| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 24 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
|
CCP Rise
C C P
C C P Alliance
1014
   |
Posted - 2013.06.19 15:43:00 -
[1] - Quote
I have another balance announcement for our Odyssey 1.1 release to share: we are going to make NOS good again.
In ye old times, Nosferatu was fairly broken. It used to drain cap from your target regardless of how much cap your target had, and deposit it into your cap pool. This meant you could generate cap from thin air as long as you could target any ship. We had nano Dominixs permanently cap stable by draining some cap-dry frig and all kinds of other nonsense.
Unfortunately when this got addressed, it was nerfed into the ground by basing the success of the NOS activation off the relative PERCENTAGE of cap for each ship. NOS went from extremely overpowered to fairly useless. You can never depend on your opponent having a higher % cap than you, and especially not when you're using a ship that wants to win the cap war by neutralizing the enemy.
Our plan for this is fairly simple - we want to make successful NOS activation based on relative cap amount, not percentage.
This means if you turn on your NOS, and you have 50 cap in your cap pool, and your opponent has 100, the NOS works regardless of relative % cap.
The biggest effect here will most likely be that any time you're fighting up a class (frig vs cruiser, cruiser vs BS, etc) NOS will become a much more attractive choice. It also means that in fights with several ship sizes present, deciding on a target for your NOS should be more intuitive (target something big).
Gimme feedback o/
(PS - this would of course effect all sizes and all metas) |
|
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope
Gallente Federation
1187
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 15:45:00 -
[2] - Quote
So they still require you to have less cap than your target correct?
Ideas for Drone ImprovementTwitter Account-á @Omnathious |
Jonas Sukarala
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
235
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 15:47:00 -
[3] - Quote
now you just too make them fittable on said ships like frigates and cruisers as most of the time they cost twice as much to fit than the guns or launchers... its not so much of an issue on battleships because of the fitting requirements of guns and launchers are much closer.
'Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line' CCP Ytterbium
Nerf missile range into place where is the TD missile change?-á ..projectiles should use capacitor.
ABC's should be T2 HABC and nerf web strength its still too high |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
6497
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 15:48:00 -
[4] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:So they still require you to have less cap than your target correct?
Yes, but it would compare the actual amounts of cap instead of percentages of the ship's full pool.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Two step
Aperture Harmonics
K162
3820
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 15:49:00 -
[5] - Quote
I agree that a fitting change is also needed. Why do they use the same PG/grid as Neuts?
CSM 7 Secretary
CSM 6 Alternate Delegate
@two_step_eve on Twitter
My Blog
|
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
Aegis Solaris
1975
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 15:52:00 -
[6] - Quote
Hmm, I did not realize it worked that way. Shows how much I, as an industrialist, know about cap warfare.
I thought it worked by always transferring x cap from the target to you, unless the target had less than x in which case it transferred all available. You get nothing from a drained ship.
Whats wrong with it working like that?
http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope
Gallente Federation
1187
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 15:53:00 -
[7] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:So they still require you to have less cap than your target correct? Yes, but it would compare the actual amounts of cap instead of percentages of the ship's full pool.
I see nasty frigate fleets coming from this
Ideas for Drone ImprovementTwitter Account-á @Omnathious |
Aidamina Omen
Aperture Harmonics
K162
50
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 15:55:00 -
[8] - Quote
I always thought the percentage system was dumb, especially on inter-class fights. Glad it's getting addressed. Makes them a lot more viable, without making neuts obsolete. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
6497
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 15:55:00 -
[9] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:Hmm, I did not realize it worked that way. Shows how much I, as an industrialist, know about cap warfare.
I thought it worked by always transferring x cap from the target to you, unless the target had less than x in which case it transferred all available. You get nothing from a drained ship.
Whats wrong with it working like that?
Because that makes it universally better than neuts and extremely powerful for small and large ships alike.
The eternal draining of the old NOS was just one part of the problem, even with your proposed change you'd essentially be getting all the power of a neut while usually gaining cap instead of losing it.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
l0rd carlos
Friends Of Harassment
484
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 15:59:00 -
[10] - Quote
Sounds nice!
Two step wrote:I agree that a fitting change is also needed. Why do they use the same PG/grid as Neuts?
Yeah, i have wundered that myself.
At least give us a good reason why :)
German blog about smallscale lowsec pvp: http://friendsofharassment.wordpress.com |
BadAssMcKill
Love Squad
Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
287
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 15:59:00 -
[11] - Quote
Excellent change
http://i.imgur.com/6j6cIZE.gif-á |
David Kir
Tailender
37
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 15:59:00 -
[12] - Quote
Finally we can make a proper use of those damn "utility" slots on most minnie hulls. |
Mackie Avelli
Reckless Cowards
9
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 16:01:00 -
[13] - Quote
If you're talking about numbers replacing percentages, would it be possible to use some different examples than 50 and 100 ?
|
Zircon Dasher
248
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 16:05:00 -
[14] - Quote
This is way more sane than the %cap mechanic. It might actually be worth making vamp fit tackle again!
Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'. |
Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon
Drunk 'n' Disorderly
725
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 16:06:00 -
[15] - Quote
I like how this gives capacitor flux coils a stealth buff.
You could use them to make sure ships the same size as you would always be nos'able, while increasing your cap recharge as well.
Good for shield boats that may have extra low slots. |
SIR PRIME
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
9
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 16:06:00 -
[16] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:I have another balance announcement for our Odyssey 1.1 release to share: we are going to make NOS good again.
This means if you turn on your NOS, and you have 50 cap in your cap pool, and your opponent has 100, the NOS works regardless of relative % cap.
Doesn't this make nos totally pointless in a ship with a large base cap pool as odds are you'll always have more than your opponent in a ship with a smaller pool?
|
|
CCP Rise
C C P
C C P Alliance
1016
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 16:06:00 -
[17] - Quote
Mackie Avelli wrote:If you're talking about numbers replacing percentages, would it be possible to use some different examples than 50 and 100 ?
Sure, why not. Updated OP with some other numbers. |
|
|
CCP Rise
C C P
C C P Alliance
1016
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 16:09:00 -
[18] - Quote
Quote:Doesn't this make nos totally pointless in a ship with a large base cap pool as odds are you'll always have more than your opponent in a ship with a smaller pool?
Not really. Your situation mostly depends on the assumption that you're fighting a ship in the same class which also has a smaller base cap pool. Not only is this not always going to be the case, but I'm actually expecting NOS to function primarily as a tool for fighting up a class. Using it against ships the same size as you will still be difficult and will probably only be a good choice in specific situations (like maybe if you're flying a ship that uses quite a bit of cap and doesn't inject).
Fozzie has also designed the cap pool for some of the cruisers with this change in mind, and there should be very few instances of a ship having a larger than average cap pool for its class while also having room to fit NOS. |
|
Kobea Thris
Horizon Freelance Ventures
26
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 16:09:00 -
[19] - Quote
Minor side point to this, but if you go ahead with this, you may want to look at how it will affect PVE ships who use NOS against rats, and how you want it to affect them. I would imagine that currently, Rats always have 100% cap, but don't have an actual cap amount. Going forward, that would likely mean NOS wouldn't work at all against rats.
Horizon Freelance Ventures is recruiting
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=249383&find=unread
|
Ager Agemo
Kiith Paktu
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
331
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 16:10:00 -
[20] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:Hmm, I did not realize it worked that way. Shows how much I, as an industrialist, know about cap warfare.
I thought it worked by always transferring x cap from the target to you, unless the target had less than x in which case it transferred all available. You get nothing from a drained ship.
Whats wrong with it working like that? Because that makes it universally better than neuts and extremely powerful for small and large ships alike. The eternal draining of the old NOS was just one part of the problem, even with your proposed change you'd essentially be getting all the power of a neut while usually gaining cap instead of losing it.
Hey fozzie given they cannot totally neut a ship, wouldn't it be good to maybe up the amount of total cap they currently drain? they cannot dry a ship so why not double the amount of cap they get per cycle? would make them a very interesting way to get capacitor on cap hungry ships.
and maybe just maybe increase their range a lil small bit? |
Edward Pierce
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
56
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 16:13:00 -
[21] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Because that makes it universally better than neuts and extremely powerful for small and large ships alike.
The eternal draining of the old NOS was just one part of the problem, even with your proposed change you'd essentially be getting all the power of a neut while usually gaining cap instead of losing it.
Change it so that Nos lowers the target's cap/sec and transfers it to your own. Make it a tool for cap stability rather than a tool for cap warfare.
Your proposal is definitely better than what we've got now, but I feel it would mostly benefit non-bonused hulls where they are looking for a source of cap and not a way to drain the enemy. |
|
CCP Rise
C C P
C C P Alliance
1016
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 16:13:00 -
[22] - Quote
Quote:Minor side point to this, but if you go ahead with this, you may want to look at how it will affect PVE ships who use NOS against rats, and how you want it to affect them.
Yep the CSM brought this up and I'll make 100% sure that nothing changes for PVE'ers, but I'm already pretty sure that this change will have no effect on the behavior of NOS in PVE. |
|
HazeInADaze
L'Avant Garde
53
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 16:19:00 -
[23] - Quote
Well that makes things much better. Amarr recons/EAfrig just got a nice boost to piloting difficulty.
I would like to see sansha or blood raiders get an always-on Nos bonus with a bonus to range and/or amount. Basically a nos that works like a neut. Powerful and interesting. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
266
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 16:25:00 -
[24] - Quote
You need to increase the drain amount over time so it's equal or greater than a neutraliser. Currently a medium nos will counter a small neut, but still get wrecked by a medium neut. You can't run any kind of tank on it when it's so weak.
I'd be happy with you not doing anything to the mechanic, honestly. |
Pseudo Ucksth
B0rthole
Test Alliance Please Ignore
148
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 16:36:00 -
[25] - Quote
Cool. It's nice to see stuff that got nerfed to dust years ago being brought back up into the usable area from the nearly unusable/niche area.
The spirit of these changes gives me high hopes for the Eos |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
Aegis Solaris
1975
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 16:38:00 -
[26] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:Hmm, I did not realize it worked that way. Shows how much I, as an industrialist, know about cap warfare.
I thought it worked by always transferring x cap from the target to you, unless the target had less than x in which case it transferred all available. You get nothing from a drained ship.
Whats wrong with it working like that? Because that makes it universally better than neuts and extremely powerful for small and large ships alike. The eternal draining of the old NOS was just one part of the problem, even with your proposed change you'd essentially be getting all the power of a neut while usually gaining cap instead of losing it.
But I thought a neut killed far more of the target's cap than a nos. That gives newts more power even with my change.
http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
SMT008
SnaiLs aNd FroGs
Verge of Collapse
615
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 16:41:00 -
[27] - Quote
It's so weak it's almost of no use.
The only useful thing a NOS can achieve is being able to hold scrambler+web when neuted.
That's it.
No one ever uses NOS for anything else. Oh, maybe they use it because it fills a highslot, yeah, that too.
Seriously, if you want to make NOS worth fitting, then other solutions are to be looked at.
Increased efficiency (gets you more cap/s)
Decreased fitting cost (specifically PWG)
Or a combination of the two. |
Morwen Lagann
Tyrathlion Interstellar
686
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 16:42:00 -
[28] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Gimme feedback o/
As someone who loves capacitor warfare, and the Curse in particular, you and the rest of the guys working on balance changes have just made my week.
THANK YOU.
Morwen Lagann
Director, Tyrathlion Interstellar |
Berluth Luthian
Meltdown.
80
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 16:43:00 -
[29] - Quote
Will the effect of batteries change on this then or how will their leech modifier stack against this effect? |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
267
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 16:57:00 -
[30] - Quote
SMT008 wrote:It's so weak it's almost of no use.
The only useful thing a NOS can achieve is being able to hold scrambler+web when neuted.
That's it.
No one ever uses NOS for anything else. Oh, maybe they use it because it fills a highslot, yeah, that too.
Seriously, if you want to make NOS worth fitting, then other solutions are to be looked at.
Increased efficiency (gets you more cap/s)
Decreased fitting cost (specifically PWG)
Or a combination of the two.
Yeah the fitting is pretty crazy as well. If they're going to remain less of a module than a neut, it'd be cool if they used less fitting. Or they could bring neutraliser powergrid usage up to what it used to be. |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 24 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |