EVE Search - Capitol NOS

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Capitol NOS

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Kaylana Syi	Posted - 2006.05.19 13:28:00 - [31] Originally by: Krulla To all the people going "sure, would bring carriers to the front" etc.. If a ship class needs one single module to be effective, and cannot compete without it, there's either problems with the ship or the module. Translation : Dominix, Typhoon, Bhalghorn, every minmatar ship with secondary missile slots, ravens, ferox, vexor and the ishtar all need to be fixed. Originally by: "Oveur" I don't react to threats any better than you do
Xenon Cypher	Posted - 2006.05.19 13:45:00 - [32] Also - bring in capitol MWDs so that we can have a MWDing Capitol-NOS Moros *shudders
Pointless Vengence	Posted - 2006.05.19 13:46:00 - [33] Originally by: Krulla To all the people going "sure, would bring carriers to the front" etc.. If a ship class needs one single module to be effective, and cannot compete without it, there's either problems with the ship or the module. I disagree. Mining Barges and Strip Miners? Drones and drone ships? ECM and Blackbirds? Sensor Damps and Celestis? Cloaks and Covert Ops Frigs? Modules help a ship fulfill its role. Some people may be comfortable keeping their carriers in the background, and others may want to bring theirs to the front line. If a capital Nos would make brining carriers and motherships to the front lines easier for some players, go for it. The point of the game is to have fun . . . a XL Nos would increase role diversity and game enjoyment for capital ship owners. For some, a ship that cannot have action in the front lines would be boring, rendering ownership of such a ship for enjoyment . . . -Pointless
Krulla	Posted - 2006.05.19 14:04:00 - [34] Edited by: Krulla on 19/05/2006 14:04:20 Originally by: Pointless Vengence Originally by: Krulla To all the people going "sure, would bring carriers to the front" etc.. If a ship class needs one single module to be effective, and cannot compete without it, there's either problems with the ship or the module. I disagree. Mining Barges and Strip Miners? Drones and drone ships? ECM and Blackbirds? Sensor Damps and Celestis? Cloaks and Covert Ops Frigs? Modules help a ship fulfill its role. Some people may be comfortable keeping their carriers in the background, and others may want to bring theirs to the front line. If a capital Nos would make brining carriers and motherships to the front lines easier for some players, go for it. The point of the game is to have fun . . . a XL Nos would increase role diversity and game enjoyment for capital ship owners. For some, a ship that cannot have action in the front lines would be boring, rendering ownership of such a ship for enjoyment . . . -Pointless Uh. Every single ship and module you mentioned are tailored to the use of that module. The only ships tailored to using nosferatu are the blood raider faction ships. The Domi isn't tailored to using nosferatu (Although a blasterdomi is twice as lethal as a nosdom, but people are sheep and just use the FOTM without thinking), neither is the vexor - Yet people choose to kit them out with nosferatu rather than fit them with the modules they get bonii for - And doesn't this say something about the power of nos? Saying Carriers can't compete without xl Nos says to me that carriers are broken. Adding xl Nos just to make carriers more viable would be a bandaid fix at best and would ultimately harm the game. Tarkin > Omfg, frigs are such bs. Red 5 > lolol, lern 2 play plz noob SIG HIJACK!!11 RAWRR!!1- IMMY
Kaylana Syi	Posted - 2006.05.19 15:43:00 - [35] Edited by: Kaylana Syi on 19/05/2006 15:43:46 Originally by: Krulla Yet people choose to kit them out with nosferatu rather than fit them with the modules they get bonii for - And doesn't this say something about the power of nos? No it tells me that medium blasters have obscene fittings and rails on gallente cruisers are suicide. It doesn't mean the NOS is overpowered but that it better serves the close range role as a weapon than medium blasters. Quote: Saying Carriers can't compete without xl Nos says to me that carriers are broken. Adding xl Nos just to make carriers more viable would be a bandaid fix at best and would ultimately harm the game. Says to me that : a) People want there to be continuity between the small drone carriers like the arbitrator, vexor, dominix and typhoon. b) Some people are afraid of allowing continuity to take place. c) Opinions are like arses... everyones got one and they all stink. Originally by: "Oveur" I don't react to threats any better than you do
Weirda	Posted - 2006.05.19 15:58:00 - [36] Originally by: Kaylana Syi Edited by: Kaylana Syi on 19/05/2006 15:43:46 Originally by: Krulla Yet people choose to kit them out with nosferatu rather than fit them with the modules they get bonii for - And doesn't this say something about the power of nos? No it tells me that medium blasters have obscene fittings and rails on gallente cruisers are suicide. It doesn't mean the NOS is overpowered but that it better serves the close range role as a weapon than medium blasters. Quote: Saying Carriers can't compete without xl Nos says to me that carriers are broken. Adding xl Nos just to make carriers more viable would be a bandaid fix at best and would ultimately harm the game. Says to me that : a) People want there to be continuity between the small drone carriers like the arbitrator, vexor, dominix and typhoon. b) Some people are afraid of allowing continuity to take place. c) Opinions are like arses... everyones got one and they all stink. sorry kay... krulla is right... you are either wrong or just not reading his post. a) is ridiculuous b) is straw man.../ad hominum (either way - invalid and irrelevant) c) is true... but borders on toolishly embarassing in this context... saying that carrier cannot compete w/o nos is saying that there is something wrong with both them AND nos. if the nos alone is what would fix them, then it is the nos that is broken. not gonna comment on blasters on ship vs. nos. regardless... everyone is afraid to comment on weirda idea because it would mean that they might need to figure out how to manage their nos while fighting... see sig... __ NOS AS WCS Idea #223579
Prestis	Posted - 2006.05.19 16:00:00 - [37] The issue with NOS is it destroying much more expensive high-skill smaller T2 ships (ie. Cruiser vs AF or BS vs HAC). But since capital ships start at 10x BS prices, I don't see the problem with this. Capital ships aren't very 'capital' at the moment anyway.
Pax Uranus	Posted - 2006.05.19 16:44:00 - [38] Originally by: Prestis The issue with NOS is it destroying much more expensive high-skill smaller T2 ships (ie. Cruiser vs AF or BS vs HAC). There's one small problem with the ship "price" part of your argument, and the problem is that you're looking at balance from the standpoint of player-run market valuations. What the average player pays isn't what T2 ships actually cost to make. Just because a HAC may "cost" anywhere from 2-4 times what a BS does (or an AF costing 3-7 times what a Cruiser does) isn't a license for it to OMGWTFBBQBLICK the larger ship.
Krulla	Posted - 2006.05.19 16:45:00 - [39] Originally by: Prestis The issue with NOS is it destroying much more expensive high-skill smaller T2 ships (ie. Cruiser vs AF or BS vs HAC). But since capital ships start at 10x BS prices, I don't see the problem with this. Capital ships aren't very 'capital' at the moment anyway. Wallets don't determine who should win a fight. Tarkin > Omfg, frigs are such bs. Red 5 > lolol, lern 2 play plz noob SIG HIJACK!!11 RAWRR!!1- IMMY
Weirda	Posted - 2006.05.19 17:46:00 - [40] Originally by: Krulla Originally by: Prestis The issue with NOS is it destroying much more expensive high-skill smaller T2 ships (ie. Cruiser vs AF or BS vs HAC). But since capital ships start at 10x BS prices, I don't see the problem with this. Capital ships aren't very 'capital' at the moment anyway. Wallets don't determine who should win a fight. yeah - weirda demand that daredevil and dramiel (and hell even hookbill) should be able to easily solo all t1 BS... __ NOS AS WCS Idea #223579
Kaylana Syi	Posted - 2006.05.19 18:23:00 - [41] Originally by: Weirda Originally by: Kaylana Syi Edited by: Kaylana Syi on 19/05/2006 15:43:46 Originally by: Krulla Yet people choose to kit them out with nosferatu rather than fit them with the modules they get bonii for - And doesn't this say something about the power of nos? No it tells me that medium blasters have obscene fittings and rails on gallente cruisers are suicide. It doesn't mean the NOS is overpowered but that it better serves the close range role as a weapon than medium blasters. Quote: Saying Carriers can't compete without xl Nos says to me that carriers are broken. Adding xl Nos just to make carriers more viable would be a bandaid fix at best and would ultimately harm the game. Says to me that : a) People want there to be continuity between the small drone carriers like the arbitrator, vexor, dominix and typhoon. b) Some people are afraid of allowing continuity to take place. c) Opinions are like arses... everyones got one and they all stink. sorry kay... krulla is right... you are either wrong or just not reading his post. a) is ridiculuous b) is straw man.../ad hominum (either way - invalid and irrelevant) c) is true... but borders on toolishly embarassing in this context... saying that carrier cannot compete w/o nos is saying that there is something wrong with both them AND nos. if the nos alone is what would fix them, then it is the nos that is broken. not gonna comment on blasters on ship vs. nos. regardless... everyone is afraid to comment on weirda idea because it would mean that they might need to figure out how to manage their nos while fighting... see sig... I never said they couldn't compete. My foolishly toolish c) was directed at the sheep statement... cause imo Krulla is a sheep for saying others are sheep because its sheepish for the cool clued in kids to say other people are sheep because they follow common advice. And I don't believe Krulla is anywhere near correct thinking a domi is more dangerous with blasters than with NOS as the TQ stands. However, I find the new Blasterthron changes are going to put the nail in the coffin for any blaster domi setup. Domis will NEED NOS and Ewar to compete with the new Blasterthron. Hell, a Tempest cannot tank a well fit Blasterthron with 2 NOS, 6 dual 650s IIs, t2 ammo and a 2 x LAR II setup, and has to switch to torpedos to remain king of the AC vs Blaster war. The topic is about capital NOS tho so I wont' digress anymore... I don't think NOS is going to be a problem next patch. I think Capital NOS would be really funny in that ships would NEED NOS in fleet battle just to shoot their guns and allow for ships like the megathron to actually rise to occasion in the new scenario of fleet war. I'd like to test it first because it sounds promising. But if not... oh well. Originally by: "Oveur" I don't react to threats any better than you do
Crellion	Posted - 2006.05.19 18:29:00 - [42] Oh I see it now.... A single BS can pown a Moros with no capital NOS. If the Moros fits 1 capital NOS the Moros > 1 single BS. Yes that a trvavesty of justice...
Laboratus	Posted - 2006.05.19 21:30:00 - [43] Edited by: Laboratus on 19/05/2006 21:33:00 Originally by: Crellion Oh I see it now.... A single BS can pown a Moros with no capital NOS. If the Moros fits 1 capital NOS the Moros > 1 single BS. Yes that a trvavesty of justice... Nope, we had around 6 I think Domies with 5 large nos es and 1 large neut trying to drain a dreads cap, didn't work. It got around 30% and stopped there. While it was repping and shooting at the same time. No use, gotto use more to drain the cap. Maybe 10 to 15 nos domis would do the trick. Perhaps. Anyways, I think they all got wasted, Wasn't there for the end of the fight. Anyways, if a cap ship wants to sacrifice a high slot for a cap nos, I think is should go ahead. But complaining that frigs cant solo BSs is like complaining that cruisers can't solo dreads or BS can't solo titans.
Malthros Zenobia	Posted - 2006.05.20 05:39:00 - [44] Originally by: Demacles For all these people who think NOS are fine just as they are, lets introduce a new module called Captiol NOS for use on capitol ships. It will devastate a BSes cap the same way a BS does anything smaller. Sound like fun? Yeah nos are fine just as they are so lets add a module for the capitol ship pilots, why should they miss out. Obviously a range bonus would be in order as well. Something in the realm of 80KM as the progression from 5 -> 10 -> 25 would denote the next step would be around 75-80. We already have counters for NOS in place so lets introduce this right? We have ECM, cap rechagers, boosters, relays, etc so why not introduce this if the NOS setup is oh so fair? Before someone suggests I was the most recent victim of a NOS domi or other BS, think again. In fact I actually fly NOS domi's I just don't think they should be nearly as effective as they are. NOS removes the need for smaller tacklers as 1 hit off a BS sized NOS on a frig can bring it to a skreaching halt. I'm down for Capital NOS, they've be about 50km range for the t1 mods, drain 300-400cap, and have probably a 20-30 second cycle time. TBH, I'd rather see Capital Shield Extenders and 10000mm armor plates. Screw the damn NOS, I want to see 200k+ armor/shield cap ships. /me wonders if Pottsey would die from happiness at the thought of a 250k or so passive tank.
Sebroth	Posted - 2006.05.20 10:30:00 - [45] Originally by: Demacles For all these people who think NOS are fine just as they are, lets introduce a new module called Captiol NOS for use on capitol ships. It will devastate a BSes cap the same way a BS does anything smaller. Sound like fun? Yeah nos are fine just as they are so lets add a module for the capitol ship pilots, why should they miss out. Obviously a range bonus would be in order as well. Something in the realm of 80KM as the progression from 5 -> 10 -> 25 would denote the next step would be around 75-80. We already have counters for NOS in place so lets introduce this right? We have ECM, cap rechagers, boosters, relays, etc so why not introduce this if the NOS setup is oh so fair? Before someone suggests I was the most recent victim of a NOS domi or other BS, think again. In fact I actually fly NOS domi's I just don't think they should be nearly as effective as they are. NOS removes the need for smaller tacklers as 1 hit off a BS sized NOS on a frig can bring it to a skreaching halt. yes plz and no Im not a BS pilot Im a cruiser/hac/recon ect pilot and I think that the nos is fine as its now.
FFGR	Posted - 2006.05.20 10:52:00 - [46] You can have your capital NOS when I have : BS sized EW modules that don't give a damn if you are immune to EW(14 base racial jammer) Scramblers that stop you from jumping out of system Change of Moros drone bonus to 1% worse cap recharge per level A number of other things that would make smaller ships able to kill a dread in 1 shot Thank you that would be it _____________________________ siggys v. 0.5
Cmd Woodlouse	Posted - 2006.05.20 11:02:00 - [47] yes, this would be especially good for carriers. dreads serve another purpose imo, but for carriers / motherships this would be nice to have! --------------------------------
Krulla	Posted - 2006.05.20 14:54:00 - [48] Originally by: Kaylana Syi And I don't believe Krulla is anywhere near correct thinking a domi is more dangerous with blasters than with NOS as the TQ stands. Did you know that a blasterdomi A) Tanks as well as a bmega. B) Does about 200-300 more DPS C) Costs less? And the changes to blasters help the blaster domi as much as the blaster mega. Granted, the bmega has one more turret so the changes help them that bit more, but the blaster domi will still do more dps and tank as well as a blaster mega. The mega is borked, both before and after those minor changes. Tarkin > Omfg, frigs are such bs. Red 5 > lolol, lern 2 play plz noob SIG HIJACK!!11 RAWRR!!1- IMMY
eve warrior	Posted - 2006.05.20 17:58:00 - [49] Originally by: Demacles For all these people who think NOS are fine just as they are, lets introduce a new module called Captiol NOS for use on capitol ships. It will devastate a BSes cap the same way a BS does anything smaller. Sound like fun? Yeah nos are fine just as they are so lets add a module for the capitol ship pilots, why should they miss out. Obviously a range bonus would be in order as well. Something in the realm of 80KM as the progression from 5 -> 10 -> 25 would denote the next step would be around 75-80. We already have counters for NOS in place so lets introduce this right? We have ECM, cap rechagers, boosters, relays, etc so why not introduce this if the NOS setup is oh so fair? Before someone suggests I was the most recent victim of a NOS domi or other BS, think again. In fact I actually fly NOS domi's I just don't think they should be nearly as effective as they are. NOS removes the need for smaller tacklers as 1 hit off a BS sized NOS on a frig can bring it to a skreaching halt. Sounds like a great idear. Lets bring them into the game asap. Eve warrior

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.