Yes, but it would compare the actual amounts of cap instead of percentages of the ship's full pool.

What if you made it a function instead of binary? IE it drains less and less cap the more I have over my opponents ship, so in excel the equation would look something like this:

MIN(1, TheirCap / MyCap) * BaseDrainAmount = AmountDrained

If you wanted to get really fancy, you could do a squared over squared equation to increase the penalty for having more cap than your opponents.

Thoughts?

Oh and if you need more feedback about energy warfare.

A complete overhaul of cap batteries is needed.

Which means, XL Cap batteries, fitting requirements inline with capboosters, capacitor efficiency inline with capboosters too.

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.

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 125 cap in your cap pool, and your opponent has 370, 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)

If this were combined with a fitting change to make them easier to tack on then they would probably enjoy some use and popularity but at present I can't think of that many situations where I would prefer them over a neut even with the change.

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.

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. .

Currently NPC's for NOS targeting is good to OK... I hope that doesn't change else my Incursion Bhaal with double 39km range NOS will no longer be CAP stable

Do NPC's cap change/deleplete like pilots? It seems different especially since you can't NEUT NPC's effectively

This is way more sane than the %cap mechanic. It might actually be worth making vamp fit tackle again!

i am going to pretend i konw what this means and support it.

well for example, with the proposed change, if youre in a battleship with 7000 cap and you want to NOS a cruiser with 2000 cap, you need to be at < 2000 cap for your NOS to work at all right?

with my proposal, if you had 7000 cap and you were NOSing a ship with 2000 cap, your NOS would work but only at 28.5%, so instead of draining 120 cap every cycle, it would drain 34.28

this would mean you get something every cycle, and for those pilots who are really good at math, they can run some numbers and actually use this information to figure out how much cap their ship has.

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.

well for example, with the proposed change, if youre in a battleship with 7000 cap and you want to NOS a cruiser with 2000 cap, you need to be at < 2000 cap for your NOS to work at all right?

with my proposal, if you had 7000 cap and you were NOSing a ship with 2000 cap, your NOS would work but only at 28.5%, so instead of draining 120 cap every cycle, it would drain 34.28

this would mean you get something every cycle, and for those pilots who are really good at math, they can run some numbers and actually use this information to figure out how much cap their ship has.

altho i think the change is kewl, it isnt more realistic.

when you hook 2 batteries, capacitors with different charges or any combo of power holding devices together, they will come to a balance.
1 10 volt battery hooked to a cap with 5 volts will stabilize at 7.5 volts each if the cap is big enough to hold the electrons the battery has. they will balance out. somewhere.

if you kill power on the cap, itll drain it from the battery down to another balance point.

a neut sends you cap "out of phase" to another ship and "shorts out" an amount of cap.
a nos is like hooking jumper cables from one vehicle to another.
if the charged car is not running, the dead car could drain the good battery to a point where neither car can start.

altho the way it was sucked, its more realistic.
now, its more like a leech or lamprey. it sucks a certain amount of blood until the host is dry (or atleast less that the lamprey).

imagine how the sentinnel and the curse is going to perform. a nos and 2 neuts....suck it out, then turn it back on someone...=)