Quote:Concerning the snac, the intention was to reduce their damage below the amount needed to instakill a snub, and raise refire rate accordingly. Raising base armor and reducing number of nanos can be part of that. "The peeps in charge who enjoy insta-killing unsuspecting noobs" referred to other people who bragged about it and later ended up as balance devs. I don't recall you being one of those I was thinking of, but who it was is besides the point. The point is that somewhat "bold" dev moves that would fix certain problems but upset people who love to have a disproportionate PvP advantage over noobs aren't being made because of fear of the later, and it's been like that for ever. Instead there'e constant squabbling about small insignificant changes like removing nanos from BS even if they cant pass bots anyway anymore, and even if there are negative consequences like "cheating" without knowing it.
That is possibly one of the most horrible ideas I've ever heard, no offence. The SNAC thing.
And correct me if I'm wrong but....
The SNAC does some 250K Damage.
The Averaged Armored up VHF, has something akin to 30K Health.
So you're saying that the SNAC, an Anti Capital Ship Weapon, that is painfully easy to dodge. To the Point where you have a decent chance of not being hit even if you're standing still, should be reduced to less than 1/8th of it's damage. It's hard enough to stick close to a Battleship with a Bomber and keep consistent damage, especially by yourself. But, that's also intentional, since they are suitably hard to take down from a Battleship in turn. If we reduce the damage to that number, it essentially becomes a slightly buffed Mini Razor. At which point, the question can really be asked. Why fly a bomber at all? Since you can get BETTER utility out of having a more maneuverable,faster, and better at defending itself VHF.
Edit: Checked the Numbers. Okay it does about half the damage I thought it did, so it'd only be reduced to 1/4th, rather than 1/8th...sounds less dramatic, same result.