Do you want to see transport nanobots merged into hull?

[SnakThree]

Based on long discussion in this thread, what is the opinion of community?

---

[Groshyr]

Does this proposal also mean liners' nanobots merge into the hull?

[SnakThree]

Does this proposal also mean liners' nanobots merge into the hull?

Liners are transports. So are yachts.

---

[Karlotta]

I'd prefer if armor, guns, and shields no longer took up cargo space. It seems there are better ways than managing what ship can mount what stuff than cargo space, that didnt exist when the cargo space method was implemented.

---

User was banned for: https://discoverygc.com/forums/showthrea...tid=200950
Time left: (Permanent)

[darkwind]

I'd prefer if armor, guns, and shields no longer took up cargo space. It seems there are better ways than managing what ship can mount what stuff than cargo space, that didnt exist when the cargo space method was implemented.

This would be awesome too. People would stop sacrificing transport protection to nothing.

[Mick]

No! I don't think they should be! I fly a Liner and a Transport and i fly deep spaces dangerous spaces! And if i cannot fix my hull from radiation damage - Neutron Star Gravity Wells etc, I'd be annoyed as hell, Having Nano Bots has saved my tin arses on many occasions!

---

[Mephistoles]

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.

---

Sigma & GMG Discord Chat: https://discord.gg/d4j3W4v

[Mick]

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.

Agreed! Couldn't have said it better myself!

---

[Karst]

No! I don't think they should be! I fly a Liner and a Transport and i fly deep spaces dangerous spaces! And if i cannot fix my hull from radiation damage - Neutron Star Gravity Wells etc, I'd be annoyed as hell, Having Nano Bots has saved my tin arses on many occasions!

Their base armor would be increased by the amount of nanobots they would have had previously. So it would make absolutely no difference whatsoever to damage from radiation or any other source.

I don't know how so many people fail to grasp that the HP would be completely unchanged.

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.

Totally irrelevant complaint, since armorless transports are meaningless from a balance perspective, die incredibly fast regardless, and can only be instakilled by two of the bomber torpedos and heavy cap weapons.

The only scenario in which this would make an appreciable difference is for SNAC+EMP bombers, a terrible loadout against transports to begin with, and only in the case of unarmored transports, as the loadout is already borderline useless against any transport it can't instakill.

---

[Mick]

More hull points - hmmmm - Still get stuck in a gravity well you're going down quick doesn't matter how many hull points you got! At least if you got nano bots you got a chance of survival my feelings stand i think it's a silly idea personally!

---