| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Weirda
Minmatar
Queens of the Stone Age
Anarchy Empire
   |
Posted - 2007.01.19 01:51:00 -
[1]
Weirda think of Nos quite a bit lately, and role they have in battle. many pilot are happy with their current state, others feel that they do not fit the 'mold' of the last couple year of rebalancing and are due for 'major nerf', while other still remain ambivalent.
of the category - Weirda fall most probably into the last... or somewhere in between.
Weirda not feel they 'fine' as they are... a skilless extension of you ship with little penalty other then fitting. they are definatley far too sexy of alternate to fitting secondary weapon system for which ship have been designed to carry. there is also large desparity between ship which can function with 1/2 to full rack of nos, vs those that cannot. the DEV have stated that they 'looking' into them (since about last year this time) and we have still seen nothing.
Weirda here to rehash an old idea and help the DEV along. Weirda will keep it simple, stupid (such is the Matari way).
The Nos Change
- NOS deactivate if there is not enough cap in target ship for them to 'suck full load'
- there is no energy transfer on any cycle that there not enough energy for full transfer
- Activation cycle will have to 'wait out' till next cycle before reactivation can occur
What it solves:
- F1-Fx 'fire and forget' activation of all nos on target (skilless play)
- 'bigger is better' (pretty much only for nos at this point)
- target being 'completely dead in the water awaiting their slow doom' (Weirda thing that we should all admit that this is frustrating, boring, and bad gameplay)
How?
- target have 100 cap... nos try to take 150... target still keep 100 cap. module can run and target can continue to fight, having to think and work even harder to stay within small amount of cap they still have
- attacker will have to manage Nos cycle (like it or not - this is better gameplay)
- attacker can still get 'lucky shot' and hit for 150 when target have 151, and thus completely cripple them still
But... but Signature Radius!!!?!!!one
- Weirda will be very happy if another system is not operating against sig radius
- the target is the Capacitor of the enemy ship... not the ship size/electronic signature
- 'transfer activation' (or sucking) take the full amount to activate, otherwise those big behemouth NOS do not have enough power to complete the extraction/transfer.
- again, Weirda would rather see this then some % based system... if they use 'cap radius' (for example): target capacitor size vs. drainer 'suck radius'... it just keep the Nos as they are: skilless, fire and forget 'weapon' system that require no management or intelligence to use.
STOP LIMITING SHIP SETUPS FFS
- when you remove absolute dominance of win buttons... you actually place less restriction
- this is the best way
but what of the curse... it bonus will hurt it
- rather then increase sucking amount, the bonus should increase the rate of fire
- meta item get same treatment, rather then longer range and more sucking, they get longer range - and faster ROF
that all Weirda have to say. am hoping that this will be good discussion and not flame fest. please think before you post, and avoid bad argument logic (ad hominem, slippery slope, straw man, etc). if you have nothing intelligent to say, take it to general discussion please. 
__
Weirda
Join QotSA |
Naughty Boy
Chronics of ordinary hate
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 01:56:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: Weirda
that all Weirda have to say.
Good post Weirda
NB.
In Rust We Trust |
Audri Fisher
Caldari
The Keep
THE R0CK
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 02:01:00 -
[3]
I really like this idea weirda
|
Tsanse Kinske
WeMeanYouKnowHarm
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 02:02:00 -
[4]
That's pretty brilliant actually.  I'd love this change.
* * *
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
-Douglas Adams, writing about EVE |
Arian Snow
The Nest
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 02:15:00 -
[5]
Its a good idea, but playerskill is highly overrated imo.
O' and:
/signed
I dont remember I dont recall I dont have memory of anything at all! |
Nyxus
GALAXIAN
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 02:18:00 -
[6]
I am very very leery of most nos posts becuase if the curse loses nos it will turn into the suck. Especially since TD's are relatively underpowered to all EW except for Painters. Matari and Amarr 4tw. 
But I like it. The Curse stays good, nos domi's not so "afk, tell me when baddies are dead".
The Curse change needs to make sure that it doesn't reduce the total nos amount it has now. Maybe even boost it again. Would also like to see the pilgrim get a range bonus over an amount.
