Is it time to nerf cruise disruptors?

[Oggdo Bogdo]

Point A: this is probably built into the engine and isnt something that can be changed. However, perhaps reducing Cruise Disruptor ammo capacity could prevent this from being spammed to completely shut down someone's maneuvering in combat.

Your movement is countered by the mere press of a button, because the issue is with your movement. EK is not the only movement a ship has.

Point B: Detonating ordnance offensively has been done for ages via minetrapping or blowing up a bomber's novas as he launches them. I dont like it, but it doesnt have as many implications as the defensive applications for ordnance detonation.
Missiles and Torpedoes have limited ammo, often times far more limited than the number of cruise disruptors one ship can carry, despite the fact that nearly every ship has a cruise disruptor and in a group fight you effectively have unlimited cruise disruptor ammo because of this. For the person using things like capship missiles/torpedoes, or nova torpedoes, this is extremely frustrating; most, sometimes all, of your ordnance, which you're spending a valuable heavy weapon slot on, will end up getting neutralized before it even gets to the target. On top of the cruise disruptors, explosive ordnance weapons already have several other counters: flak turrets, countermeasures, and simple dodging on applicable ships. This means you've got 4+ ways that the enemy can shut down your limited ammo weapon, and no ways to make sure it works reliably.

CD ammo is not unlimited and not everyone has a CD. CDs are not guaranteed to deny a unit of ammunition everytime it is fired. False premise.

Point C: This is probably an unintended side effect, but when we have cloak disruptors and jump drive disruptors, do we really need cruise disruptors covering those roles as well?

You're implying that the cruise disruptor has the same effectiveness as a cloak disruptor at denying cloaking. Very misleading.

Ultimately, point is that cruise disruptors have too many uses, too many advantages, and arent limited enough in their ammunition or capabilities to counteract those strengths.

Well when you conduct one-sided analysis listing all the uses and strengths of an item without stopping to try and consider the opportunity costs or drawbacks it obviously appears that way.

And you really think that reducing the ammo capacity of cruise disruptors is going to break a fundamental aspect of the game?

Making people deploy their assets intelligently and with a bit of thought instead of spamming the hell out of them because of effectively unlimited ammo sounds like a pretty good balance standpoint to me.

Effectively unlimited ammo? Sounds like you have never played the other end of the interaction. CDs often run dry in a balanced fleet fight because there is constant high demand for it and because of glitches in tracking you can easily lose a few for free.
On the contrary, maybe you should deploy your missiles a little more intelligently and they won't all get CD'd.

I mean, we used to have unlimited ammo capship missiles, and what do you think caused them to get changed?

Are CDs unlimited? And what about the original nerf to the CD ammo count, what do you think caused it to get changed?

But should they be stopped so easily?

Are they stopped easily?

In my experience, which admittedly is mostly dated (I find it difficult to get into a proper brawl as of late), few people were willing to equip missiles because they pretty reliably got out-turned in a furball and CD'd in a joust. Only half of that is the CD's fault, of course, but the turning radius point you mention farther down your post is kind of irrelevant in the sort of fight where missiles have a good chance of hitting.

I really doubt you've tried a missile in the current version of discovery or you've participated in any snub-brawl event when missiles are far more dominant in snub-heavy brawls now than ever, CDs won't save you from chasers using missiles. It's far more important to have players on maxims and sidewinders/firestalkers/paralyzers putting out significant damage than it is to have negligible damage from CDs.

You can talk about the SNAC in a SNAC thread. If you're going to respond to every balance suggestion you don't like with "nope, you'll break it, history repeating itself", what's the point? Make a poll or post in flood if you're not interested in discussing anything.

It would literally be history repeating itself with another disaster since we've already went down this route.

---