Is it time to nerf cruise disruptors?

[Commander Crucible]

Snacs need fixing. Not cruise disruptors.

That's really, really not the topic at hand.

Relation to topic :

Core game mechanic -> changes to core game mechanic -> adverse and very poor outcome -> another attempt to change a core mechanic -> fear of unwanted change that is, history repeating itself -> Snac references -> validated.

Your point good sir?

Cheers

---

[LaWey]

My five kopeks, to confirm words of connecticut-borned guys from perspective of more casual players which use mechanics in combination with groups drilling instead of personnel skill raising, which just harder to organise.

As noob using noob swarms, i can confirm, mosq mostly inneffective for stopping caps, low fly range and low blast make it bad variant for interception, but due traking, it will CD your opponent in snub fight in most situations.

Train just some kind of versale CD, which good for interception, good for shooting rockets,can blow mines yes, but dont being fooled, while it bombers and intercepting working horce, this is simple havent enough tracking to shoot on your back, this is where difference come. Just due versality, its preferable for small-scale pirate ganks, but fleet fights and patrols can lead to another scenarios, requiring both.

Also with high-tracking CD you can do some weirds things, like shooting of CD on your back from some transports Capships CD have tendency be usable more to prevent charge of bigcaps, or prevent enemy from escaping, they have another specific due CD arcs and low agility.

Keep in mind, fleet combat could be divided on different distancies, which required different CD too. And you also need CD for every target, which in fleet fight include one for enemy capships, one for torps which flying to friendly capships, and one for this snub which trying get your or your buddy's ass.

Not fact that every CD on every of this target will be successfull, which make 70 ammo of train not so much, and 1600 mosquito range with its 520 speed not so far when enemy rockets fly from another flank, or if some far capship perfom charge.

Regarding rockets, can confirm that on practise groups nova spam effective as hell, that heavy CM can work in both ways, so you can protect your rockets from backside CDing, which make needed this dedicated person to do it, cos other would just rather waste their CD and drive attention from more important deals if they would try hard reduce every barrage. Same as you can also launch your CD before/with novas to clean their way, and reduce enemy spirit by battle beeping.

There more, seems honestly, in fleet fights most best what can do capships which already tied by combat with other ships, its just spam CM and pray, cos all other actions which they can do, only waste their energy/force them do maneures which set it in dangerous stance. Especially bad for current carriers powercore, any missiles is just checkmate for them. So even if your ammo was countered, in fleet fight you already create bothering factor, which your fleet could use to gain advantage. Without CD blowing rockets, nova spam will be just uncounterable, just spam CD to clean enemies CM/launch them on opposite course. Or you need introduce some specialised ECM ships to fill hiche of countermeausing.

Ufff, i hope its was at leas smally readable, but i feel i should point out that work well as hell for everybody. I dunno how others see disco combat, but on my looks, even while freel itself force it all to be more oriented on snubs, fleet engagement with caps-snubs composing is what real brilliant of disco, and CD important mechanic for it.

[Greylock]

This seems like more a matter of opinion than the rest of your post. And also playstyle -- I don't know that I've ever run out of CDs, even in a long fleet fight.

See the clusterfu** that was the final battle between CR and OCs in Tau-29. Some of our (the Outcasts) bombers ran out of CDs. That kind of situation is where a lower CD count would be a complete disaster. As it was, we were outnumbered cap wise. Sure, we won anyway. If nobody had CDs left, it would have ended a lot quicker for the Outcasts.

Snacs need fixing. Not cruise disruptors.

That's really, really not the topic at hand.

Relation to topic :

Core game mechanic -> changes to core game mechanic -> adverse and very poor outcome -> another attempt to change a core mechanic -> fear of unwanted change that is, history repeating itself -> Snac references -> validated.

Your point good sir?

I am, again, with Crucible and Dime on this. Don't change it, it doesn't need it. Go fix the actual problems with the game, like the crashes whenever someone SNACs an NPC gunboat.

---

[Grumblesaur]

Snacs need fixing. Not cruise disruptors.

That's really, really not the topic at hand.

Relation to topic :

Core game mechanic -> changes to core game mechanic -> adverse and very poor outcome -> another attempt to change a core mechanic -> fear of unwanted change that is, history repeating itself -> Snac references -> validated.

Your point good sir?

Cheers

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.

This seems like more a matter of opinion than the rest of your post. And also playstyle -- I don't know that I've ever run out of CDs, even in a long fleet fight.

See the clusterfu** that was the final battle between CR and OCs in Tau-29. Some of our bombers ran out of CDs. That kind of situation is where a lower CD count would be a complete disaster. As it was, we were outnumbered cap wise. Sure, we won anyway. If nobody had CDs left, it would have ended a lot quicker for the Outcasts.

Why exactly is this specific instance of Outcasts triumphing over CR in spite of poor resource management relevant? Why shouldn't it have ended quicker for the Outcasts? A disaster for one side is a victory for the other. If you reversed the sides it would be the exact same non-argument as this.

---

A way a lone a last a loved a long the riverrun, past Eve and Adam's, from swerve of shore to bend of bay,
brings us by a commodius vicus of recirculation back to Howth Castle and Environs.

[Vexykin]

Let’s not try to fix something that’s not broken.
The CDs are fine as they are.

+1

---

Tutorial Database

Liberty Rogues Official Discord:
https://discord.gg/Wt2RqVJ

Feel free to PM this account if you have any questions, I'm here to help!

[Commander Crucible]

[quote="diamond1" pid='2058648' dateline='1548391837']
Snacs need fixing. Not cruise disruptors.

That's really, really not the topic at hand.

Relation to topic :

Core game mechanic -> changes to core game mechanic -> adverse and very poor outcome -> another attempt to change a core mechanic -> fear of unwanted change that is, history repeating itself -> Snac references -> validated.

Your point good sir?

Cheers

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.

*sigh
Refer to my quote above for clarificafion on relation to this thread. I don’t want to waste time repeating myself.

With regards to your second point,
There is substantial evidence about how detrimental this “suggestion” you so deeply consent to is going to be if ( and that being a big if) implemented. The POINT is that we have the ability to learn from mistakes made in the past. Similar to how one wouldn’t touch a hot pan after being so stubborn to touch it resulting in forced learning approach with lasting consequences.

Polls have been made and the community has spoken time and time again.
The flood is for trolling, are you insinuating that I am here to troll because I have a separate opinion supported by hard facts?

Cheers

---

[James Greed]

Fixing things that aren't broken always work out so well.

---

Greedback

[Evo]

....... No. Nerf capacity MAYBE if we had an actual issue of people just lolspamming the crap out of CDs but uh.. that doesn't happen. On the rare occasion it does, the person is so trash that it doesn't even matter. I see no reason to change CDs. CDs ARE supposed to be the general loadout. Only ships I have anything else on are dedicated group fight ships. I wouldn't say we're afraid of change because people don't like your idea, people just don't like your idea xd. It's a "hey let's change core mechanic" just for the sake of it. There's already space for the other cd slot weapons, and those are in group fights.

---

[Greylock]

....... No. Nerf capacity MAYBE if we had an actual issue of people just lolspamming the crap out of CDs but uh.. that doesn't happen.

Does launching 5-6 CDs at a battleship count? Sometimes they don't track.

Why exactly is this specific instance of Outcasts triumphing over CR in spite of poor resource management relevant? Why shouldn't it have ended quicker for the Outcasts? A disaster for one side is a victory for the other. If you reversed the sides it would be the exact same non-argument as this.

Okay, think of it like this:

>Good old fleet fight, a bunch of battleships brawling, some battlcruisers, a few cruisers, and hell, maybe even a gunboat.

>Now take into consideration that the battlecruisers and smaller are too occupied to CD a battleship.

> What does that leave? Some snubs/bombers to CD.

>What happens when the CDs run out?

>Everyone just cruises endlessly. It would be counterproductive to gameplay.

CDs don't need nerfed in any way. Their versatility is fine. If you don't like CDs, then don't get into a situation where they would be used. Simple as that.

---

[The Sovereign]

Hey do you guys remember when Corile killed Haste by effectively using Mosq CD's and the next day all CD's lost 40 points of ammo and it was suddenly near impossible to pin a intercepted target down because of all the bugs that CD's + CM's have alongside their new low ammo limits?

That was a good change wasn't it. For everyone who didn't want to fight or be caught that is. It's been brought up several times here already, but it bears repeating.

This is idea is bad, has been attempted before, and was reverted because it was terrible.