Can someone give me a good reason why Stork isn't a 5ker anymore? I understand that people want this game to be balanced. Reducing Stork's cargo capacity is going to make the game a bit more balanced...? I'm not a pro player or developer, but there are few things that I don't understand. One of them things is this. Don't get me wrong please. I'm just a curious player who wants to know why has this happened. Thank you.
As far as I understood, the main reason was the size of Stork. The ship hull is significantly smaller/thinner compared to other 5kers, what was providing too big advantage against pirates as it was much more difficult for them to hit the running ship, especially when it was equipped with cargo pods which were eating the shots first. Thus it was replaced with Titanic which is a 5ker now and has comparable hull size to other 5kers.
(09-23-2018, 03:01 PM)Laura C. Wrote: [ -> ]As far as I understood, the main reason was the size of Stork. The ship hull is significantly smaller/thinner compared to other 5kers, what was providing too big advantage against pirates as it was much more difficult for them to hit the running ship, especially when it was equipped with cargo pods which were eating the shots first. Thus it was replaced with Titanic which is a 5ker now and has comparable hull size to other 5kers.
I see, it makes sense. Stork is one of my favourite transports out there, I'm kind of sad because of this.
(09-23-2018, 03:01 PM)Laura C. Wrote: [ -> ]what was providing too big advantage against pirates as it was much more difficult for them to hit the running ship, especially when it was equipped with cargo pods which were eating the shots first.
Are you kidding me,this can not be the real reason.
Why change in my view the most iconic transport in the history of Disco,
The ship , especially in the first couple of years in Disco you all wanted
to earn the big bucks.
200 less cargo is not going to change anything.
Reno
(10-08-2018, 09:40 PM)Reno Wrote: [ -> ] (09-23-2018, 03:01 PM)Laura C. Wrote: [ -> ]what was providing too big advantage against pirates as it was much more difficult for them to hit the running ship, especially when it was equipped with cargo pods which were eating the shots first.
Are you kidding me,this can not be the real reason.
Why change in my view the most iconic transport in the history of Disco,
The ship , especially in the first couple of years in Disco you all wanted
to earn the big bucks.
200 less cargo is not going to change anything.
Reno
The reason (probably!) is that it was almost half the size of the likes of Colossus while having the same cargo and being way more agile.
(10-08-2018, 10:51 PM)Lucas Wrote: [ -> ] (10-08-2018, 09:40 PM)Reno Wrote: [ -> ] (09-23-2018, 03:01 PM)Laura C. Wrote: [ -> ]what was providing too big advantage against pirates as it was much more difficult for them to hit the running ship, especially when it was equipped with cargo pods which were eating the shots first.
Are you kidding me,this can not be the real reason.
Why change in my view the most iconic transport in the history of Disco,
The ship , especially in the first couple of years in Disco you all wanted
to earn the big bucks.
200 less cargo is not going to change anything.
Reno
The reason (probably!) is that it was almost half the size of the likes of Colossus while having the same cargo and being way more agile.
It's probably because of its size. You can certainly see the difference after comparing it with some other 5kers. Still, 200 cargo capacity less, shouldn't be a problem at all)
(10-08-2018, 09:40 PM)Reno Wrote: [ -> ] (09-23-2018, 03:01 PM)Laura C. Wrote: [ -> ]what was providing too big advantage against pirates as it was much more difficult for them to hit the running ship, especially when it was equipped with cargo pods which were eating the shots first.
Are you kidding me,this can not be the real reason.
Why change in my view the most iconic transport in the history of Disco,
The ship , especially in the first couple of years in Disco you all wanted
to earn the big bucks.
200 less cargo is not going to change anything.
Reno
Did someone say BigBucks?
This has to be a tad short sighted. In the past few years many combat craft regardless of size have been improved and developed and of course the advance in technology would make this logical. I have not seen any increase in transports which woud benifit fro the same technology. They certainly would not go backwards i their ability. Their speed, hull and cargo size would all improve.
It looks to me as if this was a step to make it easier for the pirates and to do this to the Stork is unbelievable.
I too am unhappy with this so called improvement of the game especially when the vote on who enjoyed trading went so well in favour of the trader.
I am sorry that missed this being mentionend on the forum.
Balance reasons, guys. It has nothing to do with imaginary technological advancements.
Stork was too good transport for its cargo size (ex-5000) vs its model size (long and narrow). From experience, I can tell you that Stork is really hard to shoot at as a pirate in a bomber, due to the way Freelancer engine places crosshair and due to cargo pods absorbing SNAC shots. It was easier to switch cargo sizes with Titanic (ex-4800) rather than having to downscale model, hitbox and change others stats.
As avid trader, this will not affect me as I prefer Bison myself, but I can absolutely understand the need for this balance swap as Titanic was absolutely useless in comparison to Stork, which had higher cargo space and smaller model.
It is really fine now and your grievances about the changes will fall on deaf ears as this change is appropriate and certainly welcomed.
I thought people were joking when they were saying they were having a hard time shooting the Stork, but this is kind of ridiculous.
Stop shooting at the crosshair for once, use your fat bomber armor to soak up the 4 turrets the Stork can point at you, and scorcher/snac/chaingun/scattergun/hellfire the fat front portion of the transport. The Advanced Train is THE slowest turning ship in the mod. It has a max turning speed of 8.59 degrees/sec and it has under 1/4th the responsiveness of the next fastest ship, the Coalition Carrier (.34 of a second vs .08). Lets not forget its WHOPPING 85.000 hull, which is often coupled with traders usually not putting armor on at all, means a SNAC to the hull is instant death.
Being unable to maneuver your bomber up to the front portion the size of a gunboat and the turning speed slower than the slowest battleships in the game is actually laughable.