Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
slothe
Caldari Forsaken Empire
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 05:36:00 -
[1]
OK lets keep this civil no flaming please.
Ive spent a long time thinking of possible changes to both nos and neuts, however most of the solutions involve changing the stats of the items in overcomplicated ways.
My simple suggestion is this (and it has been discussed before)-
Make it so nos and neuts cannot be fitted in gun turret hardpoints.
This would be simple and limit the amount of nos and neuts that could be fitted, and in some cases make it so that some ships couldnt fit nos at all.
Now before you go OMG NOES That would nerfster my ship (for dominix and armageddon pilots for example), and OMG that would make Caldari even more UBERster than they were b4, just think about it rationally.
Ships werent desinged to be fitted with nos, nos are meant to be support for main weapons be it guns or missiles.
Now for those who think it would nerf their ship - lets face it your ship wasnt designed for nos / neuts it was designed for weapons so use the weapons (everyone would be in the same boat remember).
For those who think the change would benefit Caldari (or other missile ships) think about it. Missile boats rely on missiles as their primary weapon and usually have missile bonus (eg raven, typhoon, caracal). if these ships were to switch to many nos they would be severally hampering their offensive capability (unlike the dominix pilot who still has main offensive capability drones if using nos).
so what do you think?
if replying constructivally please also state what ships you usually fly and how this would affect you.
Before complaining about any ship try flying Minmatar |
DiuxDium
The Graduates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 06:05:00 -
[2]
Change curse and pilgrim slot layout, and it's a good idea.
|
Kiyano
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 06:11:00 -
[3]
While i'm not against a change to nos, especially seeing as its gotton to a lot of people. I do definately think they need to consider the ships with nos bonus's and how it would effect them. Maybe nos will go the way of ecm and become a specialist ship thing.
|
slothe
Caldari Forsaken Empire
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 06:16:00 -
[4]
Edited by: slothe on 04/12/2006 06:20:37
Originally by: DiuxDium Change curse and pilgrim slot layout, and it's a good idea.
surely curse is ok with only 2/6 gun placements. pilgrim has 3/4 gun placements so has room for one. maybe this could do with 1 less gun turret, maybe 2.
Before complaining about any ship try flying Minmatar |
Toaster Oven
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 06:21:00 -
[5]
Nope, your reasoning about missile ships and NOS is weak. I can turn around and use the same argument in support of turret ships. Imho it's far easier to give ships a new attribute called "utility hardpoints." These are the number of high slots you can equip with utility mods such as nos/neut/smartbombs. So a Raven could have for example 6 launcher hardpoint, 4 turret hardpoints, and 2 utility hardpoints. That way ships can balanced in a meaningful way.
|
Samirol
Ore Mongers
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 06:53:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Samirol on 04/12/2006 06:53:35 no, simply because it would take away a lot of versatility in ships
Great being a gallente blasterthron pilot, aint it?
|
MrRx7
Amarr Quantum Industries Prime Orbital Systems
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 06:53:00 -
[7]
it dosent matter at all how many turrets the curse/pilgrim has...anyone who fits guns to these ships should be killed on sight. They are the only T2 none faction nos platform
|
Ort Lofthus
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 07:44:00 -
[8]
I think that a better option would be to just make NOS require cap to use, equal to what it drains. So you turn on your Heavy NOS I, pay 100 cap up front, then drain the other guy for 100 cap. If he runs out, you start wasting cap. Now, keep in mind that energy emmisions is a required skill for NOS, so you're paying 5% less cap per level. So you net 25 cap from the cycle with maxed skills with a vanilla Heavy NOS. Now, I see a few reasons why this system is superior:
1) NOS is great in concept, but generally too powerful in execution. Let's attempt to put it in DPS terms. A heavy NOS II drains 10 cap/sec. Assuming a tech II armor tank, cap turns into HP at a 2:1 ratio, so the NOS is doing 20 DPS. However, NOS ignores resists, so we assume a BS tank with an average resist of 60%. That is, only 40% of incoming damage is delt to HP, so nos DPS=.4 gun DPS. The equivalent gun DPS therefore is 50 DPS. Now, that is only counting the direct effect on enemy tank. NOS reciprocates cap back into your tank, so you gain about what your oppenent loses, assuming equivalent tanks. So NOS does 100 DPS per unit without even factoring in what other modules your oppenent is using that require cap. And that 100 DPS is coming at no cost to cap. Remember, 100 DPS is assuming 2:1 cap to HP and 60% avg resists. If either you or your oppenent has a better ratio or has better resists, the effective DPS goes up. This change drasticly reduces effective DPS by 37% at max skills, making this item less of a 'no-brainer' to fit.