Weirda rules, Caldari drools!
Nyxus
The Gallente ideals of Freedom, Liberty and Equality will be met by the Amarr realities of Lasers, Armor and Battleships. - Golan Trevize |
Frools
The Priory
Shroud Of Darkness
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 02:20:00 -
[7]
nice, only problem i can see is with neuts on a curse/pilgrim
as it is the bonus means they kill an awful lot of cap and dont use that much in comparison
with a 'nos rof' bonus they'd be killing the same ratio of cap on you and your target, making them far less useful
|
Blood Agent
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 02:27:00 -
[8]
The curse can already beat just about any ship 1v1, removing its ability to wtf pwn anythings cap with neuts is fine by me. |
Kldraina
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 02:28:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Kldraina on 19/01/2007 02:27:23
I actually really like this idea. It makes large nos less effective against small ships than small nos is, as the small ships just need to keep their cap below 100 to be immune to large nos. I like this idea a lot.
Edit: two issues, 1) this makes cap flux coils a lot more useful especially on small ships, 2) this makes Cap Batteries a lot less useful, especially on small ships. I like the fact that it makes cap flux coils more useful, but dislike the fact that it makes cap batteries less useful. |
Shandling
Minmatar
Disband
Phoenix Supremacy
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 02:33:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Shandling on 19/01/2007 02:32:02
Great idea. Would make people think before just tossing NOS on.
This could open a door for mods too.. how about passive lows that decrease the amount of energy drained in trade for a faster 'firing time' on the NOS? Something like...
-15% NOS Cycle Time
-15% Cap Drained per Cycle
That would keep the energy per second drained the same and allow the player to keep the target's cap lower... while taking up a low slot.
|
|
|
Frools
The Priory
Shroud Of Darkness
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 02:34:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Blood Agent
The curse can already beat just about any ship 1v1, removing its ability to wtf pwn anythings cap with neuts is fine by me.
no, it cant, dont be an idiot
and its more important on the pilgrim tbh, 2 nos 1 neut is pretty standard for pilgrim because you dont have the high slots to fit enough nos, especially when you have to be close
|
OrangeAfroMan
Minmatar
Suffoco Noctis
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 02:38:00 -
[12]
100% Agree. Nos should have been this way from the start.
|
FraXy
0utbreak
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 02:44:00 -
[13]
Good idea.
Might also think about revamping the concept of Capacitor Batteries as we all can agree they are not what they should and could be.
The idea someone had with the Battery to add cap with a different color which can`t be Nossed away, but can be Neutralized could also be considered making Neutralizer more useful and pilots considering which of the two will benefit the most during X enemies in Y location.
This is my lazy attempt to make
an uber-signature, please go away!
|
Toolivus
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 02:58:00 -
[14]
Great idea, provided neuts arent messed with Im behind this 100%.
LOL at the eve forums not letting my type in this text-box the first time I tried, now its just apostrophes which dont work.
|
Shandling
Minmatar
Disband
Phoenix Supremacy
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 02:58:00 -
[15]
Originally by: FraXy
The idea someone had with the Battery to add cap with a different color which can`t be Nossed away, but can be Neutralized could also be considered making Neutralizer more useful and pilots considering which of the two will benefit the most during X enemies in Y location.
Very good idea.. say a +25% cap battery, and that +25% value can't ever be NOS'd but with a penalty to your recharge or something, enough so that it's not giving you a double bonus of better cap/sec and no nossing on that %.
|
Ernest Graefenberg
Minmatar
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 03:00:00 -
[16]
Remind me to laugh at the first person that loses an Interceptor after these changes.
|
Plymer Ization
Infinitus Odium
Curse Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 03:16:00 -
[17]
Great ideas! Thank you for this thread Wierda 
|
Nerogk Shorn
Caldari
Royal Hiigaran Navy
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 03:17:00 -
[18]
This idea is pretty good. It still wouldn't be possible to tank a nos domi (other than keeping your hardeners on)(and if you are a small ship). Though tanking wouldn't be feasible against a fully nos fitted ship, shooting your guns still would be possible so you could at least fight back.
Good suggestions. Nosferatu need a change and need a change now. I still think they'll be overpowered.
D-F-A-A-B-A-A-S |
Vicious Phoenix
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 03:17:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Ernest Graefenberg
Remind me to laugh at the first person that loses an Interceptor after these changes.
+1
Your proposed changes take away the only defense a battleship has against interceptors. I would NOT like to sit in my BS in a belt for as long as he decides to keep me there, scrammed by an inty just waiting for his friends to show up and kill me. Battleships are exactly that, battleships. It should not be possible for a lone interceptor (a frigate) to hold them in place like that.
Notice that heavy nos and warp disruptor range is the same. I highly doubt that is an accident.
I have other reasons this is a bad idea but I'm too lazy to type that atm, I'll post more later involving other scenarios and ship classes.
CFW (Certified Forum Warrior)
I kill people ingame too. |
Tsanse Kinske
WeMeanYouKnowHarm
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 03:24:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Ernest Graefenberg
Remind me to laugh at the first person that loses an Interceptor after these changes.
It's a very good point. However there will still be adaptations available to BS pilots, like fitting Neuts or Medium NOS. Sure, those won't be nearly as effective as Heavys vs. other Battleships, but that's where the interesting choices and teamwork come in.
* * *
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
-Douglas Adams, writing about EVE |
|
|
Vicious Phoenix
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 03:35:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Tsanse Kinske
Originally by: Ernest Graefenberg
Remind me to laugh at the first person that loses an Interceptor after these changes.
It's a very good point. However there will still be adaptations available to BS pilots, like fitting Neuts or Medium NOS. Sure, those won't be nearly as effective as Heavys vs. other Battleships, but that's where the interesting choices and teamwork come in.
Show me medium nos that have the same range as warp disruptors. Thats what I thought.
CFW (Certified Forum Warrior)
I kill people ingame too. |
Audri Fisher
Caldari
The Keep
THE R0CK
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 03:50:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Vicious Phoenix
Originally by: Tsanse Kinske
Originally by: Ernest Graefenberg
Remind me to laugh at the first person that loses an Interceptor after these changes.
It's a very good point. However there will still be adaptations available to BS pilots, like fitting Neuts or Medium NOS. Sure, those won't be nearly as effective as Heavys vs. other Battleships, but that's where the interesting choices and teamwork come in.
Show me medium nos that have the same range as warp disruptors. Thats what I thought.
that's the point. 2 heavy nos + a webber should not be an I win button against tacklers.
|
Templar Dane
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 03:51:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Templar Dane on 19/01/2007 03:48:19
If you're in a battleship/battlecruiser/or even a cruiser it won't matter if you have 100-200(including some time for a bit of recharge) cap left. You're going to be in a very very bad place when it comes to cap recharge. You might get to active your guns for another few volleys before you die, but you sure aren't going to be doing much else. At this point you won't be able to keep hardeners/repairer/guns online enough to matter.
A nos nerf would have to be multifaceted. Along the lines of...
-Cap rechargers/power relays could get a nos resist bonus, making them more appealing to pvpers who normally don't use them in leu of a single/double injector. The crappier modules that nobody uses because they aren't on par with the others could get the best resist bonus
-The cap battery idea
-More high slot options. Perhaps moving painters to highs, or some kind of painter effect like was discussed much earlier(negating some of a target's resists or something along those lines). Of course, you'd need OPTIONS. We have all these ships that can't fit all their highs with their "intended" weapons, give them some choices. Right now that last non-turret high slot on every ship that deals pain to other players is a "nospoint" no matter what anyone says and that's because there's nothing else to fit that isn't pointless.
-LONGER RANGE AND MORE AFFORDABLE WARP SCRAMBLERS. I have been saying this over and over since I've been playing. This might cause some problems, but it would fix a lot. Being able to hold down a target and stay out of nos range would be cool. "Medium" range ships would get more love as a bonus. The fitting/cap consumption of these would have to be balanced as to not make every other scram worthless. Perhaps some penalty to speed or propulsion mods while activated or something along those lines. Makes dampeners better ftl.
-If they introduce that "heat" system that was talked about, nos could cause heat on the nos ship making it hard to run it the entire fight. On the other hand if nos were found to be a little too nerfed, it could add heat to the target's ship.
|
Tsanse Kinske
WeMeanYouKnowHarm
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 03:52:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Vicious Phoenix
Show me medium nos that have the same range as warp disruptors. Thats what I thought.
Oops. 
That leaves Heavy Neuts I guess. Which is problematic. 
* * *
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
-Douglas Adams, writing about EVE |
Grimpak
Gallente
Twisted Attitude
Apocalyptica.
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 03:53:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Grimpak on 19/01/2007 03:50:58
Originally by: Audri Fisher
Originally by: Vicious Phoenix
Originally by: Tsanse Kinske
Originally by: Ernest Graefenberg
Remind me to laugh at the first person that loses an Interceptor after these changes.
It's a very good point. However there will still be adaptations available to BS pilots, like fitting Neuts or Medium NOS. Sure, those won't be nearly as effective as Heavys vs. other Battleships, but that's where the interesting choices and teamwork come in.
Show me medium nos that have the same range as warp disruptors. Thats what I thought.
that's the point. 2 heavy nos + a webber should not be an I win button against tacklers.
indeed. the I win button vs tacklers is a swarm of T2 warriors.
thos things are scary and can practically nullify any tackler in a few moments.
edit: and I agree with weirda.
weirda for pres/PM/king/queen/emperor/empress/god/whatever!
-------
Originally by: Tiuwaz
for caldari perception weapons that hit up to 100km are short range weapons 
|
OrangeAfroMan
Minmatar
Suffoco Noctis
Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 04:10:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Vicious Phoenix
Your proposed changes take away the only defense a battleship has against interceptors. I would NOT like to sit in my BS in a belt for as long as he decides to keep me there, scrammed by an inty just waiting for his friends to show up and kill me. Battleships are exactly that, battleships. It should not be possible for a lone interceptor (a frigate) to hold them in place like that.
Your defense against them should be the friends you're with.
Battleships are not supposed to be solo-pwnall ships.
Deal with it.
Nos - Time for a Change |
Vicious Phoenix
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 04:11:00 -
[27]
Edited by: Vicious Phoenix on 19/01/2007 04:07:47
Originally by: Audri Fisher
that's the point. 2 heavy nos + a webber should not be an I win button against tacklers.
Yes the nos should be an iwin versus tacklers. They are in a FRIGATE, you are in a BATTLESHIP. Why should a frigate be able to completely immobilize a battleship indefinitely and call in friends to kill it at will?
Originally by: Grimpak
indeed. the I win button vs tacklers is a swarm of T2 warriors.
thos things are scary and can practically nullify any tackler in a few moments.
edit: and I agree with weirda.
weirda for pres/PM/king/queen/emperor/empress/god/whatever!
I guess you haven't encountered any of those 10km/s crows that seem to be all over TQ after the patch. The warriors don't get anywhere close.
CFW (Certified Forum Warrior)
I kill people ingame too. |
Naughty Boy
Chronics of ordinary hate
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 04:28:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Vicious Phoenix
Yes the nos should be an iwin versus tacklers. They are in a FRIGATE, you are in a BATTLESHIP. Why should a frigate be able to completely immobilize a battleship indefinitely and call in friends to kill it at will?
Whether battleships should or shouldn't have what you call an iwin button against frigates is not an evidence that the nosferatu should be that particular mod.
NB.
In Rust We Trust |
Arx Sheep
Minmatar
Infinitus Odium
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 04:30:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Vicious Phoenix
Yes the nos should be an iwin versus tacklers. They are in a FRIGATE, you are in a BATTLESHIP. Why should a frigate be able to completely immobilize a battleship indefinitely and call in friends to kill it at will?
Yes, lets remove everything from the game except for battleships, no point having anything else because it's a BATTLESHIP it should be the best vs EVERYTHING amirite?
|
Tyler Lowe
Minmatar
DROW Org
|
Posted - 2007.01.19 04:30:00 -
[30]
J.A.F.O.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |