Cloak Disruptor VS Cruise Disruptor: About time for that change

[An'shur]

@TheUnforgiven
+1!

---

User was banned for: Requested
Time left: (Permanent)

[7AlphaOne1]

OP seemingly makes sense to me. +1

---

Need some software for FL?looking of a whole database? click here!

Jay's Quotes

TO FLOOD OR NOT TO FLOOD, THAT IS THE QUESTION.

Well, I've managed to piss off Snak3, Ageira, LH~, Furries, Wisp, but at least Beast is happy.

[Thunderer]

If it is decided that cloak disruptors start using CD slots instead of the CM ones, it will have the following consequences:

1) One will be able to mount a cloak and a cloak disruptor.
2) Snubs will carry cloaks, but won't carry cloak disruptors, as CDs are very important for them.
3) Battleships will be able to mount cloaks, but not cloak disruptors.
4) All of this will cause more buttcloaking, which most of us dislike.
5) As a consequence, someone will make another wall of text.
6) Jumpdrive disruptors will be forgotten about.

What I think would be fair to do is, in case my 346346 tests all failed due to a coincidence or in case the Train CD doesn't work against battleships, take away the cruise disruptors' function of disrupting the cloak charge, as dedicated cloak disruptors have been produced. In the other case they don't have that function already, so it's all fine.

---

Bretonian Treaty Database Bretonian Armed Forces Recruitment Center
Bretonian Charter of Interstellar Law Bretonian Secrets Act

[Haste]

I don't think we're quite there yet with cloak disruptor versus cloak balance. Snubs with cloak disruptors for example still gimps themselves excessively compared to snubs with cloaks, since they have to fly around with no CM 24/7 on the off chance they run into a cloak user. A snub with a cloak on the other hand has access to his "alternate CM" at all times. So basically, one gives up a valuable slot for a rather rare occurrence while the other gives up a valuable slot for a (valuable) piece of equipment they always have access to.

This isn't as big a deal for larger ships as the CM slot is generally less critical to them. Still, I'd like to find - and implement - a fair solution that doesn't gimp cloak users unnecessarily but also makes it so that having a "casual" cloak disruptor on a snub doesn't gimp you 24/7 for very little, conditional gain. After that, making cloak disruptors an actual requirement for disrupting cloaks could be considered*.

Oh and this is just my opinion, it's not in dev gold and stuff.

*) Looks like this might already be the case, though, in which case this entire thread is rather pointless.