2) This change does not impact NOSs effect on your oppenent's tank, just your own. You can still knock out the capacior of small ships with ease, maintaining NOS as a tool for large ships to counter small ones. All this change does is effectively remove NOS as a primary means to maintian your own tank, which is where all the trouble with NOS is coming from.
3) This change removes some of the 'automatic' nature of NOS. Right now in a fight once you get in range and hit the NOS button and think nothing more of it. It takes no skill to use beyond staggering the NOS to hit your opponent to drain maximum capacitor or to get your cap back from his nossing. Now, if you are forced to pay up front for your nossing, you are less likely to turn it on and leave it running. By extension, this also makes it harder to keep an oppenent cap-dead, as you end up draining your own cap if your opponent has less than 75% of what you nossed for left. If you're fighting a smaller ship, it might be a bad idea to keep using big NOS on it, so there is incentive for fitting smaller NOS on a ship, to keep an oppenent cap-dead without wasting too much of your own cap (think nanophoon with 2 heavy adn 2 med NOS). Being cap-dead and whittled away is not a fun place to be, far less fun than losing in a real fight. This change removes an unneccesary amount of pain from the game.
4) Relatively easy to implement, just change one line in the item activation cost and make sure energy emmisions lowers the cost of nossing. No new items, no new skills.
5) Opens the door to skill training, making players make more choices in their style of play. EVE is based off of players using different skills together to create a larger effect. This change adds incentinve for training energy emmisions beyond lvl 3 for best named NOS and also makes room in the future for improved nos/neut skills.
6) Last but not least, this change eliminates NOS as a primary weapon system and moves it to the support role that is was designed for. With its effective DPS drasticly reduced, NOS becomes a tool to hurt smaller ships while retaining a measure of effectiveness in equal-terms PVP as an effective and reliable cap-less low-skill weapon system that can assist in the kill but can't make the kill itself.
Possible setups killed by change: NOSDomi and other drone boats, NOSphoon, Nanophoon. Note: Ammar cov. ops drain more for the same cap, less hurt
|
slothe
Caldari Forsaken Empire
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 07:51:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Ort Lofthus I think that a better option would be to just make NOS require cap to use, equal to what it drains. So you turn on your Heavy NOS I, pay 100 cap up front, then drain the other guy for 100 cap. If he runs out, you start wasting cap. Now, keep in mind that energy emmisions is a required skill for NOS, so you're paying 5% less cap per level. So you net 25 cap from the cycle with maxed skills with a vanilla Heavy NOS.:
you just described an energy neutraliser already in game. so your suggestion is to remove nosferatu completely.
Before complaining about any ship try flying Minmatar |
Ort Lofthus
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 08:15:00 -
[10]
Its similar to a neut in that you drain thier capacitor and you have to pay for it up front, but the energy goes back into your capacitor. Sorry, its late and i'm not explaining it very well. I'll go step by step: You have a nos that drains 100. You have maxed energy emmision skills. You pay 75 cap (100-25%) to start nossing. They lose 100 cap, you gain 100 cap.
Very similar to the neut, using the same skill and all to boost itself, but markedly different in that if your opponent has cap to drain, your net capacitor will go up. It still sucks cap, just not at 100% efficiency.
|
|
Laboratus
Gallente BGG Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 08:42:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Laboratus on 04/12/2006 08:46:36 Edited by: Laboratus on 04/12/2006 08:44:35 NOS are primarily supposed to be fitted into Amarr ships. Amarr ships are primarily designd to combat amarr (some some bizarre reason. Don't ask me why. TDs and such.). High cap using weapons, low fall off etc. Baalgohrn, curse etc etc etc.
This would remove them from what they are meant to be. As such, they could be fit not in Missile slots, and the same thing would be acchieved without interfearing with what NOS is supposed to do.
BTW. NOS/NEUTs are fine. Ppl just have to learn to fight capasitor warfare in Kali. Nerf Whineing!
PS. And a Domi does 75% of it's dps with Blasters, not drones. Any ship can carry drones. Most battleships can carry drones, doing 66% of the damage Domi does with drones. So invalid point there.
PPS. I mainly fly blaster cruisers and laugh at the face of any who try to nos/neut/ecm me, cause I can just MWD away. ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats |
goodby4u
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 08:50:00 -
[12]
Edited by: goodby4u on 04/12/2006 08:58:18 Now first off,why make them missile based and not turret again?
The curse and pilgrim will suffer,the reason being is that is what they were made to do(according to their not having any weapon stats but having nos and neut stats).
I dont think the nos is the iwin button for anything unless either used in huge scale,or used on a small ship(easy fix for the small ship have a sig radius)and in huge scale would mean death if they fitted weapons instead of nos anyways. (ships i fly) Zealot. Arbitrator. geddon. blackbird once(got ganked decided i didnt like it anymore). Stabber. retribution.
It will affect my zealot by making me fill that missing high slot with a smartbomb.
The arb i use like a mini curse(i havent trained for the curse yet)so i will have to use turrets on a no turret bonus ship.
geddon wont be affected other then i wont be using a high slot for a reason now.
BB will have mixed results.
Stabber wont be affected.
retribution will be affected just like the zealot.
|
Lucian Corvinus
Gallente Expert Systems
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 09:24:00 -
[13]
Originally by: goodby4u
The curse and pilgrim will suffer,the reason being is that is what they were made to do(according to their not having any weapon stats but having nos and neut stats).
I dont think the nos is the iwin button for anything unless either used in huge scale,or used on a small ship(easy fix for the small ship have a sig radius)and in huge scale would mean death if they fitted weapons instead of nos anyways.
The problem is that it is used on a huge scale, especially for the dominix and the myrmidon because of those ships not having to deal damage from the highslots. Just drain the target and kill it alittle slower with the drones. Something should be done, like max fitting 2 per ship or another restriction..
...just my iskies
|
Laboratus
Gallente BGG Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 09:32:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Lucian Corvinus
Originally by: goodby4u
The curse and pilgrim will suffer,the reason being is that is what they were made to do(according to their not having any weapon stats but having nos and neut stats).
I dont think the nos is the iwin button for anything unless either used in huge scale,or used on a small ship(easy fix for the small ship have a sig radius)and in huge scale would mean death if they fitted weapons instead of nos anyways.
The problem is that it is used on a huge scale, especially for the dominix and the myrmidon because of those ships not having to deal damage from the highslots. Just drain the target and kill it alittle slower with the drones. Something should be done, like max fitting 2 per ship or another restriction..
...just my iskies
The myrmidon and the Domi have a very small PG for a ship of it's class. As such they are gonna have a real hard time fitting a full rack of NOS and a tank. And, still they get most of their dps from fitting blasters in their highs, not drones. ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats |
Ithildin
Gallente The Corporation The Corporation Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 09:41:00 -
[15]
...in other words: Remove nosferatus and neutralizers from game.
What you are suggesting is for nosferatus NOT to be able to fit IF turretHardpoints >= highSlots.
This would mean that the following ships (as examples) could fit nosferatu, with restrictions given: * Raven - Two minus nr. of launchers * Megathron - Up to one, provided it fitted no launchers * Armageddon - Up to one. * Maller - Up to one. * Celestis - Up to one, provided it fitted no launchers * Vexor - Up to one. * Ishtar - Up to two.
These ships could not fit nosferatus: * Dominix * Thorax * Incursus * etc. Strictly limited to Gallente ships.
You asked what I fly: non-nossing Gallente ships. Race doesn't matter in this case, though, since I don't use nosferatus in greater number than 2.
The suggestion isn't very well thought out since the criteria only takes into account one ship: DOMINIX SHOULDNT BE ABLE TO FIT NOS Can't make it more obvious, to be honest.
What you really are looking for is a utility hardpoint so that you got three types of high slot modules: * Turrets (Projectiles, Hybrids, and Energy) * Launchers (Duh) * Utility (Nos, neuts, smartbombs, drone mods¦, and auto targeters) ¦ This might actually be pulled out of Utility slot, though. - EVE is sick. |
Spanker
Absolut Profit
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 09:55:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Ort Lofthus so the NOS is doing 20 DPS
I liked that one
- Shpank |
Grivent Travior
Gallente System-Lords E N I G M A
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 09:57:00 -
[17]
With cap boosters being reduced in size again, arnt cap injectors the answer to this?
|
Laboratus
Gallente BGG Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 10:38:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Grivent Travior With cap boosters being reduced in size again, arnt cap injectors the answer to this?
They always have been. With injectors and a sence of timing, nos/neut is a waste of time. ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats |
Marcus Alkhaar
Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 11:03:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Marcus Alkhaar on 04/12/2006 11:05:25 I dont like the Idea.
EVE will lose some of the Variety in setups, which will make PvP more boring because of the "hey, that ship MUST have that setup fitted, I'll just have to use....[insert yadda yadda] and then I 0wn"
more specified example (typo?)
A geddon can kill a Nos-dominix with dual rep, dual plates and omni hardeners. Though a Dominix with guns got the sufficient damage to kill a geddon before its dead itself.
and Nos/inertia-nano BS will deffo be fun with the new +warpspeed rigs
Originally by: darth solo I dont blame XS, tbh if i was in there shoes i wouldnt fight us either, its like bringing a caldari mountain sheep to fight a gallante war wolf(u like how i kept that in character |
mallion
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 11:13:00 -
[20]
Good large nos sucks 120 in 12 secs, cap injector does 800 in 12, now domi has 3 (mabey 4 if he sacrifices tank). They have alway, always been the counter, ive killed pilgrems ina domi with on, and know ppl who likk curses using rax with one.
dominix main dps is from gun, most ppl go with drones because of the very high fitting skills needed for a blaster/rail domi (which outdammages any other bs fyi and still isnt vunerable to nos. Its the same reason so many ravens are going about (low skills decent performance, ravens have 2, domies have 3, with injector raven wins), what your proposing is unballance and more to the point unjust.
ffs STOP WHINING, learning to mannage your cap is more crutial than understanding ew (and how many low skilled characters still whine about that. At base the game is ballanced, in practice that is impossible thanks to skills being relative.
|
|
Jeanpierre Duvall
Caldari Spectral Armada Eternal Empire
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 11:28:00 -
[21]
I like the Utility slot Idea. (Example: Domi 6 High. 6 turret 2 Utility, Curse 5 high 4 launcher 2 turret 4 utility) where the utility is for NOS/Neut/SB. You can still use many diffrent setups but no longer use the Nos abuse.
In reply to the drone comment earlier. I would really love if my 75m¦ dronebay would alove me to deal 66% of the domi's 5 heavy drones. I'm not sure but isn't there only 3 battleships that have more then 75m¦ dronebays? And also. If you kill a heavy drone for a domi it still have 10 more in backup. Geddon only have 5 drones and then it's screwed.
|
Laboratus
Gallente BGG Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 12:04:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Jeanpierre Duvall I like the Utility slot Idea. (Example: Domi 6 High. 6 turret 2 Utility, Curse 5 high 4 launcher 2 turret 4 utility) where the utility is for NOS/Neut/SB. You can still use many diffrent setups but no longer use the Nos abuse.
In reply to the drone comment earlier. I would really love if my 75m¦ dronebay would alove me to deal 66% of the domi's 5 heavy drones. I'm not sure but isn't there only 3 battleships that have more then 75m¦ dronebays? And also. If you kill a heavy drone for a domi it still have 10 more in backup. Geddon only have 5 drones and then it's screwed.
Sigh. At least the following have a 125m3 dronebay: Geddon Mega Typhoon Domi
And as such do at least the mentioned 66% of the damage the domi does. Not quite sure how much drone bay the T3 battleships have, but that is 50% of the old T1 and T2 battleships. So, yes, the raven can't with it's 75m3 dronebay can't deploy 5 heavies, but it can carry 3 flights of T2 lights, that can blow up heavy drones quite easily if used. Most ppl don't bother and lose fights because of it. ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats |
Keitaro Baka
Babylon Scientific and Industrial Enterprises Babylon Project
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 12:41:00 -
[23]
if you would ever do something like this it would mean utility slots indeed and not something as unbalancing as "no nos/neut in turret slots".
As said before if you know what you're doing nos is not a problem. Cap injectors with the newly reduced cap volume space work wonders. And i understand that would mean that shield tanks miss a slot for tanking, but shield tanking ships are 99% the missile/projectile ships in EvE so they're at least partly compensated already in cap use. And if all else fails shield regenerate and therefore have the option to passively tank at least better than armour.
I can see some people wanting to change Nos and Neuts to be more like a missile (signature radius and velocity of the target has influence on amount of cap ) or even like a gun (it could even miss). The idea of Nos only working to a certain percentage of cap is even worse of an idea since it cripples every ship that needs cap for dmg.
Tbh I don't see the need for changing Nos and Neuts other than maybe making them more skill involved.. and that's not because I'm a domi pilot (/me hugs high sec) but because everyone I know, armour and shield tanks alike, know that nos only cripples when your outclassed.
- All the stuff above does not necessarily reflect my corp, my alliance or even me - Pure drone user... give us a mini carrier and faction Typhoon and Dominix please |
Alpha Prime
Destructive Influence Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 13:14:00 -
[24]
I agree 100% on this. I¦ve spent a few hours on SISU and im shocked over how hard, close to impossible, it is to kill battleships rigged with NOS. The only ships that should be allowed to use lots of NOPS are those ships which gets a bonus for them.. Curse & Pilgrim.
Maybe a slight increase in "non-specific" hardpoint on some ships, like the Domi. Cuz lets face it, without NOS, the Domi aint worth it.
Bob farted, ASCN burped. And then there was a Nodecrash
|
Kaylana Syi
Minmatar The Nest Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 13:16:00 -
[25]
The only change I can see that is fair is adding sig radius to dictate the amount they can drain. Another approach is souping up cap batteries to be actually useful other than on frigs who need to warp 80AU and make cap batteries un nossable since it is a thoretically reserve.
Team Minmatar Carriers need Clone Vats
|
Imperil
Northern Intelligence SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 13:21:00 -
[26]
My changes I think would fitt is.
1) Cap Batteries invul. to Nosferatu. Fix Cap Batteries at the same time.
2) Make Nosferatu an ALPHA weapon and not a DOT weapon, meaning it would take x capacitor a minute instead of every 10 sec. By taking x amount of capacitor every minute, you are making setups with high recharge rate able to "fight back at the nosferatu", making high capacitor recharge setup good in combat again, instead of the usual inject-inject - tho injector setups would work as well.
Support POS Overhaul - Read it NOW! |
Jeanpierre Duvall
Caldari Spectral Armada Eternal Empire
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 13:35:00 -
[27]
Amarr use Nos pretty much. and have very few midslots. Fitting a injector or battery on a geddon, Omen or pretty much every amarr ship would really mess with their PvP ability. But then again Solo-PvP is a Capital sin according to CCP so that is ok I guess. :) Even the Mega which pretty much needs a cap booster to be usefull even without being nos'd is gonna suffer alot.
But I don't really hold any perfect answers but see the Utility slot as an option. Right now it's not even near optimal
|
Laboratus
Gallente BGG Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 14:04:00 -
[28]
And now for a simple 3 step program. 1. Stay out of nos range. easy for small/med nos. Not so doable for Heavy. 2. Fit a cap injector. 3. Laugh at NOS.
___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats |
kublai
Short Attention Span
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 14:11:00 -
[29]
What's the big deal? nos isnt THAT imbalanced, get a cap injector.
What, are people angry they can't run 3 armor reps at once while having a nos on them?
Go check how much nos steals, now go check what the modules you run use, now do some math and buy a godamn cap injector.
If a ship fills all it's gun turrets with nos, it's either A. a NOSFERATU DRONE BOAT (pilgrim/curse, look at the bonuses) or B. Piloted by an idiot with no damage -at all-.
If B. his gang mates will probably own you, but guess what, if it's a gang you'll most likely die anyway.
You wont die because OMG I CUD HAVE TAKEN THEM, you'll die because if you fly in a gang the different members of this gang can specialize in one thing at a time to knock out the various systems of your ship.
Christ people, stop whining, if you can't cope with one medium nos or three heavy nos on a domi, you need to re-think your ship setup.
Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes, ty. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Cortes |
FawKa
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.12.04 14:12:00 -
[30]
Hehe, Looks like you are caldari
Nos cant be fitted in gun slots Nos can be fitted in launcher slots
Wheres the balance?
if they cant be fitted in either turret or launcher slots I vote yes - but makes no sense to give missile users the ability to fit NOS when turret users cant.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |