| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Topic |
Kamen
SRBI
Kith of Venal
    |
Posted - 2006.10.23 13:47:00 -
[1]
I apologize if Nos/Neut rebalance has been posted and set in stone somewhere, but I thought of an idea that seemed to be better than the original idea Tux had with using batteries to counter Nos.
Using batteries to counter nos seems to be a bit of a difficult approach because it would make it too difficult for some ships to fit batteries (especially ceptors) due to PG requirements of those modules.
I thought of amore general idea:
General thought:
Introduce "Ray size" which has to be matched with target's signature radius to get full effect. Small rays are not as effective against large targets due to their limited capacity. Large rays are not as effective against small targets due to their size covering only a small portion of the target.
Have nosferatus be able to "focus" rays (similar to missile explosion velocity) up to a certain percentage to be able to get better effects on larger or smaller targets. The "focus" amount depends on your Energy Emission Systems skill. The vampire ships should get this bonus in addition to amount bonus.
Background info:
Condor with my Cap skills (skills round 4) at peak regenerates about 5 cap per second.
Scorpion with my skills at peak regenerates about 18 cap per second.
A small nos I on my barebone Condor would add up to 2.6 cap per second. Translated to percentage, it is about 50% per module.
A heavy nos I on my barebone scorp would add up to 8.3 cap per second, which is again about 50%
Nos Module description:
This module reduces the capacitor regeneration rate of the target ship by a percentage and is capable of transfring some of the cap amount to the ship, which is using this module.
Percentages: about 35% for Nosferatu I. Every next module is better by 5%.
Ray size: This parameter determines effectiveness of the module against a different size ship. Ideally the ray will fully cover the ship. If the ship's sig radius is smaller than ray radius by 10%, the target's regeneration rate is affected by a 10% lesser amount. This works also the other way around - if ray radius is smaller than target ship's sig radius by 10%, the target's regeneration rate is affected by a lesser amount.
Size differences:
Small:
Range 5.5 km
Activation duration 3s.
Energy transfered: up to 8.
Ray radius: 50m
Medium:
Range 11km
Activation duration 6s.
Energy transfered: up to 30.
Ray radius: 125m
Heavy:
Range 11km
Activation duration 12s.
Energy transfered: up to 100
Ray radius: 400m
Scenarios:
Condor 3x Small Nos I against a Scorp:
Target's regeneration rate with no skills is reduced by 3 x 35% x (50m / 480m) = 11%.
Since Scorp regenerates 18 cap per second at peak, if hit with 3x Small nos during this time, ScorpÆs regeneration rate would be reduced by 18 * 11% = 2 cap per second. Condor's cap regen is increased by about 50% and Scorp is not hurt by much.
Scorp 3x Large Nos I against a Condor:
Target's regeneration rate is reduced by 3 x 35% x (37m / 400m) = 9.7%.
Since Condor regenerates 5 cap per second at peak, if hit with 3x Large Nos during this time, CondorÆs regeneration rate would be reduced by 5 cap/s * 9.7% = 0.45 cap per second. Neither ship benefits or loses much. Condor can likely run an additional scrammer.
Scorp 3x Large Diminishing Nos against a Scorp:
Target's regeneration rate is reduced by 3 x 47% x (400m / 480m) = 117%.
Since Scorp regenerates 18 cap per second at peak, if hit with 3x Small nos during this time, it's regeneration rate would be reduced by 18 cap/s * 117% = 21 cap per second. The victim Scorp would be rapidly losing cap at peak and the Scorp with Noses would be getting nar double regen rate.
Condor vs Condor:
Well you get the idea... Victim gets shut down.
|
I'm WithStupid
|
Posted - 2006.10.23 13:48:00 -
[2]
Cap Neutralizers:
Apply the similar principle to neuts. You sacrifice your own cap regeneration rate in order to kill the targetÆs cap. Make two percentages: one for scarification and one for the target, but get rid of max transfer amounts. Sacrificed amount varies depending on how much targetÆs cap is killed.
Possible issues with this solution:
Painted targets get Nos reduction.
If a friendly ship uses Nos on the friendly, the target has to bring his cap into peak regen at 30%.
Interesting thoughts:
- Passive tanking ships are not really good targets for Noses.
- DonÆt use your own cap at all and the Nosing ship will not gain much cap because you are not near your peak.
Other thoughts:
Can you think of a reason to keep max transfer amounts or can we get rid of them given the mechanics? Can you guys think of any others possible issues with this approach? What do you think in general about the idea?
|
I'm WithStupid
|
Posted - 2006.10.23 14:51:00 -
[3]
Edited by: I''m WithStupid on 23/10/2006 14:52:03
Cap Neutralizers:
Apply the similar principle to neuts. You sacrifice your own cap regeneration rate in order to kill the targetÆs cap. Make two percentages: one for scarification and one for the target, but get rid of max transfer amounts. Sacrificed amount varies depending on how much targetÆs cap is killed.
Possible issues with this solution:
Painted targets get Nos reduction.
If a friendly ship uses Nos on the friendly, the target has to bring his cap into peak regen at 30%.
Interesting thoughts:
- Passive tanking ships are not really good targets for Noses.
- DonÆt use your own cap at all and the Nosing ship will not gain much cap because you are not near your peak.
Other thoughts:
Can you think of a reason to keep max transfer amounts or can we get rid of them given the mechanics? Can you guys think of any others possible issues with this approach? What do you think in general about the idea?
Edit: Posted with my alt^^^
|
Dryxonedes Sae
Whine Distillery
|
Posted - 2006.10.23 15:33:00 -
[4]
It's the last resort for a large ship to fight with multiple small ones... Lets just make battleships obsolete, so that simply you can no longer undock anything bar a cruiser without a small fleet to accompany you. It might be fine for fleet/moderate gang warfare, but not every has that option availiable all the time. Check out the "tracking" on a busted power transformer on a light pole near you... Does it care how small you are? I don't think so, you come close enough for a power source to bridge itself, it's going to, in full force.
Now i know it gets said time and time again about RL comparisons, but to nuke the use of nos removes the viability to fly larger vessles without considerable support. They're fine as they are, you want to engage something that will deal nos, take something to counter it... I find myself flying cruisers/frigs more frequently than battleships, but I deal with the nos factor as it comes, because i know it's a very limited resource, far far far from being a win button against smart enough opponents.
Learn to deal with it rather than trying to make the game easier for yourself.
(Disclaimer: NOS-domi's are a problem, but i feel more related to ecm than the nos...)
****
Where's the problem? It's called natural selection - The bottom of the ****ing food chain. -Denis Leary |
Ayanami Nova
Gallente
Mercs With Attitude
|
Posted - 2006.10.23 15:51:00 -
[5]
 Originally by: Dryxonedes Sae
It's the last resort for a large ship to fight with multiple small ones... Lets just make battleships obsolete, so that simply you can no longer undock anything bar a cruiser without a small fleet to accompany you. It might be fine for fleet/moderate gang warfare, but not every has that option availiable all the time. Check out the "tracking" on a busted power transformer on a light pole near you... Does it care how small you are? I don't think so, you come close enough for a power source to bridge itself, it's going to, in full force.
Now i know it gets said time and time again about RL comparisons, but to nuke the use of nos removes the viability to fly larger vessles without considerable support. They're fine as they are, you want to engage something that will deal nos, take something to counter it... I find myself flying cruisers/frigs more frequently than battleships, but I deal with the nos factor as it comes, because i know it's a very limited resource, far far far from being a win button against smart enough opponents.
Learn to deal with it rather than trying to make the game easier for yourself.
(Disclaimer: NOS-domi's are a problem, but i feel more related to ecm than the nos...)
What a load of rubbish. Every battleship can carry 5 small drones and so is perfectly capable of fending off attacking frigs/inty's/AF's.
I think the OP's idea is one of the best i have heard for balancing heavy nos against frigs. They would still have their caps drined so would need to disengage but it wouldnt be in one cycle - sounds good to me
 |
50freefly
Caldari
Purify
|
Posted - 2006.10.23 16:37:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Ayanami Nova
Edited by: Ayanami Nova on 23/10/2006 15:56:19
Originally by: Dryxonedes Sae
It's the last resort for a large ship to fight with multiple small ones... Lets just make battleships obsolete, so that simply you can no longer undock anything bar a cruiser without a small fleet to accompany you. It might be fine for fleet/moderate gang warfare, but not every has that option availiable all the time. Check out the "tracking" on a busted power transformer on a light pole near you... Does it care how small you are? I don't think so, you come close enough for a power source to bridge itself, it's going to, in full force.
Now i know it gets said time and time again about RL comparisons, but to nuke the use of nos removes the viability to fly larger vessles without considerable support. They're fine as they are, you want to engage something that will deal nos, take something to counter it... I find myself flying cruisers/frigs more frequently than battleships, but I deal with the nos factor as it comes, because i know it's a very limited resource, far far far from being a win button against smart enough opponents.
Learn to deal with it rather than trying to make the game easier for yourself.
(Disclaimer: NOS-domi's are a problem, but i feel more related to ecm than the nos...)
What a load of rubbish. Every battleship can carry 5 small drones and so is perfectly capable of fending off attacking frigs/inty's/AF's.
I think the OP's idea is one of the best i have heard for balancing heavy nos against frigs. They would still have their caps drained so would need to disengage but it wouldnt be in one cycle - sounds good to me
No.
I think that heavy nos having 9.7 percent effect on a frigate is ridiculous, and it would make heavy nosferatus (and indirectly battleships) obselete.
Say I am in a tempest and I get attacked by 2 taranises. I deploy my medium drones, which are promptly destroyed by the taranises. I launch my light drones, which are again destroyed (trust me, frigs kill drones FAST). Bye bye drones. Now, I can no longer kill the interceptors because my guns can't hit them (even with web) and I do not have drones. So, to fix this I have my Nos to scare them off and render them useless (2 interceptors should NOT be able to beat an enormous battleship).
The way the OP is proposing to change nosferatus would make it so that those 2 taranises could easily destroy my tempest. That's just not right.
(By the way, I fly taranises and not tempests, so this is not a biased opinion)
Originally by: Eight Ace
For reasons that have been lost in the mists of time all caldari ships are designed by two people. One does the left hand side and the other does the right.
And they never meet.
|
Rafein
Eye of God
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2006.10.23 17:12:00 -
[7]
actually, last I heard, tux was going to add a module to reduce the effectiveness of NOS on your ship, which is how it should be.
You counter a Damper with a Sensor Booster, Tracking disrupter with a Tracking computer, NOS with a anti-nos mod
|
Ayanami Nova
Gallente
Mercs With Attitude
|
Posted - 2006.10.23 17:34:00 -
[8]
No.
I think that heavy nos having 9.7 percent effect on a frigate is ridiculous, and it would make heavy nosferatus (and indirectly battleships) obselete.
Say I am in a tempest and I get attacked by 2 taranises. I deploy my medium drones, which are promptly destroyed by the taranises. I launch my light drones, which are again destroyed (trust me, frigs kill drones FAST). Bye bye drones. Now, I can no longer kill the interceptors because my guns can't hit them (even with web) and I do not have drones. So, to fix this I have my Nos to scare them off and render them useless (2 interceptors should NOT be able to beat an enormous battleship).
The way the OP is proposing to change nosferatus would make it so that those 2 taranises could easily destroy my tempest. That's just not right.
(By the way, I fly taranises and not tempests, so this is not a biased opinion)
Why is a heavy module not being as effective against a smaller ship unbalanced ?
Cruise missiles are less effective against frigs.
Large Turrets are less effective against frigs.
Heavy drones are less effective against frigs.
There is a pattern here. To say that a change like this would make battleships "obsolete" is being over dramatic and just makes you sound silly.
Anyway 10% of the amount that a heavy nos darins when used in context against the massive amount of armour/sheild that a BS has will still get the job done, just not instantly. If you havent drained the frig by the time it gets anywhere near scracthing you then your a pretty crap pilot. And for your tempest example, like i originally said - carry 5 light drones.
|
Jak'ai
Minmatar
The Temple of Ash Ock
|
Posted - 2006.10.23 19:05:00 -
[9]
I'd rather see Nos act as a positive feedback thing. Cycles every second and increases in power (exponentially? geometrically?) with each cycle up to the listed maximum for the module size.
If the module effect is broken (i.e. target out of range) the next time the module activates it's back down to 1 again and must cycle up.
This keeps the effectiveness of the Nos against less agile, larger ships while allowing smaller, more agile ships an "out" in that if they can get out of range quick enough they won't feel the full effect of the module.
|
Tunajuice
|
Posted - 2006.10.23 19:32:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Tunajuice on 23/10/2006 19:33:01
Small ships have many many benefits when fighting large ships.
They are faster, so they dictate range.
They have a smaller sig radius, so they take much less damage.
They are able to render many weapons on a big ship useless due to speed and size.
NOS is what gives big ships a counter to smaller ships. I think the game is already too balanced towards small ships... being big should have definite advantages. Otherwise.. the only thing a battleship is better at killing (than a HAC) is another battleship. So why ue them? 5 hacs or af's can beat 5 BS's... and have a lot more speed to go along with it.
There has to be benefits to being big. If you take this away, then you need to add in things like battleship sized resist mods (start with 60% for tech1), battleship size shield amps (start with 50% at tech1), battleship sized webbers (start at 90% 30km for tech1), etc. etc.
|
|
xaioguai
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2006.10.23 19:50:00 -
[11]
Just add cap activation cost to NOS, problem solve.
2 heavy nos tabbing on a ceptor, heavy nos' activation cost is greater than reciving cap, you screw up your own cap balance.
2 heavy nos tabbing on a cap rich BS, you drain other bs's cap and use it for yourself.
2 heavy nos tabbing on a cap empty BS, you nuke your own cap.
heavy nos can longer activate if your cap is dry up. always think who you are tabbing to and reserve the last bit of cap.
make nos less brainless module which currently tabbing on something small will make it's cap dry and keep it dry without slightest management skill and without harm to self.
|
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |