Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Felinuszzz
Caldari TunDraGon
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 17:17:00 -
[1]
How to nerf nos:
~ Don't add tracking ~ Don't add stacking ~ Don't add falloff/etc ~ Don't change the way NOS works at all ~ Simply add a certain number of "Utility Hardpoint" to each ship's fitting.
I.E. Limit a Phoon to two "Utility Hardpoints", but keep ships like the Curse flexible.
Nanophoon limited to two heavy NOS? Domis with only two heavy NOS? Problem solved.
This quote quite articulately explains -WHY- NOS must be nerfed (Thank you Ryysa):
Quote: Ryysa
Going to post one more time...
There is a very strong argument about "counters".
The following counters apply to mostly anything ingame: 1. BBB (Bring Bigger Blob). 2. Do the same thing better.
Currently, in addition to the former, there are the following counters to nanoBS: 1. Webbing. 2. Fast Tracking Turrets.
Now, at least there are some counters.
I can't find any counters to NOS. Small ships get wtfpwned by big NOS, there's no module to reduce nossing amount, there's no way to do anything, except nos back more.
This, in my book, is an IWIN module. With NO drawbacks and NO counters.
Guess how many IWIN modules the nanobs fit atm? 4... And the only cruiser sized vessel which can be effectively nanoed up is the curse. Oh, woopsie, it has a RANGE and an AMOUNT bonus to the IWIN module.
Vagabonds can't speedtank while attacking something, if you want to bring this as an argument against the curse. They also can't disable the opponent's tank completely.
Now, if you NOS a nanobs back with 4 nos or deny him the opportunity to NOS his target, he needs, depending on his skills/mwd, to use a cap charge about every 20-30 seconds.
Even with a medium secure container, you won't be carrying much more than 25 charges. That means, you can run your MWD for 10-15 minutes before you run out cap.
Due to current HP buffs, to kill a decently tanked ship of the same class, it takes you 3-4 minutes. If it has an injector, it takes a LOT longer.
Now, if there was a counter to NOS, except fitting more of it (NanoBS has 4...), nanoBS would have to make trips to stations quite often to refill cap charges... Making them almost pointless for any really serious roaming ganking.
They would also lose their huge IWIN button against EVERYTHING smaller size.
Think about it... Trackless weapons/drones are in the game for a very long time now... Nanos are ingame for a very long time...
What forced the nanobs is the fact that it takes forever to kill something that is not out of cap.
Revelations is all about cap. Nanobs are effective at killing cap.
Speedtanking is a viable alternative, I think it should stay ingame. Speedtanking has always had a very high cost on cap.
A battleship shouldn't be able to speedtank forever with 4 nos.
Face it, the CORE problem is not that you can't kill nanobs, it's the fact that they can keep speedtanking forever while killing their targets, WHILE being uncatchable.
Take a vagabond for example, solo, it's a minor nuisance. It might gank your haulers or your ceptors/frigs, but it can't kill anything bigger on it's own.
To deal damage, it has to stop speedtanking.
Forever speedtanking should only be available to interceptors as they are built from the ground up for speedtank, and they have very low HP.
Think about it... are istabs/nanos/mwd's really the problem? Or is it the fact that you can keep it all running forever?
If you had to go to station to refill after 15 minutes of action every time, and that everyone could tank your pathetic damage, because you couldn't make everyone's cap instashutoff, would you still fly a nanoship?
I know i wouldn't.
So as I said before, leave speedtanking to the ships SPECIALIZED in it.
I want to use my vagabond again, I want to use my interceptors again... I am sick of my flying trashcan, yet I keep flying it, because no other ship can outperform it for guerilla warfare right now.
Sad...
--------- |
Thor Xian
Vertigo One E.A.R.T.H. Federation
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 17:20:00 -
[2]
I've been lobbying for actual utility slots for quite some time.
Turret/Launcher/Utility
I do agree with the OP, but I also think the ships (notably Amarr) that have 'utility slots' need to either gain a launcher, or have that slot moved to mid. _________________________ ~Thor Xian, Material Defender
"For all your Material Needs, Vertigo One."
Got Alliance?
Contact me ingame for alliance creation services. |
DarkElf
Caldari DJ's Exotic Dancers Escorts
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 17:24:00 -
[3]
i personally think it's fine as it is. every race can use it. and it is a bs's only real defence against fast moving frig group. without heavy nos draining small ship quickly bs's then any bs would be owned by a group of frigs.
stacking penalty on multiple nos would work pretty well tho in some cases.
DE
|
Thor Xian
Vertigo One E.A.R.T.H. Federation
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 17:27:00 -
[4]
Originally by: DarkElf i personally think it's fine as it is. every race can use it. and it is a bs's only real defence against fast moving frig group. without heavy nos draining small ship quickly bs's then any bs would be owned by a group of frigs.
stacking penalty on multiple nos would work pretty well tho in some cases.
DE
You only really need one or two nos for that. _________________________ ~Thor Xian, Material Defender
"For all your Material Needs, Vertigo One."
Got Alliance?
Contact me ingame for alliance creation services. |
Sally
Caldari R.u.S.H. Red Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 17:31:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Sally on 03/02/2007 17:27:36
NOS are fine as is. Besides, ANYTHING what remove same playstyle from the game making it poorer - is BAD for gameplay and most players. -- Stories: #1 --
|
Kharakan
Amarr Magnificent Beavers Exquisite Malevolence
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 17:36:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Sally Edited by: Sally on 03/02/2007 17:27:36
NOS are fine as is. Besides, ANYTHING what remove same playstyle from the game making it poorer - is BAD for gameplay and most players.
Soooo wrong... it hurts...
this signature space is claimed in the name of eris, haha I got to him first. neeneer
|
Azerrad InExile
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 17:37:00 -
[7]
Sig. Res. and an activation cost.
|
Thor Xian
Vertigo One E.A.R.T.H. Federation
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 17:40:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Kharakan
Originally by: Sally Edited by: Sally on 03/02/2007 17:27:36
NOS are fine as is. Besides, ANYTHING what remove same playstyle from the game making it poorer - is BAD for gameplay and most players.
Soooo wrong... it hurts...
Yeah, nerfing logoffski, nanoships, and supertanking nos ships (that still seem to be doing damage) is bad for the game. So basically don't nerf anything that makes you nearly unkillable. _________________________ ~Thor Xian, Material Defender
"For all your Material Needs, Vertigo One."
Got Alliance?
Contact me ingame for alliance creation services. |
Thor Xian
Vertigo One E.A.R.T.H. Federation
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 17:43:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Azerrad InExile Sig. Res. and an activation cost.
Activation cost is for Energy Neutralizers, Sig res is a nonsolution since it just means BS will be forced to use more nos to put a smaller ship in its place. Unless our guns suddenly decide to track orbiting ceptors, nos nerfage as they are used vs frigs is unacceptable.
The Utility slot idea is a good one, limits how many nos you can fit, so makes BS fights more balanced, and keeps solo frigs in check. _________________________ ~Thor Xian, Material Defender
"For all your Material Needs, Vertigo One."
Got Alliance?
Contact me ingame for alliance creation services. |
Roue
Privateers Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 17:52:00 -
[10]
I don't like NOS the way it is and I am a major user of it.
The problem as I see it, and I know many agree and disagree. Is that unlike every other weapon in this game, NOS lose 0 effectiveness when use against smaller class ships. In fact because their cap damage remains 100% they become even more dramatically affective.
I agree that Battleships shouldn't be easily killed, but I disagree that a significant number of frigs shouldn't be able to do that. Especially if the battleship has no equipment fitted that is designed to engage frigates.
To me I think that 2-3 frigates should require an inane amount of time to destroy a BS, but they should be damn well effective at keeping it from moving or warping away. Which means that it should be a tactical stalemate. Frigates can tackle battleships but not kill them, but get killed by cruisers which get killed by battleships which get tackled effectively by frigates. A nice circle so that the ideal fleet is a composite.
Kind of like real life, you have a nice diversity of ships, not just 5 battleships. Unless some of the battleships were rigged with special weaponry to specifically deal with certain threats.
So for NOS I feel that they should all have the same range. They should all use 20km range. This will even the playing field on usage. Then make it sig based just like any other weapon. No tracking. But for simplicity sake, say average ship radius are 50, 100, 200. frig/cruis/BS. Then the sig of the nos should be 50,100,200 sm/md/hvy and should do 25,50,100 points of nos respectfully (t2/named vary)
This would produce the following: Frigate nos Frigate 25cap exchange (threatening to frigate) Frigate nos Cruiser 25cap exchange (not very threatening) Frigate nos BattleS 25cap exchange (hardly a threat)
Cruiser nos frigaet 25cap exchange (threatening to frigate) Cruiser nos Cruiser 50cap exchange (threatening to cruiser) Cruiser nos BattleS 50cap exchange (Not too concerning)
BattleS nos Frigate 25cap exchange (threatening to frigate) BattleS nos Cruiser 50cap exchange (threatening to cruiser) BattleS nos BattleS 100cap exchange (threatening to BattleS)
So battleships would with their heavy nos would have an upperhand, doing max nos affect but limited to the size of it's target. SO always effective, but never over effective.
So now tell me how a Battleship with 1 heavy Nos can now not break the tackle of a frigate. If you are concerned about multiple frigates, then use multiple NOS and a combination of light drones to kill the frigates as they NOS out. You should be able to tank them.
If the frigates decide to give up a slot for their own nos, then they can counter 1to1 your heavy nos. Unless they have a larger then average sig radius, if they are smaller they even have an advantage.
Curse/Pilgrim ships like that could be given bonuses to range, bonuses to amount, or even given bonuses to the sig precision of their NOS. You could add in modules for nos defense/enhancement. Modules that reduce sig radius would also affect NOS.
But ultimately it comes down to the argument. Should a Battleship be a solo pwnmobile. I say no, Oveur has said no, alot of people say no. Some people want to be able to counter teamwork with a large ship. To them I ask, What is the difference between a battleship being caught by 3 frigates and a battleship being caught by 2 frigates and another battleship. A change in DPS? What's the difference between 1BS 2 frigs vs 1BS 1Cruiser? it's called tactics. 1 person can't perform tactics really. Neither should 1 ship be able to counter tactics. If you fear frigs, fly a cruiser, or bring a cruiser escort.
But that's just my opinion This is my opinion not that of privateer corp, alliance, its member corps, affiliates, minions, pet animals, ex girlfriends, former roommates, 3rd grade gym teachers, late relatives, ontime relatives, |
|
Iudex
Caldari CaIdari Navy
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 18:06:00 -
[11]
I think expecially the NOS usage of dominix must be nerved. On other ships it's still ok, they can either nos OR deal damage. If they nos too much they can't hurt you much and vice versa. But the domi can nos AND deal full damage with it's primary weapons, the drones. So if nos will not be nerved i'd like to see at least a nos penalty on the dominix.
L...i...b...e...r...a...t...e.........C...a...l...d...a...r...i........P...r...i...m...e.!
|
Felinuszzz
Caldari TunDraGon
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 18:51:00 -
[12]
Roue;
Your idea is well thought out, but I suggested such a simple fix as utility slots, because from what I have seen in the past CCP does not like making extremely complicated nerfs that dramatically alter the way the game is played for everyone.
With utlity slots, we'd see support ships (Logistics Ships), being used to fill their intended role more frequently, while at the same time removing the huge imbalance that is the NosNanoBS.
Most Frigates, Cruisers, and Battlecruisers would be unnaffected (bar the NosDroneboat, which would still be viable in a slightly less potent form).
Ships like the curse and pilgrim should be able to use as many NOS/Neut as they want - Logistics ships should be able to use as many remote transfers/reppers as they want - and maybe even as many Nos/Neut as they want - Battleships should be able to fit a Nos and a remote rep without issue......
But battleships with four heavy NOS should not be possible, perhaps bar some faction BS that have innate bonuses to the use of NOS in the first place! --------- |
Christopher Dalran
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 20:03:00 -
[13]
Just one little quick question for all these guys in large frig groups that cant kill a nos ship. Have you ever tried using sensor dampers on your ships? Get everyone the skills that make them more effective and have 5 between your group, now all you have to do is alternate close/far so that everyone has the opportunity to move in and out of his now approx 1 and a half minute lock time (if not close too 2). He shouldnt have the chance to lock any of your ships let alone nos you.
|
Jordan Musgrat
Discordant Provisions
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 20:35:00 -
[14]
IMO there should be a sig res penalty for NOS... Think about it, it doesn't hurt normal ships like blasterthron or really any close range setup, they will be hit anyway. But it will hurt really really fast ships like inty/frigs/nanoBS and force them to use cap boosters. Maybe it should be not very much for 1 NOS, a fair amount for 2, lots for 3, and so much for 4/5+ that a dread could hit it in seige.
|
Shiv Ertai
Gallente Direct Intent The Makhai
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 20:41:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Shiv Ertai on 03/02/2007 20:42:21 Edited by: Shiv Ertai on 03/02/2007 20:40:03 This is just a rant about WHY nos should be nerfed in non-game mechanic terms.
I have seen people complain that nos should not be nerfed because it is their only defense to small fast ships. This is complete and utter bull****. Battleships are slow moving, hard hitting bastards. They have poor tracking and poor scan resolution by design. THEY ARE NOT MEANT TO TAKE OUT SMALL FAST SHIPS. If you look at any fleet in the real world, or even in fantasy/sci-fi worlds, they are always a mixture of smaller, faster ships, and slower heavier hitters. Battleships should always have escorts. Now you say "Hmm, the best non-capital ship needs an escort?! WTF?!". The escort is to defend it from the smaller ships that would harass it. If flying around solo in a battleship, a small gang of frigates should be able to take it out... after ofc waiting however long for it's tank to die (If you can out-damage it's tank).
EDIT: Just thought of a solution: you can only nos ships of a larger class than your own. (Frig vs Cruiser, Cruiser vs BS, BS vs Capital ship)
EDIT: Just realized the above idea makes the Curse king of the hill. I guess it will take multiple things working together to nerf nos in a way that would make it still usable, but not completely overpowered.
One ship to jam them all, one ship to damp them. One ship to suck them dry and in the dark void gank them. |
Sally
Caldari R.u.S.H. Red Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 21:32:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Jordan Musgrat IMO there should be a sig res penalty for NOS... Think about it, it doesn't hurt normal ships like blasterthron or really any close range setup, they will be hit anyway. But it will hurt really really fast ships like inty/frigs/nanoBS and force them to use cap boosters. Maybe it should be not very much for 1 NOS, a fair amount for 2, lots for 3, and so much for 4/5+ that a dread could hit it in seige.
As long as there are no damage penalty for smaller guns against large ships - i dont see any reasons to nerf NOS. Think, after all small guns shouldnt penetrate thick BS armor as easy as frig armor... -- Stories: #1 --
|
HankMurphy
Pelennor Swarm Eternal Rangers of Terror
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 21:33:00 -
[17]
hardpoints for NOS is the simplest and most logical solution to the issue.
of course there are lots of problems in the game that could be remedied w/ simple solutions and i dont see them hopping on those either so..... g/l seeing it happen.
|
vile56
Nubs. Anarchy Empire
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 21:48:00 -
[18]
as long as maller remains with 2 and curse with 5 i have no problem
|
Twin blade
Minmatar The Caldari Confederation
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 21:55:00 -
[19]
Best fix to Nos that could be added it don't Nerf Nos but stops it been overpowerd.
!
|
welsh wizard
0utbreak
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 22:01:00 -
[20]
One idea was to make small nos long range and heavy nos short range. That way frigs don't get completely splatted by heavy nos and battleships will be forced in closer.
Nos is currently the great decider in many fights, I wouldn't say its overpowered but it could do with some changes to spice up gameplay a bit. It's sometimes a little too absolute ie,, "Oh he/she had nos so he/she won".
|
|
Taipan Gedscho
Taipan Industries
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 22:10:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Thor Xian
Originally by: Azerrad InExile Sig. Res. and an activation cost.
Activation cost is for Energy Neutralizers, Sig res is a nonsolution since it just means BS will be forced to use more nos to put a smaller ship in its place. Unless our guns suddenly decide to track orbiting ceptors, nos nerfage as they are used vs frigs is unacceptable.
i think the point behind this, is, that when your target is dry, you actually lose energy when youre not careful.
im really against all that nos nerfing whinage, but i think this would add a little bit of player skill requirement to use nos properly.
plus cap boosters and timing become a more viable nos defense.
|
Mortuus
Minmatar Just-fun Dark Matter Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 22:10:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Sally
Originally by: Jordan Musgrat IMO there should be a sig res penalty for NOS... Think about it, it doesn't hurt normal ships like blasterthron or really any close range setup, they will be hit anyway. But it will hurt really really fast ships like inty/frigs/nanoBS and force them to use cap boosters. Maybe it should be not very much for 1 NOS, a fair amount for 2, lots for 3, and so much for 4/5+ that a dread could hit it in seige.
As long as there are no damage penalty for smaller guns against large ships - i dont see any reasons to nerf NOS. Think, after all small guns shouldnt penetrate thick BS armor as easy as frig armor...
Well, you are in luck, we already have this. Its called lower DPS from frigates and massive tanks on battleships. A properly setup BS has nothing to really worry about from 2-3 frigates short of it can't get away if something bigger comes through. 4-5 Frigates SHOULD toast a BS unless the BS is setup to kill them. Hell, I know I can pull frigates down easy with a dual webbing AC Tempest, and tank the little bastards for a loooong time.
ex-Occassus Republica <3 |
Katrina Coreli
Soar Angelic
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 22:27:00 -
[23]
Ive already posted what i think would work for NOS.
Simply have feedback, if you try and take say 300 cap and your target only has 260 your target gets no penalty and you get a feedback of say 260 cap loss.
Stops NOS being I Win vs ships smaller than you, nerfs nano setups cause you wont have enough cap to sustain their MWDs and would force NOS users to think about it rather than turning em on and waiting for the enemy to pop.
Thoughts would be appreciated..
|
Psrina Dorsai
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 22:52:00 -
[24]
Wow a bunch of crybabys getting NOSed so they take it to the Forums. Only person here that made any sense was the guy that posted about Sensor Damps. There are plenty of ways to prevent being NOSed. U have to lock on the target to use the NOS .. DOH! just disrupt the targeting of the bigger ship> As far as frigates being owned by NOS Battleships, if you keep your sig radius low (NO MWD) and use some ECM modules why would you have a problem? And why is your Frigate gang trying to gank a battleship? If I was in a frigate and I didnt have some support ships with me im supposed to be owned.. Makes no sense that 3-4 Frigates can take down a battleship without heavy casualites. Anyone ever study real Naval warfare? Battleships owned the day. I joined EVE to get away from cry cry cry waa waaa the game is unfair 'Everquest/WOW' players. Now we got whine 'my frigate cant take down a battleship'... Guess what, if u want to kill a battleship, get a bigger ship or bigger blob, or skill train your way into something that can compete.
|
Thor Xian
Vertigo One E.A.R.T.H. Federation
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 22:55:00 -
[25]
Hate to burst your bubble, but I'm not usually a victim of nos...even when flying an Armageddon. _________________________ ~Thor Xian, Material Defender
"For all your Material Needs, Vertigo One."
Got Alliance?
Contact me ingame for alliance creation services. |
Valandril
Caldari Resurrection R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 23:02:00 -
[26]
1/10, posted 1milion times already -------- Don't like my post ? Mail me Flamedrone II belonging to Valandril perfectly strikes you, wrecking your topic.
|
Samirol
OctoberSnow Corp
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 23:12:00 -
[27]
Nosadomis are hardly supertanking.
If you fit out a nanoship with the right implants, you deserve a little bit of invulnerability.
Fine as is.
|
R'adeh
Gallente Gekidoku Koroshiya Buntai
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 23:17:00 -
[28]
Here we go again
There are counters to NOS. A BS with a NOS should be able to disable a bloody frig! Quit your "omg, this elephant can disable mosquitoes....so unfair" whining!! _______________________________________________
My views are my own and I don't represent my corp. |
Commander Thrawn
Tarnak inc.
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 23:35:00 -
[29]
signed, leave nos as is but give utility slot hardpoint. wont happen tho this was all said when rmr came out
|
Drazin DawnTreader
|
Posted - 2007.02.03 23:51:00 -
[30]
The only problem I have with NoS in its current state is that it 100% disables me from doing my job every time. No Interceptor can lock down a larger ship that uses a NoS. And We all know Interceptors dont exactly have the room to fit a Dampener in their tackle slots.
Last Battleship I tackled I was spot on. Got in range clean, Locked him down and started targetting his drones. Unfortunetly he was damn good and wiped out my party. Turned his Heavy NoS on me and I was empty in the blink of an eye. But instead of warping away safely, -He- scrambled -Me- then Webbed me and proceeded to pound my little Inty into dust. Amazingly he gave up and let me go instead of continuing.
The problem is, 1 round of his NoS with my Tackle gear active and my Inty all but turned off. I cant shoot, I can zoom, I can't web, I cant scramble, I cant armor repair... Nothing. Sure, NoS has its uses and is a great asset for many ships. Its just too powerful against ships smaller than itself.
The NoS proposal by Roue is very cool and I like it alot. Better than that though... Make Signature radius Determine NoS amount. Small sig Radius... Small nos transfer. Large sig radius... Large nos transfer.
You'd get 400 energy vs my Passive Drake. but only 25 vs my Inty.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |