|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
xHomicide
   |
Posted - 2007.02.06 03:53:00 -
[1]
Edited by: xHomicide on 06/02/2007 03:53:03
Nos should have two attributes which determine energy transfer.
> Max energy transfer amount - same thing it is now
> Max percent transfer - the max % a single nos cycle can take from a target based on the targets capacitor capacity.
Heavy Nos
Max energy transfer amount: 100
Max percent transfer: 4%
Activation time: 12sec
Medium Nos
Max energy transfer amount: 30
Max percent transfer: 6%
Activation time: 6sec
Small Nos
Max energy transfer amount: 8
Max percent transfer: 10%
Activation time: 3sec
What this would mean:
Heavy nos vs frig: ~12/cycle = 1/sec
Heavy nos vs cruiser: ~40/cycle = 3.3/sec
Heavy nos vs battleship/capital: 100/cycle = 8.3/cycle (The max energy transfer would be the max limiter)
Med nos vs frig: ~18/cycle = 3/sec
Med nos vs cruiser/battleship: 30/cycle = 5/sec (The max energy transfer would be the max limiter)
Small nos vs frig/cruiser/battleship(anything): 8/cycle = 2.7/sec
Larger Nos would obviously be less affective against ships with small capacitor, while smaller nos would be more affective.
note:
People dont seem to understand how massive a nerf this would be to nano-bs. Nano-bs would be in a world of hurt if they could no longer nos off ceptors. This means a ceptor could affectively sustain its web and mwd on a nano-bs even if it put 4 heavy nos on it.
no need to thank me for fixing nos and nano-bs with one extremely easy solution.
|
xHomicide
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.02.06 09:39:00 -
[2]
Edited by: xHomicide on 06/02/2007 09:35:42
 Originally by: Ort Lofthus
Edited by: Ort Lofthus on 06/02/2007 09:03:42
The idea of making NOS have a maxium amount of cap that they can drain is also a nice fix, but I'd like to see sig radius matter more. Not to say its a bad idea, it would work well in conjuction with sig radius and activation cost.
My initial response was one related to sig as well, but other people have pointed out that if it was based on sig there would be complications as a result of MWD sig penalty. The sig increase as a result of MWDs is needed as a result of tracking calculations. If the nos affect was based strictly on sig and no form of tracking then it would dominate MWD ships even more than it does now. If it was based on capacitor capacity the mwd sig problem would be avoided.
On the other hand I disagree with your first few main points. I think the ability of nos to enable 'broken' setups as you have put it is a great gameplay element. Nos gives versatility that I hope they never take away. I also dont see any issues with cap warefare, it is another element of combat, which is a good thing. I dont see any problems with an inject being a requirement on a cap-dependent ships.
___________________________________________________
http://www.razor-eve.org/killboard/?a=kills |
xHomicide
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.02.06 09:45:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Jack Icegaard
The nerfbigands are out in force again..
Yeah, please nerf nos. Please make my frig a solopawnmobile that can attack, scramble and kill battleships with impunity. I cant wrap my head around any tactic that does not involve weapons that deal out damage. I also have 27 million sp in weapon tech and my dps pawzoorz. But people use alternative tactics against me. Whaaaa that's not fair! buhhuuu huu take away all alternative tactics!11
Because everyone knows frigs are overpowered.. lol
"omg a frig.... it takes me 40 seconds to nos him to uselessness instead of instantly!!!....oh wait.... its a frig."
___________________________________________________
http://www.razor-eve.org/killboard/?a=kills |
xHomicide
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.02.06 19:54:00 -
[4]
Originally by: DarkElf
Originally by: Jerick Ludhowe
Battleships should have some massive weaknesses if they are going to be the ship class with the most firepower, largest tanks, and longest range (cap ships asside). Battleships should never be solopwnmobiles as Devs have stated many times however they are exactly that and the reason is large nos. I feel a small group of interceptors should be a large threat to a single battleship simply because it's a group of people using teamwork instead of a single person using a big ship. Battleships should almost exclusivly rely on smaller ships or dedicated anti frigate/ceptor platforms(destroyers) to provide them point defense. Untill we see such changes fleets containing large varieties of ship classes will never be common.
Very true. couldn't agree more. but tbh a small group of ceptors, say 3 for example are a significant threat to a bs right now even if it does have nos. especially if they are missile/minmatar ceptors.
DE
like it should be....question mark?
___________________________________________________
http://www.razor-eve.org/killboard/?a=kills |
xHomicide
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.02.07 05:37:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Nyxus
Originally by: Cygwin Gaad
could just introduce a mid or low slot mod "Capacitor Buffer".
buffers the ships capacitor from energy vampires. from 20% T1, to 40% T2, with up to 35% for named.
40 Cpu
10 power.
so you can still get wtfpwnd by a nanos ship, but like WCS, if you are prepared you can get away.
But what about the Curse, Bhaalgorn, and Pilgrim?? A set % would make them useless?
Nyxus
Not if it was done as explained in this post. Medium would work the exact same against cruisers and would drain approximately 24 cap a cycle instead of the full 30...a marginal difference. The biggest hit would be heavy nos vs frigs.
Kind of like small, medium, and large guns.
___________________________________________________
http://www.razor-eve.org/killboard/?a=kills |
xHomicide
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.02.08 00:48:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Aramendel
Originally by: xHomicide
Not if it was done as explained in this post. Medium would work the exact same against cruisers and would drain approximately 24 cap a cycle instead of the full 30...a marginal difference. The biggest hit would be heavy nos vs frigs.
Kind of like small, medium, and large guns.
Exept curse and pilgrim have a nos strength bonus. 24 cap a cycle instead 72 cap a cycle is a bit more than "marginal".
Obviously the nos bonus would affect the max % as much as the max transfer.
___________________________________________________
http://www.razor-eve.org/killboard/?a=kills |
xHomicide
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.02.08 02:49:00 -
[7]
Did you get the memo?
ECM was already nerfed.
___________________________________________________
http://www.razor-eve.org/killboard/?a=kills |
|
|
| |
|