proposing to solve by removing chances to be insta-killed.
Maybe you could raise a proper argument instead of talking about status quo or exaggerating that this change needs to be applied to all ship classes.
I will not stop posting just cause you say so. I know you do not like me, never have and you never will. You do not like anything i say, then please add me to your ignore list. I am saying if they are removed on some ships they should just be removed completely. I do not feel they should change this just cause someone like you wants to scare traders into paying, that is just dumb. Anyways you want a better reason, then fine. You are honestly making it easier for a Cap 8 transport that may actually know how to fight. Let's say i am a pirate in a snub of whatever type, I come across a transport and he does not want to pay, so we begin fighting. One major advantage he will have is he does not have to keep a watchful eye on his hull, all his worries are trying to maneuver and shoot at me, meanwhile i have to keep an eye on my hull to make sure i hit the nanobots if i start getting to low. If for some reason i fail to keep a close eye on my hull, or my finger fumbles trying to regen then i could end up dead. But the transport does not even have to worry about nothing but concentrating on shooting. Not to mention most times fighting a heavily armored transport you "Hope" they fumble with regens, or maybe they forgot to resupply if they were low or out of them. So basically you will be making taking one of them down a hell of a lot longer with no effort from them paying attention to keep it alive.
(Btw Snack 3, in case you didn't know this game does not revolve around you or only your opinions)