Nanocost

[Vurtuoso]

I would like nanocost to be an added factor in damage reduction against nanodrain targets.

IE

-1% = 1% less nano drained per attack

[Ocene]

So you mean, you want your nanocost to come to effect when people try to drain your nano pool?

Makes sense to me.

[Marinegent]

also makes sense to me.

[Waahash]

I'm against it.

[Vurtuoso]

I'm against it.

Explaining your position helps contribute to more effective discussions.

[Waahash]

Well if we're gonna ask for debate then:

Other than the blatantly obvious that I use a profession that drains nano and that the amount of -nanocost, namely on doctors, can get quite high: you'd see that I'd be unfavorable towards it. Your debate was, "might be cool," so mine was, "naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah man."

[Saetos]

I would like nanocost to be an added factor in damage reduction against nanodrain targets.

IE

-1% = 1% less nano drained per attack

So any Doctor with, say, -75% nanocost (with buffs from MPs or NTs) makes GTH drain a whopping 26.25% nanopool (giving them back 70% nanopool in the process) and makes Plagiarize Notum drain a whole 378 points? Heck no.

[Djiax]

So any Doctor with, say, -75% nanocost (with buffs from MPs or NTs) makes GTH drain a whopping 26.25% nanopool (giving them back 70% nanopool in the process) and makes Plagiarize Notum drain a whole 378 points? Heck no.

Let's assume the OP propose more nanodrain from those nano at the same time ; so that it isn't a flat loss for nanodraining profession. A NT or doc or agent or anyone that would work on his na cost would potentially lost bit less nano then today ; while someone with next to zero na cost would lost even more nano then today.

Could make sense in a balanced future.

[drops]

This idea makes as much sense as debuffs not landing on you if you don't have enough free NCU.

[Xenotric]

It sort of makes sense that it would effect it someway.

But -nanocost works by making the nanobots more efficient at their job, on your casts this is making it need less bots for the same effect, however a nanodrain the entire purpose is for the bots to deactivate/transfer over. So making them more efficient should mean you loose more nano at that point.

Also considering how hard it is to hurt peoples nano pool with most nano drains, that would be a good way to give them a bit of a penalty.

If they have a high -nanocost they need less nano to cast but they loose more nano from offensive nano's like that. If they don't have -nanocost their nano's take more but drains do less.

But I can't see it happening... just like I can't see offensive nano's taking up any free ncu you have even if they don't need it to land.

[Zwelgje]

I believe Cost reduction are breed capped (no matter the extra buff etc).
Nanomage 55% max
Sol and Opi 50% max
Trox 45% max

Debuff's are 0 NCU as far as I know (even if they say something else). But would be fun to have a Debuff that Floods the remaining NCU left in the target and fills the NCU even further when a friendly buff ends within the duration of the Debuf.

[Hellrule]

I believe Cost reduction are breed capped (no matter the extra buff etc).
Nanomage 55% max
Sol and Opi 50% max
Trox 45% max

Debuff's are 0 NCU as far as I know (even if they say something else). But would be fun to have a Debuff that Floods the remaining NCU left in the target and fills the NCU even further when a friendly buff ends within the duration of the Debuf.

Swimming Expertise

[Otinsainpas]

I believe Cost reduction are breed capped (no matter the extra buff etc).
Nanomage 55% max
Sol and Opi 50% max
Trox 45% max

they are.
to endgame nanomage docs cost reduction buffs are NCU debuffs.

[Phargus]

Judging by how FC does things in the rebalancing docs (i.e heavier debuffs the more skill you have) having it work the other way around seems the more likely scenario...