| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Gogela
Freeport Exploration
Loosely Affiliated Pirates Alliance
3149
   |
Posted - 2014.04.01 16:22:00 -
[31] - Quote
I hope we're not getting April foolzed. I love the NOS. It would be sweet for it to make a comeback.
|
Markku Laaksonen
EVE University
Ivy League
423
|
Posted - 2014.04.01 17:04:00 -
[32] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:...enhancements to batteries?
You mean make them worth considering ever?
DUST 514 Recruit Code - https://dust514.com/recruit/zluCyb/
EVE Buddy Invite - https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=047203f1-4124-42a1-b36f-39ca8ae5d6e2&action=buddy
|
Phoenix Jones
Dropbears Anonymous
Brave Collective
456
|
Posted - 2014.04.01 17:15:00 -
[33] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: (sorry about the formatting, but if you copy and paste the text into a spreadsheet it should format correctly):
Upgrade the forums to support tables.
Stabbers are totally broken
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=15116553
|
Akrasjel Lanate
Naquatech Conglomerate
Naquatech Syndicate
1504
|
Posted - 2014.04.01 17:24:00 -
[34] - Quote
Nice |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
688
|
Posted - 2014.04.01 17:28:00 -
[35] - Quote
Deeone wrote:Speaking of blood raider ships how but giving the skin some love it looks like its covered in poo now not blood......It would be nice to see NOS actually useful again.
would be nice too see the Bhaalgorn getting a unique model since the cruor and ashimmu does .. i also love the ship skin ... i don't know what your poo looks like .. but it looks like blood to me.. at least when you zoom in .. perhaps its small box icon pic could use brightening up.
on second thought the 2 smaller ones do look rather brown .. gorn is red though
Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists
ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic.
Nerf web strength ..... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
688
|
Posted - 2014.04.01 17:30:00 -
[36] - Quote
Markku Laaksonen wrote:Arthur Aihaken wrote:...enhancements to batteries? You mean make them worth considering ever?
there too difficult to fit ... at least half there fitting requirements .. probably needs a 3rd off really..
Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists
ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic.
Nerf web strength ..... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
Capqu
Love Squad
Pasta Syndicate
416
|
Posted - 2014.04.01 19:11:00 -
[37] - Quote
nos is primarily anti-neut, and in that role this is a hella effective buff so thumbs up
edit: im dumb
http://pizza.eve-kill.net |
Crazy KSK
Tsunami Cartel
Gank for Profit
78
|
Posted - 2014.04.01 20:33:00 -
[38] - Quote
I am very concerned that this changed might make it too easy for frigates to hold tackle on bigger ships possibly making it impossible to neut a frigate to loose its tackle
I am all for frigates being used more maybe one day in large scale combat but I don't think this will do any good atleast for small NOS
on med and large it will probably not cause much of a change, ships that already fit NOS will get more cap from it, others will not care
the new blood ships have other much more weighty issues then NOS power
Quote CCP Fozzie:
... The days of balance and forget are over.
|
Blind Molechild
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2014.04.01 20:51:00 -
[39] - Quote
Quote:the new Blood Raider ship line. |
big miker
Viperfleet Inc.
Disavowed.
69
|
Posted - 2014.04.01 22:06:00 -
[40] - Quote
Crazy KSK wrote:I am very concerned that this changed might make it too easy for frigates to hold tackle on bigger ships possibly making it impossible to neut a frigate to loose its tackle
I am all for frigates being used more maybe one day in large scale combat but I don't think this will do any good atleast for small NOS
Exactly. Not to mention the new cycle times will buff AB's or better yet, dual propulsion frigates too.
Small Diminishing power system draws 9.6 capacitor per cycle per 2.5s.
Now let's say a frigate with maxed skills fits the following mods:
1mn AB II - Consumes 5.5 capacitor per 7.5 seconds
Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I - Consumes 3 capacitor per 5 seconds
Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I - Consumes 3 capacitor per 5 seconds
11.5 capacitor consumed if you want to run everything permanently.
One small nosferatu would not be enough to run all those 3 modules, but it would allow to run 2 of them at the same time.
A buff like this would mean an even bigger threat for larger ships.
This would mean almost any frigate pilot with a decent fit is able to tackle and hold a larger ship down VERY easy. Yes, they are ment to tackle larger ships but with these changes it almost get's to the point there's no 'skill' involved for tackling. Sure frigates have to deal with light drones and the like. But usually fleets arrive before their tackler get's killed anyways.
Just my 2 cents! Apologies for my English.
|
|
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1201
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 03:02:00 -
[41] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:With improvements to NOS, are we going to see enhancements to batteries?
I would rather see significant ease of their fittings. I believe the effects currently are balanced relative to the other cap mods. They normally give less cap than a cap recharger, but have the NOS/Neut protection also. The issue with Batteries is that their fitting cost is huge. Massive PG cost & more CPU |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
2039
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 07:39:00 -
[42] - Quote
This isn't enough btw, they need either a fitting buff or a bigger rof buff than this
BYDI recruitment closed-ish |
Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
352
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 09:00:00 -
[43] - Quote
Eh... It's a beneficial change I guess. But the fix you REALLY need to make is to correct the fitting issues.
Until the PG/CPU costs are reduced down to Neut level or lower, the module is still only going to see use on specific tackle ships. And as many have pointed out, the changes you are proposing only make it MORE likely they will be fitted on tackle boats as opposed to more widespread use. While you are at it, you could also take a look at making Cap Batteries NOT suck (again fitting issues). |
Calexis Atredies
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
3
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 11:57:00 -
[44] - Quote
I knew this change was coming. This combined with the upcoming changes to the pirate faction line of cruisers is going to make the Ashimu a monster, about time.
Have already been stockpiling A-type med nos, thank you CCP. |
Johann Rascali
Crunchy Crunchy
The Obsidian Front
95
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 17:43:00 -
[45] - Quote
Another vote for changing their fitting requirements. They feel like they still have huge requirements that tried to balance them back when they worked like neuts that gave energy back. They don't any more, so they shouldn't be so agonizing to fit.
Welcome to our universe where cooldown timers are a mystery, the PLEX menu is just an advertisement, shrapnel bombs deal explosive force, concussion bombs are somehow kinetically penetrative, and who left all these prototype Inferno modules all over the place? |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
598
|
Posted - 2014.04.03 09:59:00 -
[46] - Quote
Johann Rascali wrote:Another vote for changing their fitting requirements. They feel like they still have huge requirements that tried to balance them back when they worked like neuts that gave energy back. They don't any more, so they shouldn't be so agonizing to fit.
it's pretty funny when a single nos uses up more fitting than all of my guns combined. |
King Fu Hostile
Imperial Collective
Unsettled.
21
|
Posted - 2014.04.03 11:07:00 -
[47] - Quote
Thanks for removing the utility highs from both Gallente HACs
|
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
5568
|
Posted - 2014.04.04 21:47:00 -
[48] - Quote
Quote:I told you that last summer's Nos mechanic change would fail and something like this would be necessary. 
I'm not sure what your point is, as they freely acknowledged that tweaks along this line might be necessary.
They simply wanted to get some hard metrics to work with first before taking any next steps.
Also, your definition of "fail" is a bit odd... as the changes are overall working as intended. They are simply tweaking the ROF on the module, not changing the mechanic.
To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors.
If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
1162
|
Posted - 2014.04.04 22:22:00 -
[49] - Quote
Ranger!
But you said that Nos would "become more popular on all cruiser class, and several BC's", which was predictably wrong. I mean, you didn't even notice how few utility slots modern cruisers have!
I said that the mechanic changes was a bad idea because it would have minimal effect on usage patterns and future changes would be required, particularly for heavy Nos... which was right. Especially for the heavy Nos bit, which is being ignored in this crude blanket change and will require another set of fixing in in the future...  |
Renge Ukyo
MASS A DEATH
Mordus Angels
11
|
Posted - 2014.04.05 03:28:00 -
[50] - Quote
I'm not as devout and EFT warrior as some but it seems to me the cycle time is only half the battle. The fitting requirements make even an electron blaster fit atron difficult to fly with a nos on unless your ACR a rig somewhere. At this point in my career with perfect fitting skills it seems kinda strange when I need to rig something like that, or throw a chip in my head to turn on a nos. The cost/benefit ratio is kind of skewed there for me.
The module I'd like to see fixed are cap batteries. I'd like to see greater resistance to nueting and nossing on them, less in the way of fitting requirement, and perhaps a reasonable cap pool boost. Seems like fixing an active module like the nos is putting the cart before the horse. What's needed is a capacitor with greater resistance to nueting, and enough size to get things done. Perhaps as a new low slot module, or just fixing the existing mid slot. But it needs more attention than the Nos at the moment.
- Renge |
|
|
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
2040
|
Posted - 2014.04.05 16:54:00 -
[51] - Quote
King Fu Hostile wrote:Thanks for removing the utility highs from both Gallente HACs
Utility highs are worth less than any other slot..
BYDI recruitment closed-ish |
Flyinghotpocket
Amarrian Vengeance
Team Amarrica
306
|
Posted - 2014.04.05 19:32:00 -
[52] - Quote
King Fu Hostile wrote:Thanks for removing the utility highs from both Gallente HACs
your welcome for the extra mid on the deimos for cap injection.
anybody else remember the 3 mid diemost? |
Nyancat Audeles
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
739
|
Posted - 2014.04.05 23:50:00 -
[53] - Quote
Awesome changes! Thanks! |
Lord Eremet
The Seatbelts
26
|
Posted - 2014.04.06 10:12:00 -
[54] - Quote
As some already said, they need to be a bit more 'fitting'-friendly to be considered, and the nos drainage scale up with each size.
|
Talcuris
Dragon Clan
Nulli Secunda
5
|
Posted - 2014.04.06 15:43:00 -
[55] - Quote
Since you are revisiting the topic of energy leeching, could the currently fairly useless Semiconductor Memory rigs maybe get the same treatment the battery modules got with their reflect bonus?
The game mechanics look to be in place already, don't know if there are any programming reasons this wouldn't be a Little Thing(ߦÇߦ¦) ?
I honestly don't know _anyone_ who uses this kind of rigs as they are completely outclassed by the Capacitor Controls, with a nice little pvp only bonus there would be a serious choice between more efficient cap recharge and defense. |
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
1162
|
Posted - 2014.04.06 18:11:00 -
[56] - Quote
Talcuris wrote:Since you are revisiting the topic of energy leeching, could the currently fairly useless Semiconductor Memory rigs maybe get the same treatment the battery modules got with their reflect bonus?
The game mechanics look to be in place already, don't know if there are any programming reasons this wouldn't be a Little Thing(ߦÇߦ¦) ?
I honestly don't know _anyone_ who uses this kind of rigs as they are completely outclassed by the Capacitor Controls, with a nice little pvp only bonus there would be a serious choice between more efficient cap recharge and defense.
I use them, and I'm far from alone. |
Talcuris
Dragon Clan
Nulli Secunda
5
|
Posted - 2014.04.06 22:17:00 -
[57] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:I use them, and I'm far from alone.
Oh? What for? The only use I've ever seen was for a burst smartbomb BS.
The advantage for high burst cap use is usually so tiny that I've never really heard anyone advocating SCM's over CCC rigs. |
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
1162
|
Posted - 2014.04.07 10:39:00 -
[58] - Quote
They're used for WH dreads, particularly Naglfars and shield Moroses. Increasing your total cap amount increases the EHP gained from conversion of cap to shield via your booster.
Now, that's somewhat niche, sure, and it doesn't translate very well into k-space because of the need for cap recharge for jumping, while the value of local tank is also less than it is in WHs. But it's still a distinct use. More pertinently, giving SMCs a neut reflect bonus would be a pretty hefty, and entirely undeserved, boost to these shield dreads because neuting them is the most EHP-effective way to take one down - their efficiency of conversion of cap to shield is so great that a typical subcap is normally much better off eliminating cap, rather than letting it convert that cap into shield and removing shield by shooting it.
So, it's undeserved boost to the ships that use SMCs, while not giving much of a motivation for ones that don't use them to switch to them. "Make the good ships better while leaving the broken ones unfixed" is a classic trap that can be seen repeatedly in Eve balancing history.
For example, it's exactly what happened to Nos last summer, when small Nos, which was already pretty useful, was boosted while useless heavy Nos got nerfed. And now CCP is doing the same thing again by a blanket change to Nos ROF, which again boosts the small Nos that is arguably fine already, while not helping in the slightest the heavy Nos that actually needs serious help. It would be funny if it wasn't so predictable. |
Catherine Laartii
Knights of Xibalba
131
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 02:57:00 -
[59] - Quote
When are t2 neuts and nos getting a buff to range and/or amount? |
Flyinghotpocket
Amarrian Vengeance
Team Amarrica
306
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 20:13:00 -
[60] - Quote
so meta 4 nos and neut still better than t2. gotcha. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |