| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Leneerra
Minmatar
Trinity Nova
KIA Alliance
   |
Posted - 2007.04.29 07:53:00 -
[1]
First of all lets limit the scope of this discussion
-I know currently nos are almost the only surefire way to deal with 5km/s inties. My proposal will rece the efectivenes of nos on smaller ships but it nos should still be a functioning deterrant this proposal is balanced correctly. I also hope another type of frig deterrant is made availeble to bigger ships
-Nos are not 'Fine as they are'. argument on a point by point nature if you disagrea but I will innore such statements
-While /signed posts do keep a tread on the first page they add nothing else, please refrain
-I personally think too many weaponsystems are affected by target speed already. In addition I think it is am imprecise tool to regulate effects between ships of different size classes, Most of the time signature radius is used for this modefied by speed.
Using these to base it all on would hamper ballancing between slower frigs and bs for instance and further reduce mwd usefullness. I want to try something different in this suggestion.
The Idear
-Add an activation cost in cap to nosferatu's (invest a little cap to get more from the enemy)
-Make cap baterries immune to nos (and neutralizers?) so exclude them from the next calculations
-Rather than signature use ralative current capacitor charge (not percentage filled but actual cap remaining in your capacitor to the amount in their capacitor) to modify the amount of cap you drain on a nos cycle (so your heavy nos effectively becomes a small neut when your bs cap and the target frig capacitor are both full, and maybe an verry inefficient one at that too).
-Have the amount of cap drained be affected by the percentage of cap remaining in the target capacitor, scale it like 20% efectiveness at about 33% cap remaining to 100% effectiveness at 100% capacitor charge (maybe with some intresting curve to it like the apacitor recharge curve)
-Make Small nos ignore all capacitor charge over 400 on the vessel fitting it for calculations on its effectiveness. Make medium nos ignore any capacitor charge over 4000 for the same
In my opinion this would still allow heavy (and medium) nos to be a deterrant against smaller ships but not as cripling as they are now. In addition this would reduce the efectiveness of nos as a gank weapon without making them useless in 1v1
|
Donna Maria
|
Posted - 2007.04.29 17:52:00 -
[2]
WaaaaWaaaa... someone NOSed my Inty and i got podded.. WAAAA!!..
|
Dana Serenity
|
Posted - 2007.04.29 19:49:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Dana Serenity on 29/04/2007 19:47:00
OK, while I do agree that NOS's are not balanced and need looking at, there are a few problems I can see with your ideas
1. Adding an activation cost to NOS's is pretty much defeating the whole point of NOS's as they take power from a targets cap and puts it in your own ship.
2. Making cap batteries immune to NOS is pointless as they offer limited cap and they already effect NOS by making it take longer to drain you.
Infact there is one simple idea I can think off which would work in balancing out NOS's
Make them effected by sig radius the same as missiles. What this simply means is large nos's will suck less power out of small ships than they will out of large ships meaning that frigs will not suffer instant cap death upon getting Nosed by a battleship. With a bit of calculation, this will mean that NOS's will still be effetive against frigates but not as crippling as they are now.
Hell I would like it so small nos's take more energy from big targets aswell but I think that might be pushing it 
|
Kramer Verone
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.04.29 20:10:00 -
[4]
nos are fine and I will "innore" your post to the contrary
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente
Cadien Cybernetics
|
Posted - 2007.04.30 00:11:00 -
[5]
Nos is overpowered, yes.
Thus the drained energy amount should be reduced and fitting requirements increased.
That would probably fix it.
Regarding interceptors I'd suggest a different approach.
Give battleships some other means of defense and in turn reduce heavy Nos range to 15km.
Some ideas:
- 20km Long Range Webber with low % speed reduction
- Improve webbing drones or add some high speed ones
Just trying to think out of the box.
_________________________________
- The sky is the sky wherever you go - |
Kramer Verone
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.04.30 00:23:00 -
[6]
 Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Just trying to think out of the box.
I strongly recommend you stay inside the box before you fall off.
What part of an inty or two shouldn't be able to solo a battleship, ever, do you not understand?
your idea doesn't fix nos, it kills it.
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente
Cadien Cybernetics
|
Posted - 2007.04.30 00:26:00 -
[7]
Omg, you really think Nos as the only way to counter inties is a good concept?
Btw. I don't use to fly inties. Much more often I fly a Dominix. So what?
Iirc I said give battleships new/other means to counter fast moving ships, didn't I?
_________________________________
- The sky is the sky wherever you go - |
Viro Melchior
|
Posted - 2007.04.30 01:25:00 -
[8]
I too believe that NOS are overpowered. To the OP though, using good english is a MUST for a long post like this. It was irritating to read through the misspellings, lack of proper spacing and punctuation and other such writing errors.
That said, I think some of the ideas raised that would best balance NOS counteract the following balance issues:
Large NOS vs small ships (insta-drain)
NOS is the winner in any long fight because it empties your enemies cap while filling your own at no cost in cargo space (vs boosters).
The ways to balance this out are simply to make signature radius (or max cap could be the value used) determine efficiency. Small NOS would work at 100% on anything with at least 200 capacitor, Medium would need 800, and Heavy would need 3200. Then your tiny little frigate with it's 300 cap would only lose 9% of the drain (about 12-15 cap on a heavy NOS), effectively neutralizing the NOS's massive destructive power. Then in order to reduce the advantage provided by NOS in PvP between two cap-reliant ships, use the suggestion to tie the % in to the capacitor percentage. A target with 20% cap would provide 20% the return. In order to balance this back out, increase NOS values by 50%. They will become *amazing* in PvE for providing capacitor (which IMHO won't ruin balance much at all), and work well for lowering an enemy's capacitor in PvP to a mid-point. If they barely have enough cap recharge to stabilize in the 30-50% region, your NOS will still be strong enough to break through their recharge, but you will still need to employ neutralizers in order to completely empty the capacitor. Which, it should be noted, should also be adjusted to be affected by ship size at this point. Neutralizers will be the mod designed for cleaning out a targets cap, while NOS is centered around providing a slight tilt in cap advantage.
|
Leneerra
Minmatar
Trinity Nova
KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.04.30 01:46:00 -
[9]
Donna.
Did not happen, sorry.
Dana.
The idear to add a cap cost will have the following effects
Concerning your point 1
-If targeting a same class ship with full cap you will get as much cap as you do now
-If targeting a ship on wich you get less cap returned, for whatever reason, then the nos becomes more inefficient
-The skill reducing activation cost as required to operate nos will now actually make operating a nos more efficient
Concerning your point 2
-I think cap batteries can use a boost and they do not really help that much with nos currently. Capacitor boosters are used because they cannot be drained by nos
-I specificaly wanted to exclude signature radius, mwd effects and such, to have at least 1 weapon system thatacts realy differently.
Kramer.
Why are they fine.
I have seen so many nos domies (and other nos ships) lately that it is not funny anymore.
My suggestions will reduce the killing strike they do against smaller ships.
They will reduce their effectiveness when used en masse on a single target or ganking (Something that is being looked at for guns as well).
The penalty that this way you would loose cap when targeting a drained ship is something fitting in my opinion as it is the only module that at the same time hampers the enemy as wel as benefits the user.
Tarron.
I think heavy nos have sufficiently demanding fittings, I think the problem lies in the way they currently work.
With regard to your comparison to webbing, I Will disregar it as I am trying to discuss nos, not webbing there are a multitude of modules to balance the nos on, for instance 20 km scramblers.
Lastly
As I mentioned before, something to fit on a bs to help it deal with inties (and other frigates), that is not also the best think to help you tank and kill an opponents tank is very much needed. Sadly nosferatu's by their very nature cannot fill this role.
|
Leneerra
Minmatar
Trinity Nova
KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.04.30 02:42:00 -
[10]
Viro.
Thank you for weeding trough my spelling and looking for the value in the idear, not the words. I will try to improve, but it was rather late (as it is now).
I decided to use current capacitor as the basis for effect to allow among other behaviour: Draining that frig just that little bit as your cap is running out to facilitate escape from its scrambler and safe your ass at the last seccond, provided you time it well.
With regard to your cap values and the calculation of relative cap. As my idear was based on comparing current cap there would be little effect already of a fully charged bs (7000 cap including skills) draining a frig (up to 500 cap including skills). the Cap limits (that were quite arbetrairy) are to help when fitting a smaller sized nos on a larger ship to use it against smaller ships.
After looking at them I ajusted to the following values:
-Make a small nos ignore cap over 500 on the ship it is fitted on so it can effectively drain a destroyer and slightly less effectively drain a frigate when fitted on a bigger ship. This also provides some size protection for frigs from nos fitted destroyers as those will be at the top end of the 500 cap and most frig will have between 200 to 300 cap.
-Make med nos ignore cap over 2500 or even 3000.
offering a similar effect as with the smaller nos between cruisers and battle cruisers and slightly improving the power ratio for cruisers as compared to bs or bc, something I think they can use.
Other than that I concurr with you on the described behavior on the nos, this is exactly the behaviour I seek to create with my suggestions.
I also like your suggestion of making neutralizers the module to realy clean out the cap on your target. That said they should also be balance for size. For this to work properly perhaps a comparison on max cap limited the same way as the nos (500 max counted on a small and 2500 or 3000 on a medium) obtains the best results.
|
Aki Yamato
|
Posted - 2007.04.30 10:31:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Kramer Verone
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Just trying to think out of the box.
I strongly recommend you stay inside the box before you fall off.
What part of an inty or two shouldn't be able to solo a battleship, ever, do you not understand?
your idea doesn't fix nos, it kills it.
Why not ?
BIG GUN
BIG FUTURE |
Kramer Verone
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.04.30 22:52:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Kramer Verone on 30/04/2007 22:48:34
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Omg, you really think Nos as the only way to counter inties is a good concept?
It's not a good concept, but currently, it's the only concept. A good concept would be having light drones go as fast as their target.
|
Kramer Verone
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.04.30 22:57:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Leneerra
My suggestions will reduce the killing strike they do against smaller ships.
that suggestion is not logical. big ship > small ship.
Originally by: Leneerra
The penalty that this way you would loose cap when targeting a drained ship is something fitting in my opinion as it is the only module that at the same time hampers the enemy as wel as benefits the user.
Neutralizers already exist, and will still kill your useless inty in one zap rather than a few like with the nos.
|
Suoh Amshar
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 00:14:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Viro Melchior
I too believe that NOS are overpowered. To the OP though, using good english is a MUST for a long post like this. It was irritating to read through the misspellings, lack of proper spacing and punctuation and other such writing errors.
That said, I think some of the ideas raised that would best balance NOS counteract the following balance issues:
Large NOS vs small ships (insta-drain)
NOS is the winner in any long fight because it empties your enemies cap while filling your own at no cost in cargo space (vs boosters).
The ways to balance this out are simply to make signature radius (or max cap could be the value used) determine efficiency. Small NOS would work at 100% on anything with at least 200 capacitor, Medium would need 800, and Heavy would need 3200. Then your tiny little frigate with it's 300 cap would only lose 9% of the drain (about 12-15 cap on a heavy NOS), effectively neutralizing the NOS's massive destructive power. Then in order to reduce the advantage provided by NOS in PvP between two cap-reliant ships, use the suggestion to tie the % in to the capacitor percentage. A target with 20% cap would provide 20% the return. In order to balance this back out, increase NOS values by 50%. They will become *amazing* in PvE for providing capacitor (which IMHO won't ruin balance much at all), and work well for lowering an enemy's capacitor in PvP to a mid-point. If they barely have enough cap recharge to stabilize in the 30-50% region, your NOS will still be strong enough to break through their recharge, but you will still need to employ neutralizers in order to completely empty the capacitor. Which, it should be noted, should also be adjusted to be affected by ship size at this point. Neutralizers will be the mod designed for cleaning out a targets cap, while NOS is centered around providing a slight tilt in cap advantage.
Ive read the whole thread up to this point and atm (giving everyone's words equal value) i think that this is so far the best idea. I applaud you Mr. Melchior. Also, the other ideas are good too but we cant all have 1st place ~_^
|
Angelus Xenotov
|
Posted - 2007.05.01 00:17:00 -
[15]
The NOS tears, we're at sea in them, they're everywhere, but you can be damn sure the moment they go PVP they go out with a rack of NOS.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |