Armored Transport shouldn't be better at fighting/pirating/running than all freighters who have less cargo, less armor and less energy. Which it was in 4.84.
Igiss says: Martin, you give them a finger, they bite off your arm.
I'm willing to admit, even I was disappointed with myself dying so quickly. (Me being the aTrans you're speaking of)
Unfortunately running Dial Up I absolutely suck in PvP, no matter the odds.
I could be in a Dread and you'd kill me with a Starflea XD
If that were possible :S
Anyway, moving away from my suckiness, I do agree that it needs to lose the transport turrets, even if it's just for aesthetic reasons. It just looks ridiculous.
Even the small turrets look odd on this ship. On my ATs I have only three transport turrets each.
Did anyone notice the strange firing arcs of the guns on the belly? Both of them cover the frontal-low-right area as well as the rear-low-left area. None of them fires above the horizon.
How about the dropping shield when you jettison cargo? It sometimes blocks my roleplay when I don't want to drop cargo in front of a pirate bomber, because only a CAP4 equipped AT does not instantly die to a single SNAC.
I trained in ATs a lot, because they are such a challenge staying alive in.
The biggest problem with the ATs is the bad turning. It feels about the same as the Yacht turns. This means that you can fight smaller targets only while thrusting away from them. Even a freighter can easily stay on your backside, so you can not use the frontal guns on it.
If the AT get a better turning and the hardpoints on the belly get fixed, it will do quite good in a fight against a smaller target.
A faster thrust-speed would help, but isn't really necessary. You can run from ships with a slow turning easily in a fast-turning ship regardless of having the same thrust-speed.
' Wrote:for those who missed it: the moral of it all is ----> traders with teeth are fun for pirates. - within reason.
' Wrote:First, the default camera angle is kind of in your face. I would love to have it moved a bit further back.
Second, the turrets on the bottom are placed at really odd angles, and only one shoots forward. It looks very strange.
Taken from the bug report subforum.
Well, the AT really needs to be better. I'm pretty sure that, right now, it has a smaller core than most freighters. I can't check, because I don't have FLstat on me right now, but isn't the core the size of a Werewolf's?
Edit: Ah, thanks Mjolnir, I don't use the AT... Ever.
' Wrote:Well, the AT really needs to be better. I'm pretty sure that, right now, it has a smaller core than most freighters. I can't check, because I don't have FLstat on me right now, but isn't the core the size of a Werewolf's?
Freighters have max 38k capacity/1.3k recharge.
AT has 25k capacity but 3k recharge.
Though this recharge is reduced under fire depending on what shields you use:
35k one -500
50k one -1500
100k one - 3000
Still with 50k one it has more recharge than all freighters, with 35k one (which is bigger than the 26/29k one on freighters) it has about twice as good recharge.
All this while having:
more armor 60k vs freighter average of 15
more cargo 800 vs freighter average of about 550
almost 3 times more bats/bots (240 vs 85 )
=================================================
Remember that Armored Transport is a generic ship that anyone can use. That's why freighters are kinda better for other things than trading. Cause we want to see more local ships and less one shiptype spam.
As was written it fills the position as a newbeginners ship when moving up the ladder for a reasonable price. It costs 3.2mil for 800 cargo, while normal transport costs 4mil for 1000 cargo with less armor, bots turning and bigger size.
Igiss says: Martin, you give them a finger, they bite off your arm.
Armored Transport Max Angular Speed (rad/s) 0.7132
Dormedary Max Angular Speed (rad/s) 0.9000
Camara Max Angular Speed (rad/s) 0.7500
"Roc" Civilian Bomber Max Angular Speed (rad/s) 1.0625
Higher rad/s is better. The Starflyer has a turning of 1.6667 rad/s, by comparison. The dormedary can dodge much more effectively due to it being smaller and more agile. The Camara is practically a pencil, so that lets it dodge more easily as well. Bomber guns can rip transport shields to shreads, while they will have trouble hitting a freighter that is either employing strafing effectively, or not moving in a straight line. (Which any semi-competent pilot should be doing in a dogfight) Additionally, both the dormedary and camara are generic ships as well. Armored transport can dodge somewhat, but that's ONLY because of its size.
Higher thrust speed also increases your ability to not only dodge, but to run as well. A freighter is far more likely to survive an attack from a gunboat then an armored transport.
And from my experience, it doesn't even fill the position as a stepping stone. The armored transport doesn't come with guns, Class 5 turrets take time to track down, while transport guns are 300-425k each. As opposed to the 1k 'Gull' transport, which comes with class 4 transport turrets. Many newbies don't bother with regens (makes them weak, but it's true), and the 2-3 mil spent on armored transport guns would be better invested into the 2k transport.
' Wrote:By definition this ship should be able to defend itself
Which it currently cannot. You argument about it being just a alternative to the gull proves this.
I like your ideas Alex, the AT got nerfed too much.
But raising its agility in line with agile freighters does not cut it. It is a cross between transports and freighters, it is a hybrid. I am not saying buffing the turn rate on the AT is bad, by all means do it. But just be careful you do not go too far with it.
I think it definitely got hit too hard in 4.85. It was quite nice in 4.84 but seems less effective than freighters or other transports now.
I say give it only fighter turrets and faster thrust - maybe more like the Yacht than Freighters, but more than gunboats. Otherwise, the RP logic would be to, you know, go in a gunboat in the first place.