EVE Search - Nosferatu Changes

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Nosferatu Changes

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
KtB	Posted - 2007.07.31 04:30:00 - [1] Nosferatu Changes In their current implementation Nosferatus not only neutralize cap of the targeted ship, but also leeches energy for your own ship. For instance a Heavy Nosferatu I gives you 8en/s and the peak recharge rate of a Megathron is about 20en/s with good skills, so a single Heavy Nosferatu I gives you about 40% increase in cap recharge rate. Even if the Nosferatu didn't leech energy it would still be a useful module since it can neutralize a capacitor at no (energy) cost to yourself. The problem, then, is that Nosferatus allows one to both leech energy off a target and at the same time neutralize its capacitor. This makes the Nosferatus too powerful since there is no compromise involved. To address this issue we have changed the effect on Nosferatus (but not on Energy Neutralizers) in order to make the Nosferatu less powerful as an Energy Neutralizer without affecting its ability to leech energy. Under the new system, the amount transferred by a Nosferatu is based on the relative capacitor charge levels (measured in percent). Energy is only transferred while the charge percentage of the targeted ship is higher than the charge percentage of the ship that activated the Nosferatu. This means that the target is no worse off (energy wise) than the attacking ship. For instance, if a battleship with 30% capacitor left activates a Nosferatu on a frigate, then the frigate is not drained below 30%. In other words, the Nosferatu would not drain the capacitor of the frigate completely, though an Energy Neutralizer would do the job nicely (but at an energy cost to the battleship). It is, however, still possible to use Nosferatus to drain a target if one is willing to sacrifice ones own energy to do so. The official thing if you havent read it^^^^^^^ This is plain bull****. They haven't really thought about bs' vs bs' NOS warefare. They are just trying to stop little ships caps getting drained in one shot. If you want to do that, base it on sig radius or some crap!! So now battleships in combat with 100% cap each vs each other...... Why the hell would nos be used anymore? Erm not even battleship combat etc. Name me one reason why nos would be helpfull now.. Oh yeh my caps at 40% lets feed off this other ship thats been in the battle aslong as me and probably has the same cap as me! Doh i cant drain any cap because we have the same %! That just renders NOS ineffective COMPLETELY. Their argument is that nos is too powerfull. How so?? Do you actually use it in pvp devs? At the moment with equal ship sizes in combat it takes you along time to drain someone else cap. Otherwise if your talking about a battleship instantly power draining a little ships cap, think of another solution! Also its just the same as a missile boat slamming a little ship with missiles, BOOM! Big ship kills little ship, thats just how it is... Okay battleships vs interceptors = instant cap drain and no mwd to get out of there. Yes i see that problem. But this solution is clearly NOT going to work. IF you however think that alot of ships carrying NOS and ganking with it is overpowering, well no not at all. Its just like all them ships fit for dps, instead of the ship going BOOM its caps drained and it goes BOOM shortly after... Base it on the ships sig radius somehow like everything else in this game is. I really have no idea what compelled you to bring out this method of "balancing?"?? You may aswell remove NOS from the game completely. As no one's going to bother using it if this change goes into effect. Seriously.
David GramSchmidt	Posted - 2007.07.31 04:44:00 - [2] I completely agree this is a silly change that makes no sense. Now, if Nosferatu's took up medium slots, they might have a points. But Nosferatu's take up high slots, which means you can field less weapons, which makes that potential point I was thinking of rather moot. I thought the whole point of Nosferatu's was to drain a ship dry, isn't that why they call them "Energy Vampires" ? I don't think it's very vampyric for the vampire to say to his/her prey "okay you have blood, I don't, let's split the difference, mmkay?"
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2007.07.31 05:28:00 - [3] neuts are used to drain a ship dry vamps are used to get extra energy form a ship with a cap advantage. ----------------------------------- I'm working my way through college target CCP Quote: CCP posted a new dev blog, they are going to bring Nos in line with.....well....logic
Arte Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2007.07.31 06:06:00 - [4] I've only just come across this post as I looked for info as to what the Nos changes were and I can't see that it would be a game breaking change. Although it would affect the way NOS are used at the moment, it would redefine their role. Neut would be the offensive module used to drain an opponents capacitor. Nos would be the defensive counter to that. If you want to win by draining someone's capacitor (such as a tackling interceptor) then fit neutralizers. If your capacitor is low because you are being neutralized then you can drain off whoever is doing it, so it becomes your saviour. (that was the one reason it could be useful that you asked for). Nos in certain circumstances ceases to be the 'i-win' button it became. Capacitor flux might be more useful so that you could deliberately run your cap at low levels just so that you could use Nos. So there, with a bit of thought, it doesn't render them useless. Just removes the usefulness in certain circumstances. Neutralizers still serve the purpose if you wish to drain the enemies cap.
Arte Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2007.07.31 06:07:00 - [5] Edited by: Arte on 31/07/2007 06:07:36 Originally by: MotherMoon neuts are used to drain a ship dry vamps are used to get extra energy form a ship with a cap advantage. Or you could just read what he said 'cause it says the same thing... Still - no problem.
Markousa Minmatar Pator Tech School	Posted - 2007.07.31 06:12:00 - [6] Hi Guys I know i'am probally in panic mode and not that I use them a lot but what the hell? Eve is removing the paper scissor rock conundrum I notice in most of the forums that say nerf nos nerf nos. they curse is the biggest punching bag i mean really the curse can hurt you if it catches you hiding in a belt ratting where the rats do the dps and the curse breaks your tank . By making nos useless what has the curse got? It certainly doesnÆt have dps. I mean tanked curses are nasty but all it can do is nos you it canÆt hurt you and a nanocurse is tough to beat but you get a web on him heÆs boned because last time I checked nano's have no tanks. If he has a buddy with him with dps then what can I say itÆs your fault getting caught by him. So now that makes another ship nerfed are ccp really trying to move the focus away from 1v1 or small roaming gangs and onto HUGE fleet battles? Well that doesnÆt work either usually there is to much lag and people canÆt see or shoot anything anyway last fleet I was in was about 50/50 either side the lag was impossible Another reason for the nos nerf really is it to extend fights. another example is fleet battles no matter what tank you have your dead in 3 seconds so they cant extent fights that way either the other one would be small fights but that doesnÆt work either e.g. Ratter raven gets stuck in belt near home system small 4 man gang attacks raven raven tanks some damage and screams in corp chat for help corp comes with 14 man gang small 4 man gang runs away. ThatÆs from my experience so how is this a pvp game again? And wouldnÆt the golden rule be DONT GET STUCK IN A BELT WITH HOSTILES? Is it coming to the point where eve is becoming like real life and common sense is going out the window? Nerf nos you have nerfed a wide range of ships whatÆs next? Vagabond - nanoships are getting hit hard I wouldnÆt be surprised if this goes next wait we will take away the speed bonus at add a energy weapon bonus genius Remote Damps - well they probably do need a nerf yet some how the nos kind of got hit first when damps are probably the best defense against nos so again ccp have made people who brought a very expensive ship have another expensive paperweight I mean really you might as well take away shield boosters OMG my 1 gun cant kill a bs nerf it nerf it . A little exaggerated I know but really is that what this game is coming to? The way this game is now there is no way any amount of hardware will fix large fleet battles Jita is the best example. they keep fixing it but last I checked its still laggy the less lag you get the more people go there the more go there the more lag you get hence a vicious cycle
Lance Fighter Amarr	Posted - 2007.07.31 06:21:00 - [7] Edited by: Lance Fighter on 31/07/2007 06:21:06 From what I can understand of your last post, You are saying that some ships are no longer I-win buttons? How can this be? Can this mean that you have to THINK to fit a ship now? OH NO NERF NERF... Seriously people.
Vitelius Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.07.31 06:27:00 - [8] New rules, new fittings, new tactics. That's all there is to it. So your current fit doesn't work soon and you're understandably angry - but these changes happen and the game is continuously being balanced. Figure out a new way to use your ship, there are plenty of ways. I'm not very fond of this change either but at least it does change things from the nber nos-without-countermeasures and it will be interesting to see how it changes the way battles are fought. Nerfing it this way is perhaps not the best way of solving it but at least they're doing something. ---
Arte Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2007.07.31 06:28:00 - [9] Edited by: Arte on 31/07/2007 06:28:42 EDIT To Markousa... You're talking about a lot of things there fella. Sticking to the curse issue as that seems to be your main bone of contention - I can see that it would be an issue but it puts the curse in a specific role which can no longer a solo pwn mobile. Curse pilots will still be able to work, just no longer with a high cap level, they will have to have lower % cap to be effective, therefore they will have to think a great deal more rather than just pressing the f-keys. I don't fly them - so can't say what my ideas for alternative fits would be but everyone would have to adapt anyway - and besides amarr a due a buff soon...
Markousa Minmatar Pator Tech School	Posted - 2007.07.31 06:36:00 - [10] as with everything nerfs fix and destroy things . a curse is not an IWIN button 1v1 as most people seem to love to use as an example . Curse uses NoS takes all your cap can no longer drain any more cap because you have none . so which means both you and him are sitting there with no cap the curse cant do any dps at all other than drones and most people that get in fights use their drones so sounds more of an even fight other than an IWIN button .

Lance Fighter Amarr	Posted - 2007.07.31 06:51:00 - [11] Originally by: Markousa as with everything nerfs fix and destroy things . a curse is not an IWIN button 1v1 as most people seem to love to use as an example . Curse uses NoS takes all your cap can no longer drain any more cap because you have none . so which means both you and him are sitting there with no cap the curse cant do any dps at all other than drones and most people that get in fights use their drones so sounds more of an even fight other than an IWIN button . except you forget, once your opponent has no cap, you are still regening cap, while you are stealing what little regen the other guy gets. You effectively are making plenty of cap, while the other guy cant run a repper properly. And a curse can do 233 dps with a set of hammerhead IIs, if the guy i stole the numbers from did his math right.
Bongpipe Bum	Posted - 2007.07.31 07:09:00 - [12] I think the stupidest arguement is the "there is no compromise" Sure there is, I could be using a missile launcher in my highslot for dps instead of draining cap. Is there a downside to fitting an artillery? Do i shoot myself while i shoot it? Not really. Face it, this change isn't very well thought out, nor the reasoning behind the change. NOSes aren't "IWIN" buttons by a longshot. They are a feasible way to break tanks within a reasonable amount of time without using a disgusting amount of ammo. NOS changes, coupled with cloaking changes, make me believe that CCP is just trying to destroy the "behind enemy lines" sabotage aspect of this game. Read: Making more carebear.
Galan Amarias Amarr Vendetta Underground Rule of Three	Posted - 2007.07.31 07:12:00 - [13] I wnat to say it pains me to agree with Deep Core, but as a Pilgrim pilot I fail to see how this will be all that terrible for me. It would mean instead of 2 nos and 1 energy disruptor I fot 2 disruptors and mabey a pulse laser. With the bonus for ship I can still crush your cap w/o risking mine too bad. What this change takes up the river is the nosdominix/nosmyrm/nos whatever that little af was with the drones. Basically Galentee no longer get the I Win button on us poor amarr sob's unless they really want to go for the neuts. They did the same thing to the casual ECM user with too many mids on that nerf. Seriously, how many people use neuts? Although, if they are going to tinkier with the nos PLEASE change either the range drain rate or cpu requirement of the T2nos and drainer. As it stands they are useless compared to their named T1 equivilants. -Galan
Amaldor Themodius	Posted - 2007.07.31 07:12:00 - [14] Honestly this is a terrible "fix" to the nosferatu complaints.. Like others here i join your chorus of protest the module is now a usless fitting.. not really sure what ccp are thinking on this one but i really hope the dev responsible is subject to some form of cruel and unsual torture... The solution presented does nothing to enhance game play, fails to balance the item, and appears to lack any real thought process on the role of nosferatu in game.. Needless to say it just doesnt make sense.. i know its a computer game but for me plausability is a large part of my enjoyment of the game and to my mind i cant see any possible explanation for the unti to function with these mechanics. To CCP a truly awful result your vision, creativity and play testing on this leave a lot to be desired... sincerely you should be embarassed ... CCP is better than this poor solution, no time like the present to show some thought leadership and find another means to address your concerns with the mechanics of NOS. To any who ask... No u cant have my stuff, Eve is still my fav game, one awful rule doesnt spoil the game.
Bobby Atlas Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2007.07.31 07:21:00 - [15] The nos change seems very far removed from the actual problem, a sig radius based nerf would have been far more fitting. Not like there isnt a litany of bigger problems right now CCP could be devoting time too... sure nos has long been slightly over powered but this change is slightly out of context.
CHAOS100 Momentum. The Reckoning.	Posted - 2007.07.31 07:32:00 - [16] I really disagree with this change; imo it is not the correct way to fix it, I would much prefer a sig radius method. Curses are gunna be butt hurt if this nerf goes through. --------------
Hermy Nator	Posted - 2007.07.31 07:58:00 - [17] So i guess my curse is worthless now, and my Corpum Nosferatu`s just halfed their value Well done, and thank you CCP go f*** yourself
Evil Eden	Posted - 2007.07.31 08:15:00 - [18] 2 months Curse training down the drain, Cancels Amarr Cruiser Level 5 Reprocesses all Amarr ships and modules as they are now worth jack squat Thanks CCP you even managed to give Amarr another real good kick in the balls,the score is now what? Amarr 0 - 2 CCP Even the Nos specific ships, Curse and Pilgrim are now pretty much worthless, whatÆs there role now? you nos someone and its going to take a lot lot lot lot lot longer to break there tank, by which time they have called in backup, logged in sheer boredom or died of old age.
Arthur Frayn	Posted - 2007.07.31 08:41:00 - [19] Edited by: Arthur Frayn on 31/07/2007 08:42:12 Originally by: Evil Eden 2 months Curse training down the drain, Cancels Amarr Cruiser Level 5 Reprocesses all Amarr ships and modules as they are now worth jack squat Thanks CCP you even managed to give Amarr another real good kick in the balls,the score is now what? Amarr 0 - 2 CCP Even the Nos specific ships, Curse and Pilgrim are now pretty much worthless, whatÆs there role now? you nos someone and its going to take a lot lot lot lot lot longer to break there tank, by which time they have called in backup, logged in sheer boredom or died of old age. I can't help laughing at you and every player like you who are bawling their eyes out over losing the great and mighty advantage you've all had. All day I've been beaming, grinning, and winking at nobody in particular while thinking about all the pilots out there who won't so easily be podded anymore, because now the ones doing the easy podding will have to take some risk doing it. Enjoy things the way that CCP, the builders of this vast playground and who let you play in it every day, has now decided they should be.
Voltaeis Gemini	Posted - 2007.07.31 08:45:00 - [20] OMG!! What are they thinking... of all the discussion on controlling NOS they chose this fix.. So NOS only works if proportionally your opponent has greater percentage of cap left than you.. I agree with all the game play aspects listed above but to add further to the comments of others.. Why would anyone invent a weapon that only works from a position of inferiority? Like others i share concern for the role of NOS related vessels (Curse and Pilgrim) as clearly another slap in the face to all Amarr players.. I consider the new NOS function a knee jerk reaction by CCP to the complaints of forum trolls on the current NOS function. The existing NOS is not an i win button and is easily countered by cap boosters (perhaps not for the win but certainly for the escape) in the interests of quality PVP experiences please rethink this move.. Someone said it above.. Eve needs to retain the Rock, Paper, Siccors aspect or it runs the risk of becoming linear and predictable. Disgusted !!

Voltaeis Gemini	Posted - 2007.07.31 08:54:00 - [21] Originally by: Arthur Frayn Edited by: Arthur Frayn on 31/07/2007 08:42:12 Originally by: Evil Eden 2 months Curse training down the drain, Cancels Amarr Cruiser Level 5 Reprocesses all Amarr ships and modules as they are now worth jack squat Thanks CCP you even managed to give Amarr another real good kick in the balls,the score is now what? Amarr 0 - 2 CCP Even the Nos specific ships, Curse and Pilgrim are now pretty much worthless, whatÆs there role now? you nos someone and its going to take a lot lot lot lot lot longer to break there tank, by which time they have called in backup, logged in sheer boredom or died of old age. I can't help laughing at you and every player like you who are bawling their eyes out over losing the great and mighty advantage you've all had. All day I've been beaming, grinning, and winking at nobody in particular while thinking about all the pilots out there who won't so easily be podded anymore, because now the ones doing the easy podding will have to take some risk doing it. Enjoy things the way that CCP, the builders of this vast playground and who let you play in it every day, has now decided they should be. Arthur Frayn.. You raise some particularly poigniant and thought provoking points (NOT).. Simply put u Sir are an IDIOT. Noobs like u will continue to die in your thousands nerfing NOS will not offset your intrinsic lack of skill and PVP instinct. If u thought NOS was an i win button then its clear.. U FAIL @ EVE I see no further purpose in wasting keystrokes on your contribution to this thread..!! Good day and good riddance fool.!!!
Arthur Frayn	Posted - 2007.07.31 08:56:00 - [22] Originally by: Voltaeis Gemini Why would anyone invent a weapon that only works from a position of inferiority? Because it's not a weapon. Imagine a gun or laser that stole shield/armor points and added them to yours. Pretty cool? Nobody deserves the right to that kind of weapon. Originally by: Voltaeis Gemini The existing NOS is not an i win button and is easily countered by cap boosters (perhaps not for the win but certainly for the escape) Implying that one cannot win against a NOS-wielder. Therefore, NOS-wielders had too much power that they do not deserve. It's a case of rock/paper/scissors/nuke, where nuke beats all others.
Arthur Frayn	Posted - 2007.07.31 09:01:00 - [23] Edited by: Arthur Frayn on 31/07/2007 09:02:35 Originally by: Voltaeis Gemini Arthur Frayn.. You raise some particularly poigniant and thought provoking points (NOT).. Simply put u Sir are an IDIOT. Noobs like u will continue to die in your thousands nerfing NOS will not offset your intrinsic lack of skill and PVP instinct. If u thought NOS was an i win button then its clear.. U FAIL @ EVE I see no further purpose in wasting keystrokes on your contribution to this thread..!! Good day and good riddance fool.!!! lolz. Aren't we the high and mighty menstruating old woman? If you were so confident that us "noobs" will still die by the thousands, then you have no reason to complain about Nos, now do you? Certainly no reason to display far more noobish tendencies with ad hominem attacks at people who express the opposite opinion to yours. It's too bad those all-dominating pvp skills don't assist you in developing anything remotely approaching character.
Voltaeis Gemini	Posted - 2007.07.31 09:08:00 - [24] Originally by: Arthur Frayn Edited by: Arthur Frayn on 31/07/2007 09:02:35 Originally by: Voltaeis Gemini Arthur Frayn.. You raise some particularly poigniant and thought provoking points (NOT).. Simply put u Sir are an IDIOT. Noobs like u will continue to die in your thousands nerfing NOS will not offset your intrinsic lack of skill and PVP instinct. If u thought NOS was an i win button then its clear.. U FAIL @ EVE I see no further purpose in wasting keystrokes on your contribution to this thread..!! Good day and good riddance fool.!!! lolz. Aren't we the high and mighty menstruating old woman? If you were so confident that us "noobs" will still die by the thousands, then you have no reason to complain about Nos, now do you? Certainly no reason to display far more noobish tendencies with ad hominem attacks at people who express the opposite opinion to yours. It's too bad those all-dominating pvp skills don't assist you in developing anything remotely approaching character. No need for personality.. when dealing with fools.. short, sharp and to the point.. Yes i know u have some retort or other but seriously i don't care.. u didnt come to discuss the merits of the change only to gloat that u will no longer die in this fashion.. i agree u wont die in this fashion any longer.. but u will still die.. PS. U STILL FAIL @ EVE
Arthur Frayn	Posted - 2007.07.31 09:17:00 - [25] Originally by: Voltaeis Gemini No need for personality.. when dealing with fools.. short, sharp and to the point.. Yes i know u have some retort or other but seriously i don't care.. u didnt come to discuss the merits of the change only to gloat that u will no longer die in this fashion.. i agree u wont die in this fashion any longer.. but u will still die.. PS. U STILL FAIL @ EVE Thanks for continuing to waste keystrokes on my contribution to this thread. If you want me to discuss the merits of this change, here goes: - Amarr pvpers won't have to fear NOS so much anymore without mounting half a rack or a full rack of their own. - Passive tanked ships will no longer be the only ships that can fly without fear of your precious Curse and Pilgrim waiting in the shadows. - Pilots will now have a chance for victory against NOSing opponents, as you previously stated the most they can hope for is a chance for escape. For someone who seems to think I die often at the hands of NOS, you sure are having trouble letting go of it as a weapon. Perhaps you tend to kill often because you use NOS. Which brings me to the final merit I'll mention. If you're so opposed to this change, it stands to reason you have much to lose from it. Which means you don't want to discuss the merits of it yourself. You just want to whine. That fully entitles myself and others to gloat.
Raekone	Posted - 2007.07.31 09:19:00 - [26] In my time with EVE (since release, in fact) I never felt any game feature/module was as ridiculous as the nosferatu. Neutralisers maybe, but not transfering energy to your own ship from your opponent. It just smacks of exploitability and that's exactly what's been going on the past 4 years. There's got to be a "but", or it just gets silly. I'd rather see them go away entirely but I guess this is as good as it's getting.
Bongpipe Bum	Posted - 2007.07.31 10:12:00 - [27] With the changes to nos, amarr recons, which take over 2 months to successfully train a decent one, can be killed by a bship that takes about a week to train. That makes alot of sense... oh wait....
Starbuck Caldari Goldadler Enterprises	Posted - 2007.07.31 10:15:00 - [28] Originally by: Voltaeis Gemini OMG!! What are they thinking... of all the discussion on controlling NOS they chose this fix.. So NOS only works if proportionally your opponent has greater percentage of cap left than you.. I agree with all the game play aspects listed above but to add further to the comments of others.. Why would anyone invent a weapon that only works from a position of inferiority? Like others i share concern for the role of NOS related vessels (Curse and Pilgrim) as clearly another slap in the face to all Amarr players.. I consider the new NOS function a knee jerk reaction by CCP to the complaints of forum trolls on the current NOS function. The existing NOS is not an i win button and is easily countered by cap boosters (perhaps not for the win but certainly for the escape) in the interests of quality PVP experiences please rethink this move.. Someone said it above.. Eve needs to retain the Rock, Paper, Siccors aspect or it runs the risk of becoming linear and predictable. Disgusted !! A weapon would be developed to operate only form a position of inferiority if that was the only way the weapon could funciton. Someone said it easriler. This makes NOS defensive. It kinda makes sense if you understand electricity. I have more negative ions to your positive ions so this module provides a conduit to allow your excess to move over to me. As for nerfing the Curse and Bhall and whatnot. PErhaps their bonus should be explanded to include Neuts? --------------------------------------------------- Have Rail's. Will travel.
Angoleus Tech Mineral Holdings Limited	Posted - 2007.07.31 10:31:00 - [29] Originally by: Arthur Frayn Originally by: Voltaeis Gemini No need for personality.. when dealing with fools.. short, sharp and to the point.. Yes i know u have some retort or other but seriously i don't care.. u didnt come to discuss the merits of the change only to gloat that u will no longer die in this fashion.. i agree u wont die in this fashion any longer.. but u will still die.. PS. U STILL FAIL @ EVE Thanks for continuing to waste keystrokes on my contribution to this thread. If you want me to discuss the merits of this change, here goes: - Amarr pvpers won't have to fear NOS so much anymore without mounting half a rack or a full rack of their own. - Passive tanked ships will no longer be the only ships that can fly without fear of your precious Curse and Pilgrim waiting in the shadows. - Pilots will now have a chance for victory against NOSing opponents, as you previously stated the most they can hope for is a chance for escape. For someone who seems to think I die often at the hands of NOS, you sure are having trouble letting go of it as a weapon. Perhaps you tend to kill often because you use NOS. Which brings me to the final merit I'll mention. If you're so opposed to this change, it stands to reason you have much to lose from it. Which means you don't want to discuss the merits of it yourself. You just want to whine. That fully entitles myself and others to gloat. Dude, do u believe what u write ? do u ever flow amarr ? or are u just asuming things ? Your points are far from whats going on in daily pvp. 1. I AM Amarr, and i fly Amarr and i dont worry about Nos because 1. we got the curse, 2. we got the pilgrim. and the most important point: ever heard of cap booster ? And btw. did u read the recent changes to amarr ? Missile Launcher dont use cap. 2. Shoot the drones, and everything is fine, Out of 10 engagements on Ratting BS in my Curse / Pilgrim i had to warp out 7 after a few minutes, because i had no drones, or cap left. 3. Pilots allways had a chance to get away. T2 scrambler > Nos Range. Its no problem to win a 1vs1 against a nosdomi in a cruiser sized ship for expl. if u stay out of his nosrange, because he lacks offensive moduls. Did u ever figuerd that the cycle times on nosferatus are different. So while the BS get it every 12s a smaller ship gets the cap more often and can use it for counter tactics ? I just feel sorry for you, because it seems u haven`t seen very many aspects of eve yet. Because if u would, u wouldnt whine and insult people, u would adapt. stop this useless NOS Nerf
Markousa Minmatar Pator Tech School	Posted - 2007.07.31 11:22:00 - [30] you will be getting lots of jacked off people with this nerf and i spose every nerf as an amarr recon takes a long time to train and even longer to train one well then the ammount of money put into one with rigs / faction items get your setup just how you like it then ccp say ok we will take away everything that ship is about . as i said in the forum earlier . imagine training for a Vagabond with faction equipment and then have ccp say oh wait sorry we are going to swap the speed bonus for a missile bonus . to all you people who dont fly a vagabond its easy to go pfft was over powered and needed to be nerfed to the people that put the time in to get that ship and use it how iam sure it was intended it is a very bad waste of skill points . now all those people out there who have trained these ships have basically a paperweight they spent lots of money to make and get good at using . i can see someone saying oh the vagabond sucks to or something but that whole eg can be put on the every ship . what if ccp decided that missles were to much of a stack and then all the sudden changed all the missile slots on the raven to turret hardpoints not that it would happen you would get a very large player base unhappy . The one thing that i feel make this game good is that you can beat a 2003 player if you have the right setup to counter his but taking away specific advantages of certain ships and moduals leads the game to more of a this ship is the best in every situation everyone fly that . i mean if a ship is close range use long range to counter it . it uses nos ? damp it or jam it . there are so many ways to beat things other than a super nerf i do believe that nos in some cases are insanely overpowered but you dont use a boulder to catch a mosquito i mean some better examples have been on the forums . even something like Nos can only be used on ships the same size or larger than you ? that way you keep the interceptors happy and that way you dont make them completely useless

David GramSchmidt	Posted - 2007.07.31 11:31:00 - [31] Originally by: Vitelius New rules, new fittings, new tactics. That's all there is to it. So your current fit doesn't work soon and you're understandably angry - but these changes happen and the game is continuously being balanced. Figure out a new way to use your ship, there are plenty of ways. I'm not very fond of this change either but at least it does change things from the nber nos-without-countermeasures and it will be interesting to see how it changes the way battles are fought. Nerfing it this way is perhaps not the best way of solving it but at least they're doing something. I don't like or agree with the change, but I do like this way of looking at it since we're stuck with it now.
David GramSchmidt	Posted - 2007.07.31 11:31:00 - [32] Originally by: Arte I've only just come across this post as I looked for info as to what the Nos changes were and I can't see that it would be a game breaking change. Although it would affect the way NOS are used at the moment, it would redefine their role. Neut would be the offensive module used to drain an opponents capacitor. Nos would be the defensive counter to that. If you want to win by draining someone's capacitor (such as a tackling interceptor) then fit neutralizers. If your capacitor is low because you are being neutralized then you can drain off whoever is doing it, so it becomes your saviour. (that was the one reason it could be useful that you asked for). Nos in certain circumstances ceases to be the 'i-win' button it became. Capacitor flux might be more useful so that you could deliberately run your cap at low levels just so that you could use Nos. So there, with a bit of thought, it doesn't render them useless. Just removes the usefulness in certain circumstances. Neutralizers still serve the purpose if you wish to drain the enemies cap. This is a really good way of looking at it
Paull90 Infestation.	Posted - 2007.07.31 12:35:00 - [33] All this talk of how this will nerf the curse & Pilgrim is fine but what about the gallente drone boats. CCP has designed these ships so they don't have enough PG to fit blasters effectively and by taking away NOS the domi as an example would find it very difficult to fight against any other BS. I fly lots of Gallente ships (including the Domi), in a situation where I have lost a fight to a domi because of cap I don't go moaning on the forums that nos is overpowered but I kick myself for not having the correct setup to counter it. This nos nerf has now completely removed nos from game. If i were you if you have any gallente drone ships or any other nos ships I would sell them now before the price goes through the floor. Its better to burn out than to fade away!!!!
throbbinnoggin Gallente Eminent Domain	Posted - 2007.07.31 13:05:00 - [34] Originally by: Arte I've only just come across this post as I looked for info as to what the Nos changes were and I can't see that it would be a game breaking change. Although it would affect the way NOS are used at the moment, it would redefine their role. *Neut would be the offensive module used to drain an opponents capacitor.* *Nos would be the defensive counter to that.* If you want to win by draining someone's capacitor (such as a tackling interceptor) then fit neutralizers. If your capacitor is low because you are being neutralized then you can drain off whoever is doing it, so it becomes your saviour. (that was the one reason it could be useful that you asked for). Nos in certain circumstances ceases to be the 'i-win' button it became. Capacitor flux might be more useful so that you could deliberately run your cap at low levels just so that you could use Nos. So there, with a bit of thought, it doesn't render them useless. Just removes the usefulness in certain circumstances. Neutralizers still serve the purpose if you wish to drain the enemies cap. This is one of the few guys who actually gets it. I can only presume that the most vehement objectors to this change are those who haven't logged onto SISI to test them out. Tis better to be silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt. 'Abraham Lincoln'
Amaldor Themodius	Posted - 2007.07.31 13:10:00 - [35] Hi all i posted a little earlier on in the discussion and having considered the view points of all arguments for this NOS nerf i still dont feel it to be either rational or in the spirit of game balance.. NOS is an important feature for Ammar players and Gallentae players alike both in PVP and PVE. The previous thread poster spoke about the impct to the domi but i would contend it doesnt stop there as mwd / armour tank / blaster ships are some of the most intensive cap thirsty vessels in the game so it is likely all Gallentae vessels will be impacted heavily. CCP how do u propose to restore the balance to Ammar and Gallentae PVE / PVP ships? The defensive NOS argument does nothing to compensate for the damage u are about to do with this nerf... Cap boosters arent a consideration either as the less cap intensive opponents (read mimatar / caldari) will be using these items as well in PVP and in PVE its tortuous to imply cap boosters are needed.. I think NOS has a greater role to play in the game than the role to which its being resigned to..
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Guardians of the Dawn Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.07.31 13:16:00 - [36] The proposed change is by far the BEST change i ever saw CCP propose. by FAR. Combat need to be more pew pew and less suck suck. Nerf NOs . I would nerf them even more if I could!! would make them drain your onw cap and give to enemy if you activate them in a ship that has less cap then you. Making them Cap equalizers!!!! If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Mister Xerox	Posted - 2007.07.31 13:25:00 - [37] NOS changes like this: 2 words. DUMB IDEA Ships dedicated to NOS (Curse, Tankbuster BS) have pretty much NO dps to speak of. Curse has med drones that take forever and 10 days to break the tank of your average BS... and can't touch a passive tanked missile boat whatsoever. NOS BS? The only effective BS in the game that can do this is the Dominix with it's massive drone DPS, but it's only one ship. Hardly worth nerfing the pants off of the only actual offensive module it can effectively fit in highs (and with a typical range of 25km, at best, unless it's all faction and you'll never see it fielded without a megablob). The launcher CPU changes and 'unspecified' NOS changes that came about with the latest big patch have completely crippled 50/50 NOS & weapon setups. So why the additional changes now? DUMB IDEA. But then, I'm beginning to think that CCP are becoming masters of the DUMB IDEA. Might as well toss out their 'Soon (tm)' trademark and pick up the 'dumb idea incoming (tm)' mark.
Tahmee Bhakeur	Posted - 2007.07.31 13:51:00 - [38] Of all the suggested changed to NOS, this seems the farthest out there. People have wanted to limit the number of nos/neut on ships, for smartbombs to damage nos/neut (shutdown for 3 cycles), decreased nos/s values, change nos/neut to per sec, create utility slots for them (another # limiter), nos/neut defense mods to cut the amount or range, called for adding tracking, ad infinitum, ad nauseum. It's a welcome change to what has been overpowered for ages simply because of it's over-use/abuse primarily on the ships with large drone bays for solo-speed pwnmobiles. While I'm one who favors the 2 nos/neut per ship with introduction of Capital Nos/Nuet, it'll be interesting to see how their changes work if CCP ever makes a test server patch from client 3.21.35183.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Guardians of the Dawn Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.07.31 13:54:00 - [39] Originally by: Mister Xerox NOS changes like this: 2 words. DUMB IDEA Ships dedicated to NOS (Curse, Tankbuster BS) have pretty much NO dps to speak of. Curse has med drones that take forever and 10 days to break the tank of your average BS... and can't touch a passive tanked missile boat whatsoever. NOS BS? The only effective BS in the game that can do this is the Dominix with it's massive drone DPS, but it's only one ship. Hardly worth nerfing the pants off of the only actual offensive module it can effectively fit in highs (and with a typical range of 25km, at best, unless it's all faction and you'll never see it fielded without a megablob). The launcher CPU changes and 'unspecified' NOS changes that came about with the latest big patch have completely crippled 50/50 NOS & weapon setups. So why the additional changes now? DUMB IDEA. But then, I'm beginning to think that CCP are becoming masters of the DUMB IDEA. Might as well toss out their 'Soon (tm)' trademark and pick up the 'dumb idea incoming (tm)' mark. What about typhoon with 4 Heavy nos and 4 torps and 5 ogres II? Its damm more dangerous than a NSO domni. Same about a Nanoed Machariel runnign around you with 4 Heavy Nos upon you. Recons ships are not meant to be able to kill BS alone!!!! Stop with this nonsesne. The people that complain are the ones that want solo pownmobiles! If you want to go solo kill BS, get a CS! If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Tahmee Bhakeur	Posted - 2007.07.31 14:02:00 - [40] tbh, any curse pilot just mwd's around draining to hell with mwd, t2 warp dis, 2 damp II, 2 tracking dis II with a speed tank in the lows. Guns won't touch it, missiles won't touch it. Maybe with the "Caldarification" of the T2 amarr ships, the curse will be forced to shield tank with 2-3 low slots making it a gang ship instead of the solo-rapist it is now.

Markousa Minmatar Pator Tech School	Posted - 2007.07.31 14:24:00 - [41] Edited by: Markousa on 31/07/2007 14:26:07 ahh maybe like most curse pilots ive seen specially nano ones usually start nossing you then send thier drones on you why not as a first measure while you still got cap Smartbomb them ? kill 98% of the curse's dps instead of a no my fitting should pwn a cruiser that takes 40 days ish to train just to fly and more if ya want to fly it well there is ways to beat anything in this game if curse's are the ULTIMATE solo pwn mobile everyone says they are iam surprised you can even get into lowsec cause hell if they were as good as everyone says they would id have 1 memeber of a 100 man corp camping every gate from empire to lowsec its paper scissors rock something can beat everything just wait shield boosters are next i can see it now . and maybe gallente get an extra missile hard point and take away some of those turrent ones oH NOES blasterthron does to much dps :P
Techyon 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.07.31 16:03:00 - [42] Like some intelligent people have already mentioned: The NOS changes are only objected by people who either just want to press some F buttons and win by default or don't have enough braincells to actually apply tactics to combat. The changes are fine. The Curse and Pilgrim aren't meant to be able to solo pwn everything. The Curse and Pilgrim are still very very useful in any gang and if you are skilled (and I don't mean SP's) they will do fine solo as well. It is understandable that there's so many Curse/Pilgrim whiners, but don't just look at the change and say it sucks right away. Take a closer look, adjust your fittings, adapt. You'll see they do just fine after the change. The only ship that gets shafted by the NOS change is the Bhaalgorn, which hasn't got a bonus to neutralizers. (which it should get)
Zinrix GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.07.31 16:22:00 - [43] I figure I might as well cross-post from the Pilgrim/Curse complaint thread. To everyone who is continuously saying something along the lines of "Oh, this ship was designed for that role, so it shouldn't be able to do it", what you might as well be advocating is the removal of modules entirely and the dumbing down of the game to your level. In Eve, your ability to think creatively and adapt to your environment gives you an edge over even the opponent that has been playing the game for 2 years longer than you. Please stop telling me what a ship was or was not designed to do. I don't care. I only care what it can do with some decent thought. That being said, as a pilgrim pilot in a ship that is already overshadowed by both the Rapier and Arazu, I'm really hurt by this. I understand its necessity though. It seems to me that a NOS should leach off your capacitor recharge rate rather than neutralizing your existing capacitor. I would like to see a NOS add a percentage to your cap recharge rate while removing that same percentage from your opponent. It won't kill someone's cap, but if they use cap intensive modules, they'll have no way to support them and their cap will naturally die over a longer time. This can be augmented by a stacking penalty and of course this is just a little speculation, but I think it makes more sense than the present course of action.
Bongpipe Bum	Posted - 2007.07.31 16:40:00 - [44] Pilgrims suck. Period. If you can fly a pilgrim, you can fly a curse. There is no reason to fly a pilgrim over a nanocurse. None. New patch, not much of a reason to fly either. The change sucks, period. I agree with what Zinrix said.
Luna Nilaya Black-Mesa THE V I G I L	Posted - 2007.07.31 23:09:00 - [45] Originally by: Techyon The changes are fine. The Curse and Pilgrim aren't meant to be able to solo pwn everything. The Curse and Pilgrim are still very very useful in any gang and if you are skilled (and I don't mean SP's) they will do fine solo as well. Please tell me a good setup for Curse after this nerf and good tactics to use with it? Thank you in advance.
Arthur Frayn	Posted - 2007.07.31 23:25:00 - [46] Originally by: Angoleus Dude, do u believe what u write ? do u ever flow amarr ? or are u just asuming things ? Your points are far from whats going on in daily pvp. Originally by: Angoleus 1. I AM Amarr, and i fly Amarr and i dont worry about Nos because 1. we got the curse, 2. we got the pilgrim. Not anymore. Originally by: Angoleus and the most important point: ever heard of cap booster ? Cap boosters are wonderful things. Especially when they act as free cap-pumping machines for the benefit of an opponent with NOS. Originally by: Angoleus And btw. did u read the recent changes to amarr ? Missile Launcher dont use cap. Irrelevant to the point I made. You sound as if laserboats are suddenly obsolete. Originally by: Angoleus 3. Pilots allways had a chance to get away. T2 scrambler > Nos Range. Its no problem to win a 1vs1 against a nosdomi in a cruiser sized ship for expl. if u stay out of his nosrange, because he lacks offensive moduls. In what galaxy? The T2 warp disruptor has a range of 24km, which is 1km inside the range of the best named or T2 battleship NOS. The advantage you're talking about aint universal. You must have gotten lucky with him using basic T1 modules. And I bet he wouldn't always lack a mwd or simple afterburner. And show me a T2 scrambler that works outside the NOS range of a curse? Originally by: Angoleus Did u ever figuerd that the cycle times on nosferatus are different. So while the BS get it every 12s a smaller ship gets the cap more often and can use it for counter tactics ? That's still a possible tactic now. Originally by: Angoleus I just feel sorry for you, because it seems u haven`t seen very many aspects of eve yet. Because if u would, u wouldnt whine and insult people, u would adapt. I feel sorry for you too, as your reading comprehension skills are hopeless. I haven't been whining, you have. I also haven't insulted anyone. I've been called an idiot and a waste of keystrokes just because I posted my opinion. Originally by: Angoleus stop this useless NOS Nerf See? You're the whiner, not me.
Tarron Sarek Gallente Endica Enterprises	Posted - 2007.07.31 23:48:00 - [47] Originally by: KtB Base it on the ships sig radius somehow like everything else in this game is. Stasis Webifier, Energy Neutralizer, Warp Scrambler, Target Painters, ECM, Dampener.. Strike the 'everything'. Imho signature based Nos doesn't make sense, and it could open a whole can of worms regarding signature based EW. Make it depend on capacitor amount. Works nearly the same. Battleships wouldn't drain much from a frigate, because of the cap relation. _________________________________ - Balance is power, guard it well.. -
Dravun ZiTek Deepspace Explorations Prime Orbital Systems	Posted - 2007.08.01 02:15:00 - [48] Never posted about game mechanics before but this one has a special place in my heart. I can't believe that you are going to go and totally nerf amarr recon pilots. My favorite ships to fly in this game are the Pilgrim and Curse and now I feel like recycling them into minerals so I can build new shuttles. Just nerf all EW if you are going to kill amarr ships. Gallente should be able to Scram from normal range, Hugins web from normal range and remove the boost from rook's ecm to even this out.
Corbon Hydrashock SPECTRE Ops	Posted - 2007.08.01 02:18:00 - [49] Edited by: Corbon Hydrashock on 01/08/2007 02:19:45 I would now like my Curse and my Pilgrim to puff out colorful bouquets of flowers from the area of the ship the NOS would generally shoot out from. I think it'd be great if Amarr could show everyone flowers in battles just before we die. Heck, we were never really about killing all that much, anyway - and that slave thing? That was all just a little misunderstanding. Ooh - maybe they could turn our lasers into flashlights (torches) so we could target and light up the ships that really ARE in the fight. That'd be so great to see on videos; well, that is until someone shoots at us and knocks the spotlight out.
Jtbenns Gallente QUANT Corp. Southern Connection	Posted - 2007.08.01 02:18:00 - [50] leave my nos alone! --------------------------------- RWREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Beastofburden	Posted - 2007.08.01 03:00:00 - [51] This change in the way NOS works seems logical (not only from the electrical point of view). Been used as a weapon, it could wreck a ship with little to do against that. The idea of making it defensive opens up a whole new field of combat tactics. If you plan to win by purging anyones cap, go and Neut + NOS him. As soon as the Neuts collateral-drain you below his level (aka small ship vs. big ship), you¦ll gain from the NOS and so forth. I don¦t really see a problem here, other than the fact that a small ship can¦t gank a big one as fast as it could, and not as safe (time to call friends, launch drones, use jammers etc.pp.) The big advantage for small ships is that a NOS-BS can¦t insta-drain them to death now either. In conclusion, this wasn¦t a nerf, it was a re-calibration to adjust modules after seeing in what ways they have been used compared to what they were meant for. Maybe a stacking-penalty would have been just as good to move NOSes away from their "role" as weapon towards a role as assisting module, but the outcome is almost the same.
Bongpipe Bum	Posted - 2007.08.01 04:34:00 - [52] The problem is that a single cycle of a Neut from a BS will still destroy a inty/frigate's cap, which is probably the problem they're trying to address. However, this change also manages to make Amarr recons obsolete. Find a new solution CCP, this one doesn't work.
Aole	Posted - 2007.08.01 05:50:00 - [53] Not a whine to any other players, and not really concerned with other peoples opinion. But a message to CCP. Been playing eve for about a year, was primarily a Gallente pilot and realized the advantages of the Amarr Recon. Did what most people do...find a niche...make a plan...and go after your dream ship. Trained skills for Amarr for several months to use these ships. Now all that time is wasted. Now I am upset. The nerf is understandable (yeah they were overpowered) have to create balance understand that, but leaving the Amarr Recons with the same current bonuses will make them useless (as everyone knows, no one is going to continue fitting NOS). Just one person...but if this happens the way it currently described on the test server. I will probably cancel my subscription. Regards... Please fix.
PCaBoo Dirt Nap Squad FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.08.01 06:50:00 - [54] while we're whining about nos, why don't I whine about how a frigate can web a bs. It's unbalanced this and that. If a frig can tackle and web a bs, why can't a bs *****a frigs cap? It's already a pain just hitting the stupid thing cuz of sig radius. Lets just nerf everything and cancel our subs. It's going to happen eventually, so why waste the time and money. ________________________________ Caldari's are the Chosen people!
Sgt Robbo Minion Development Corp.	Posted - 2007.08.01 08:25:00 - [55] Originally by: Arte I've only just come across this post as I looked for info as to what the Nos changes were and I can't see that it would be a game breaking change. Although it would affect the way NOS are used at the moment, it would redefine their role. Neut would be the offensive module used to drain an opponents capacitor. Nos would be the defensive counter to that. If you want to win by draining someone's capacitor (such as a tackling interceptor) then fit neutralizers. If your capacitor is low because you are being neutralized then you can drain off whoever is doing it, so it becomes your saviour. (that was the one reason it could be useful that you asked for). Nos in certain circumstances ceases to be the 'i-win' button it became. Capacitor flux might be more useful so that you could deliberately run your cap at low levels just so that you could use Nos. So there, with a bit of thought, it doesn't render them useless. Just removes the usefulness in certain circumstances. Neutralizers still serve the purpose if you wish to drain the enemies cap. Im afraid this concept of your doesnt work; Nos is not a defence against Neuts, it is partly shown in the problem with Nos. The reason Nos is so overpowed is because it is a free Neut. Neuts kill more cap. However, Neuts also cost an equal amount of cap for you as it does for them. Back to the problem with your concept. If someone is Neuting you and you go "im a little low on cap, time to nos" then unless they are in a larger ship it wont work because they have lost just as much cap as you. As for the Nos nerf, it doesnt make a lot of sense. If this nerf was put in place to help the little frigs so they dont hit 0cap in one shot then its a clear fail because one heavy Neut would kill all his cap still. The only thing this stops is someone loading a Hyperion or other tank with all nos and a double rep tank so they can tank without a small carrier, and for a situation like this it would make more sense for them to add a Stack penalty so after 3nos its useless adding more.
Futher Bezluden Minmatar ORIGIN SYSTEMS Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2007.08.01 19:51:00 - [56] Just played around with a ratting nos-domi. Drained my cap to nearly 0 charge then started nossing an NPC battleship. Nothing. My cap didn't budge a bit, it just recharged at it's normal rate. Guess this means the end of fitting even a single nos to a ratting ship to maintain cap. Thanks CCP. THUKKER -Be Paranoid
Mister Xerox	Posted - 2007.08.01 21:32:00 - [57] Originally by: Kagura Nikon Originally by: Mister Xerox DUMB IDEA. But then, I'm beginning to think that CCP are becoming masters of the DUMB IDEA. Might as well toss out their 'Soon (tm)' trademark and pick up the 'dumb idea incoming (tm)' mark. What about typhoon with 4 Heavy nos and 4 torps and 5 ogres II? Its damm more dangerous than a NSO domni. My main has Adv Upgrades V and pretty much all the other relevant support skills at V, and since the CPU changes to launchers finds it completely impossible without filling half the lows with Diag/RCU & CPU to fit 4/4 in either torp or cruise configurations anymore. The NOS torp/cruise Typh was killed by that gimp. I'm not saying that that is a bad thing, it's just the way it worked out. Not good, either. Since he can't fly Gallente he can't say anything about the NanoMach... but then, he's only seen 1 Mach in PvP since they were available. It died nicely after a protracted battle with a single AutoPest with a superior tank and only 2 NOS (Mach in that fight had 1 NOS). Originally by: Kagura Nikon Recons ships are not meant to be able to kill BS alone!!!! Stop with this nonsesne. The people that complain are the ones that want solo pownmobiles! If you want to go solo kill BS, get a CS! I never said that Recons were not 'meant' to be able to kill (or not kill) any individual shipclass in the game. They were not directly intended to OMGWTFPWN every battleship they run across in a solo engagement. I never said that they were. I merely said that the Curse, even with its NOS, are not able to very easily break the tank of an average BS. Mess it up severely, yes, but not just outright *****it in place. Massive NOS changes will bring back the days of the untouchable inty blob since one of the best counters to them are NOS on a big boat. Remove their ability to drain the mosquito dry and escape (or kill it) and you'll find frigate blobs running all over again. The Curse/Pilgrim/Ashi would still be viable if, rather than percentage, they used a raw capacitor quantity scale (Curse w/ smaller overall Capacitor would still suck a BS down swiftly due it its larger overall Cap... until they reached an equilibrium ratio, rendering the NOS utterly useless). Unfortunately, NOS will no longer affect interceptors/AF at all... Of the hundreds of ideas fielded in regards to NOS, or many other game change suggestions brought up by the playerbase, CCP has once again found the worst idea and implemented it. CCP = 'Dumb Idea Incoming (tm)'
Tellok Fury Corporation	Posted - 2007.08.01 22:30:00 - [58] the chance has been brough about by hte "i win" solo domi setup vs any other battleship. dominix with all nos and nothing else but drones. im not saying i like the change, but somthing needed to stop the out and out nos domis that can still do good dps through the hoards of drones. i would have prefered a stacking nerf myself.
Tellok Fury Corporation	Posted - 2007.08.01 22:32:00 - [59] Originally by: Paull90 All this talk of how this will nerf the curse & Pilgrim is fine but what about the gallente drone boats. CCP has designed these ships so they don't have enough PG to fit blasters effectively and by taking away NOS the domi as an example would find it very difficult to fight against any other BS. I fly lots of Gallente ships (including the Domi), in a situation where I have lost a fight to a domi because of cap I don't go moaning on the forums that nos is overpowered but I kick myself for not having the correct setup to counter it. This nos nerf has now completely removed nos from game. If i were you if you have any gallente drone ships or any other nos ships I would sell them now before the price goes through the floor. in a 1v1 battleship situation there is no counter to a out and out nos domi on close range.
Arte Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2007.08.01 23:06:00 - [60] Originally by: Sgt Robbo Originally by: Arte I've only just come across this post as I looked for info as to what the Nos changes were and I can't see that it would be a game breaking change. Although it would affect the way NOS are used at the moment, it would redefine their role. Neut would be the offensive module used to drain an opponents capacitor. Nos would be the defensive counter to that. If you want to win by draining someone's capacitor (such as a tackling interceptor) then fit neutralizers. If your capacitor is low because you are being neutralized then you can drain off whoever is doing it, so it becomes your saviour. (that was the one reason it could be useful that you asked for). Nos in certain circumstances ceases to be the 'i-win' button it became. Capacitor flux might be more useful so that you could deliberately run your cap at low levels just so that you could use Nos. So there, with a bit of thought, it doesn't render them useless. Just removes the usefulness in certain circumstances. Neutralizers still serve the purpose if you wish to drain the enemies cap. Im afraid this concept of your doesnt work; Nos is not a defence against Neuts, it is partly shown in the problem with Nos. The reason Nos is so overpowed is because it is a free Neut. Neuts kill more cap. However, Neuts also cost an equal amount of cap for you as it does for them. Back to the problem with your concept. If someone is Neuting you and you go "im a little low on cap, time to nos" then unless they are in a larger ship it wont work because they have lost just as much cap as you. As for the Nos nerf, it doesnt make a lot of sense. If this nerf was put in place to help the little frigs so they dont hit 0cap in one shot then its a clear fail because one heavy Neut would kill all his cap still. The only thing this stops is someone loading a Hyperion or other tank with all nos and a double rep tank so they can tank without a small carrier, and for a situation like this it would make more sense for them to add a Stack penalty so after 3nos its useless adding more. I know what you're trying to say but I think you're missing the point slightly... If he has high capacitor then you need to use neutralizers.. period. If someone uses neutralizers then they will have a capacitor recharge plan in place to cope. If they do then Nos will work as a defensive module to counteract that and bail you out. If they don't need capacitor because they use a passive tank and missiles/projectiles then this changes nothing to what they could be doing now, i.e neutralizing your capacitor and wearing you down. Ships that relied on using your capacitor to win battles now can no longer do this if this system hits Tranq. If capacitor levels are a concern to him/her then he won't be able to use nos and then if he has low capacitor then you're winning the battle anyway. It means that you can't use nos to feed your own tank. If you want to engage in capacitor warfare then you need to fit Neutralizers. That's the point, it is now no longer a capacitor warfare offensive module. Neutralizers will be the only method of doing this effectively. Nosferatu's will be a defensive module.

Pratiken	Posted - 2007.08.02 01:32:00 - [61] Curse: -Amarr Cruiser V -Spaceship command V -Signature Analysis V -Electronics Upgrades V -Recon Ships V -Drone skills V - Support Skills etc. -Wasting over three and a half months of solid training...priceless.
Narishema	Posted - 2007.08.02 01:37:00 - [62] Edited by: Narishema on 02/08/2007 01:38:55 GAH!!! look NOS is meant to help you regen when you are getting low. The NOS changes still allow people to DO THAT. The change is meant so that people can't set up a full rack of NOS and use drones for DPS while keeping their tank going with full cap. That was not right. There is ZERO reason before to use energy neuts. NONE. Now there is. Sorry, the ability for a curse to drain an BS with NOS with little danger to themselves so they can break a tank of a BS and the proceed to kick the crap out of them was stupid in the extreme. First and foremost.. the curse and pilgrim are RECON SHIPS!!!!!!! They are not "assault" ships. They are meant as SUPPORT roles only. Not to take any other ship in the game 1 on 1 and expect to win almost every single time. Look, curse and pilgrim still get a bonus to neuts. They can still drain the cap out of any other ship with a neut better than any other ship out there. The cost? they lose a little cap in the process. So now people won't put 5 NOS. they will do 3 neuts and 2 nos. Why? Neut one ship and nos another. Using neut to get rid of the cap on one ship while using some of your cap will allow you to use NOS on another ship. Just because the dynamics change a little does NOT mean the curse or pilgrim are gimped/dead boats now. They are now just brought inline with all the other recon ships that could never solo kill reliably any other bigger ship. This change does NOTHING to the boats using NOS as something to refill added cap as they are actively USING cap for other things. Quote: Curse: -Amarr Cruiser V -Spaceship command V -Signature Analysis V -Electronics Upgrades V -Recon Ships V -Drone skills V - Support Skills etc. -Wasting over three and a half months of solid training...priceless. It's quotes like these that are priceless. You going to quit eve and cry now that you can't IWIN with a curse every other ship? HAHAHA so long and good riddance. Please let the door slap you on the arse on the way out.
Callthetruth Caldari Drunken Ratbags Inc New Eve Order	Posted - 2007.08.02 01:41:00 - [63] shift in thinkng from nos only to nos+neut+remote sensor damps will happen might take a while but it will even out and once they are in expect CCP to reverse some of those changes anyway
Nostaw	Posted - 2007.08.02 01:55:00 - [64] About time the power of nos is brought down. It just doesn't seem right to basically have all your high slots free to suck the dps/tanking ability out of your target, while letting your drones do about the same dps your target is doing. The devs must have missed that setup in testing or something, obviously or else they wouldnt be making these changes. Also I think thier should be a timer in pvp so when you put your drones back you have to wait so many seconds to bring them back out. Mabye we will see some new setups out there, and not so many nos/drone boats. Its a pvp based game, and there is 4 races out there. Why should 2 race's ships dominate pvp? Looks like a nice balancing effort from the DEVs.
Pratiken	Posted - 2007.08.02 06:27:00 - [65] Originally by: Narishema Edited by: Narishema on 02/08/2007 01:38:55 It's quotes like these that are priceless. You going to quit eve and cry now that you can't IWIN with a curse every other ship? HAHAHA so long and good riddance. Please let the door slap you on the arse on the way out. It's not like that, just try to put yourself in our shoes. It would seem frustrating would it not? And no you can't have my stuff :)
BugxEarl Amarr Amaterus Boot Camp Izanagi Alliance	Posted - 2007.08.02 07:52:00 - [66] Well the thing with this nosnerf is, it doesn't nerf the ships that really do need the nerf. Are nos-domi gone now? Nope. What people are going to do is fit a passively plate tanked domi with 2 neut 1 nos which will still be very effective. Curse, on the other hand cannot do this. Why? Even with 800 charges in the injector, Curse cannot effectively passive tank, and its main method of supression against counter-nos is RSD or nos of its own, and its limited cargo capacity prohibits it from fighting a capacitor war.
Tsin'Valha	Posted - 2007.08.02 08:28:00 - [67] Edited by: Tsin''Valha on 02/08/2007 08:33:08 Edited by: Tsin''Valha on 02/08/2007 08:31:53 Originally by: BugxEarl Well the thing with this nosnerf is, it doesn't nerf the ships that really do need the nerf. Are nos-domi gone now? Nope. What people are going to do is fit a passively plate tanked domi with 2 neut 1 nos which will still be very effective. Curse, on the other hand cannot do this. Why? Even with 800 charges in the injector, Curse cannot effectively passive tank, and its main method of supression against counter-nos is RSD or nos of its own, and its limited cargo capacity prohibits it from fighting a capacitor war. K, how many other Recon Ships can solo kill as effectively as the CURSE? -Talking about Solo Ganking BS's and CS's. The uber nos drain, nano fit, fat stack of ewar (damps and tracking-dis) makes it one of the most feared ships in eve. It's a RECON SHIP, It's not suppose to be the pvp I-win ship. Tell us just where the curse's current vulnerability is? -the passive tanked FOF spamming drake or nighthawk? So basically you still got to wtfpwn anything else in short order with a speed fit recon ship. It's main method of supression against counter-nos is RSD... It's Amarr, not Gallente. Breath deeply and chant "Curse is Amarr... Curse is Amarr..." vs anything with turrets, Curse is amazing and just won't get hit. OMFG, it might lock me and nos/neut me... I must 2x Damp it. IMHO, give the Curse it's highslot layout, 4 mids (mwd, scram, 2x tracking dis or 1 td and 1 damp), and it's low-slots, then boost either shield or armor, but not both -figure out if it's got advance shields or advance armor. The uber vaga with 2 stabs was once uber, now that config is gone along with all the other wcs combat vessels. Now it's the curse's turn and all the other abused pure nos/drone ships. After this, hopefully the speed-fit gank squads will be dealt with. Maybe Web bubbles for dictors :) ------------ To the "put yourself in our shoes" comment. Anyone who long ago flew Minmatar then got nerfed, Anyone who was a pure missile spammer or ECM monster before the nerfs, Anyone who used wcs combat ships, who smartbombed the undock points of stations, who used T2 Javelin Torps at 248km, or who used the 7-8km/s battleships. Guess what, Everyone *HAS* been in your shoes. Get over it, nerf/fix happens.
podd0r Fudgepackers R Us	Posted - 2007.08.02 08:34:00 - [68] you should shush, just wait till you have a 1v1 and show your real skill instead of being a nossing newb.
podd0r Fudgepackers R Us	Posted - 2007.08.02 08:34:00 - [69] Originally by: Pratiken Curse: -Amarr Cruiser V -Spaceship command V -Signature Analysis V -Electronics Upgrades V -Recon Ships V -Drone skills V - Support Skills etc. -Wasting over three and a half months of solid training...priceless. this has happend to gallente more than enough times, atleast someone else gets the **** end of the stick.
Siltan	Posted - 2007.08.02 14:38:00 - [70] Edited by: Siltan on 02/08/2007 14:41:39 Edited by: Siltan on 02/08/2007 14:39:02 Originally by: Tsin'Valha K, how many other Recon Ships can solo kill as effectively as the CURSE? -Talking about Solo Ganking BS's and CS's. The arazu, cov ops cloak means you can take out ratting ships at your leasuire, pick the range you want, and using the dampners + warp scramble bonus make it so that its pretty much impossible for your quarry to fire a single shot back. Dosent have tremendous firepower, but your target aint going anywhere any time soon.

KtB	Posted - 2007.08.02 14:47:00 - [71] Okay now i've calmed down. But i still feel the same. People who say NOS is meant to help you out. Yeh and its meant to drain too. But the fact is its not going to help you out anymore because as soon as you get to 80% cap and they have the same, no more nos'ing for you. Tis pretty pathetic. Realistic Solution: Add a signature resolution to NOS like with drones and guns. If its bigger than the signature radius of a ship it only does so much % of nos'ing on them. This way the small ships wont get insta drained and NOS will still be effective in bigger battles.
Lydia Browm Gallente	Posted - 2007.08.02 15:01:00 - [72] I have an idea, why not make the fitting requirements of a neut the same as a nos. Now nos drains as much as it drains now but it only adds 50% of that to your cap (also with 50% efficiency so its not guaranteed to get you 50% of the cap every time)and neut will neut with 100% efficiency. Another ideae is make nos into a smaller version of a neut but have it so that it takes away opponents cap but doesn't change yours, that can be explained that it uses the energy it sucks up or something ___________________________________________ Cookies if you hijack or sign my sig. There tasty...
The Anointed Caldari Evolutionary Transhumanist Apperception The Red Skull	Posted - 2007.08.02 15:02:00 - [73] If you test it with a few different setups its actually interesting what the results are. Its a bit risky, but say for my instance of a tackling Sac, I went with 2 medium neuts and some small nos, then a full tank and an injector, if you time your module activations properly, you can still cap out ships quite easily, infact more so that when it was nos fest. I think that this change so far is heading in the right direction and whether or not the changes stay the same will depend on people bringing to the forums specifics taken from the test server, rather than random whines that are based on a quick glance at the changes in the dev blog. I am working my way through the ships that I normally fly with nos fitted and working around the changes to see what affect it has. So far all I would say is that you need to time things properly and fit a cap injector if you want to completely cap out someone. Which imo is good as it adds some tactics and risk into nos/neut setups. The one thing that I would ask for above all else, is if these changes make it to tq, could you please release a skill to reduce the cycle times on neuts please?
Kairi Elan FATAL REVELATIONS FATAL Alliance	Posted - 2007.08.02 16:59:00 - [74] Originally by: Voltaeis Gemini OMG!! What are they thinking... of all the discussion on controlling NOS they chose this fix.. So NOS only works if proportionally your opponent has greater percentage of cap left than you.. I agree with all the game play aspects listed above but to add further to the comments of others.. Why would anyone invent a weapon that only works from a position of inferiority? Like others i share concern for the role of NOS related vessels (Curse and Pilgrim) as clearly another slap in the face to all Amarr players.. I consider the new NOS function a knee jerk reaction by CCP to the complaints of forum trolls on the current NOS function. The existing NOS is not an i win button and is easily countered by cap boosters (perhaps not for the win but certainly for the escape) in the interests of quality PVP experiences please rethink this move.. Someone said it above.. Eve needs to retain the Rock, Paper, Siccors aspect or it runs the risk of becoming linear and predictable. Disgusted !! Wow... Just wow. You never took Physics did you? While it would be possible in theory to create a device that functioned as either the proposed NOS or the current Energy Neutralizer work, the current NOS makes no sense whatsoever, except from a video game power tactic point of view. Seriosly, just try and actually USE the new version before taking the Chicken Little approach for once here people. If you sit down and THINK (I know it's hard sometimes, but try for me, please?) I'm sure you'll be able to come up with some creative ways to use the changes to create new and ORIGINAL strategies (I know that this will be a first for some of you too) But seriously, before you decide that a little rain on the NOS parade signals the end times, play the game a little and see if you can't make it work. Honestly though, curse and pilgrim pilots probably take the least part of the hit here, since the good fits for those ships were NEVER solid NOS, since they would still take longer and be less effective than a NOS-NEUT setup.
Kairi Elan FATAL REVELATIONS FATAL Alliance	Posted - 2007.08.02 17:02:00 - [75] Originally by: BugxEarl Well the thing with this nosnerf is, it doesn't nerf the ships that really do need the nerf. Are nos-domi gone now? Nope. What people are going to do is fit a passively plate tanked domi with 2 neut 1 nos which will still be very effective. Curse, on the other hand cannot do this. Why? Even with 800 charges in the injector, Curse cannot effectively passive tank, and its main method of supression against counter-nos is RSD or nos of its own, and its limited cargo capacity prohibits it from fighting a capacitor war. Ok and you... You just lose. Curse gets a range bonus to NOS and NEUTs, so unless it's a) slow or b) stupid, why does it get into the cap war to start with?
chao226 Avatars of Doom	Posted - 2007.08.02 18:36:00 - [76] I can understand the feeling some ppl have about nos being overpowerd but this fix makes NOS completely useless. anything else would be better. 1. sig radios based nerf 2. nerf based on class of ship to nos 3. a nerf based more on your own cap i.e the closer your cap is to full the less effective it is and the lower your cap is the more effective is is. i.e at 50% cap a t1 hevey nos will drain 100 capacitor per cycle. if u fall down to 25% cap u get a bonus 125 or 150 cap but if your up at 75% cap u only drain 75-50 per cycle. The key here is to balance the modules not to make em completely useless. nos dommi aint the i-win botton Its good at its role which is close range combat and breaking a active tank. in the past before the ECM nerf the nos-ecm-dommi was a solo pawn mobile it wasent uncommon to beat ppl when they outnumberd u 2-1 or even bet a raven with cruiser cepter support. with the ECM nerf it took a huge hit and is more in line parhaps slightly overpowerd for a ter 1 bs but a fix to nos is needed not just throwing em out a window. btw if since a lot of ships aint gonna be getting flown at all anymore shall we just have a roaming gang with all the ammar recon nos dommi pilots ect till we lose our ships
BugxEarl Amarr Amaterus Boot Camp Izanagi Alliance	Posted - 2007.08.02 22:47:00 - [77] Regarding Curse, pre-change it had several trade-off which made it strong but not imbalanced (atleast against majority of the ships). RSD fit: It needed 4 RSD (if speed tanked with appropriate rigs) to suppress targets with longer locking ranges, namely BS. When facing multiple targets, this setup face significantly larger risk compared to Vaga or similar solo-ganker style ships. Tank fit: Can kill vaga 1v1 but will not be able to take on passively tanked ship or BS with nos-fit (Drakes, Domi) Argument that Curse is imbalanced due to being the only recon with enough firepower(and ability) to kill a BS is null. This balance farther accelerate that imbalance by not only by weakening Curse but several other ships that did not need nerfing. (AC tempest's effectiveness farther reduced. WTF is this crap?) I'd rather not flame but since certain people seem to have trouble reading, I'll state again. Passively tanked ship which have weapon system independant of capacitor (and range to a certain extent) will be at a significant advantage with this nos change. Domi, for example will still remain powerful with cap injected neutralizers. Capital ships will also somewhat suffer from this 'nerf', as now there is no way to rid a single tackler from holding it in place. Some might argue caps should not fly alone, and that is true, but it is also equally rudiculous that an inty flying around a capital ship well within nos range but does not get shot down. When a tackler suffers little risk when holding down a much larger target does not seem like a good game balance at all.
Shengxin	Posted - 2007.08.03 01:27:00 - [78] CCP's planned change for nosferatus is too extreme. even if you hate nos, this should be obvious. why not look for some middle ground? How about making the amount of energy drained/stolen proportional to the percentage difference of the two ships' cap? If the target ship has equal or greater percentage cap than the nos-using-ship, then the nos would work at full power. If the nossee has less than the nosser, the nos would function at a reduced effectiveness. If A's % cap is greater than B's % cap, then (B's % cap)/(A's % cap) x theoretical amount stolen = actual amount stolen For example, A has a Neavy Nosferatu I on target B. A and B both have 100% cap when the nos actives. The nos functions at 100% effectiveness, transferring 100 units of cap. Later, A is still nossing B. A now has 80% cap and B is down to 40%. A's Heavy Nos only functions at 50% effectiveness, stealing 50 units of cap. Finally, A's cap is at 50% and B is still going with 10% when A's nos activates again. A's heavy nos is working at a mere 20% effectiveness, transferring 20 units of cap. I don't know if this calculation of relative cap percentages would put too much strain on the servers, but it would make Nosferatu inferior to Energy Neutralizers in some respects while allowing Nos to leech some energy most of the time. Obviously, other calculations could be used to make this exponential, if desired. (B's % cap)^2/(A's % cap)^2 x theoretical amount stolen = actual amount stolen
Narishema	Posted - 2007.08.03 01:52:00 - [79] Here are the situations that NOS is overpowered. 1) Big ship being hit by tacklers in PVP. Use an extra slot to nos a tackler and you can now get away, or if you decide to kill the tackler then chanced are they can't AB or MWD any more without any cap. 2) NOS boats. Drain the cap of your target. RSD your target so they can't target you back. Drone your foe to death. Easy win against any setup that uses cap for tanking or guns. Doubly more effective against ships that use cap for both. 3) No draw backs to using nos even if your cap is full. You just keep draining away. NOS was meant to be used as a supplement. Not a defensive/offensive weapon. It was suppose to help ships out with cap problems keep going in the fight a tad bit longer. The "nerf" doesn't affect nos being used in this way at all. If you are using a cap hungry setup on a ship and need nos to help keep you going.. guess what? The nerf changes nothing. Curse/pilgrim ships, like all recon ship side roles is to disable a target in a fashion that allows ANOTHER ship to come in for the kill that target. Look at all the other recon ships and you will see this. Boost to web, or scram, or ECM. The other 3 race recond can not reliably solo kill any other bigger ship in pvp. Sure, they can "hold" their target in a fashion for someone else to make the easier kill, but not themselves. The exception, not the rule, to recon ships was the curse/pilgrim. NOS as it currently is, allows these ships to not oly disable, but destroy other ships with impunity. NOS kept a curse/pilgrim full cap, while decimating the target's cap. They get to use and active tank and wait till the lack of cap broke the tank of the target. Then it was send in the drones. Now, a curse/pilgrim can STILL break the cap of a target, but they do so using neuts, which will cost them cap. Curse/pilgrim out of all the recon ships is still the "best" solo ship with the neut bonus. They can still take down the cap of any other boat out there that requires cap for offense or defense or both. However, it is no longer so one sided. A slip, and they can be just as defenseless and out of cap as their target. But well played, using both neuts, and nos, they can still be highly effective. Just not so overpoweringly so.
Benglada Infinitus Odium The Church.	Posted - 2007.08.03 02:27:00 - [80] this change is epic win --------------------------- Originally by: Arkanor 0.0 is the Final Frontier. Bring money and friends. Sig nerfz0r - maximum allowed siz0r is 24000 bytz0r. - Devil ([email protected]) Sig By Ortos

batmoth Amarr Empirius Enigmus Navy Dark Matter Coalition	Posted - 2007.08.03 02:29:00 - [81] Originally by: Benglada this change is epic win Can You Expalin a little more why do you think it is good?
Kaben	Posted - 2007.08.03 02:52:00 - [82] The nerf is fine for me and I use drone boats, I don't see the problem with it, yes this means I'll have to refit my domi and others but it's cool. Imo if any pilot who uses drone boats says that there ship is crap now is full of it. It has already been proven time and time again the curse didn't get crushed, the only ships that are NOS specific boats that got crushed by this are faction. Which btw, look on page 34 I believe of the comments for the dev blog, the devs stated there that they were planning on changing the faction ship bonus's so they are still viable ships. As far as the whiners on the curse, it didn't make the ship a pyle, all it did was knock the curse of "it's" pedistal. As I already stated, I use drone boats and I don't see a huge problem with this nerf, all it means is using my head to think of something else instead of saying omg omg what will I do, plese don't nerf something that was overpowered. Truthfully I can't wait till it's deployed, please release it asap ccp.
Baugoti Amarr Middle Finger Technology Red Moon Federation	Posted - 2007.08.03 03:38:00 - [83] my oppinion, and sorry if this has been said before but im lazy and dont feel like reading everything is that nos does need a nerf. but not like this. i think if they are going to nerf nos, make it track. So that heavy nos wont be able to track a frigate orbiting at 500meters. yes it needs a nerf.. but this nerf kills the curse/pilgrim as we know it.
Kaben	Posted - 2007.08.03 07:34:00 - [84] Originally by: Baugoti my oppinion, and sorry if this has been said before but im lazy and dont feel like reading everything is that nos does need a nerf. but not like this. i think if they are going to nerf nos, make it track. So that heavy nos wont be able to track a frigate orbiting at 500meters. yes it needs a nerf.. but this nerf kills the curse/pilgrim as we know it. srry for calling this a forum troll but it is, not reading is like trolling. I went through alot of pages reading everthing that I found relavent in the dev blogs commentary section. People who just make accusations stating something like "it will not work" without testing it are irrelavent, point being the curse was tested on sisi by curse pilots and it still works, just not as good as they used to. By saying "used to" I don't mean they are not good, lets face it, the curse and pilgrim were overpowered before and now they aren't as overpowering, the same goes for drone boats that used this tactic. Please don't say that I was one of the ones calling for the nerf, I never posted it be nerfed, but as I am a Domi and Ishtar pilot I know that it was overpowered and am willing to accept the nerf. All it means to me is I will have to setup my ships differently and not relying on the nos to crush my opponent while my drones destroy them. The only ships this nerf hurt (and by hurt I mean are not very viable anymore) are faction ships like the bhal, which as stated in the comments of the dev blog on page 34 I believe that the bonus for those ships will be changed to include neut bonus's. Beyond that they might be adjusting the amarr recon's fitting or changing the fitting requirments on neuts. (personally I don't think a change is needed on fitting of curse or neuts, maybe a slight fitting adj on nos as it's not as valued anymore) Yet I will say the same alot of people have sayed, "adapt or die." If I can adapt, how come you can't?
Depp Knight Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.08.03 08:38:00 - [85] Why is the curse so overpowered. At the one corner you got those who 1 train for amarr recons and 1 hate the nos change for all ships And in the other corner you got the players who love the nos nerf because now the dom, phoon, curse, pilgrim has been nerfed. The curse is not overpowered. Slap a snake set, faction mods then it is. But then its over a 1bil isk ship and its meant to be overpowered if thats the case.
Kaben	Posted - 2007.08.03 09:52:00 - [86] Originally by: Depp Knight Why is the curse so overpowered. At the one corner you got those who 1 train for amarr recons and 1 hate the nos change for all ships And in the other corner you got the players who love the nos nerf because now the dom, phoon, curse, pilgrim has been nerfed. The curse is not overpowered. Slap a snake set, faction mods then it is. But then its over a 1bil isk ship and its meant to be overpowered if thats the case. I'm not sure if this is a ? or not, but it doesn't require snake implants to make this ship overpowering, nor does it take faction, at the most I would say a domination warp disrupter and the curse is overpowering. ie. curse gets bonus to nos/neut amount and nos/neut range, this with recons at rank 4 allow for 32km (roughly opt range) with nos and neuts. Now slap on 2 sensor damps and skills and pretty much any ship that doesn't have at least 1 sensor boost can't even target lock the curse, hence meaning it can use lows for speed instead of tank. So in turn without sensor boost or a mwd whatever ship it is will die a slow death and the only thing the curse has to worry about is local and it's own drones. Or a better example of this, lets look at market value, I wonder why the lach only costs roughly 40mil and the curse and pilgrim are at 80mil/90mil. I think this is pretty self explanitory considering they require the same t2 components (xept of course difference in race components, but the same) ie. the same reason the crow is worth 15-20mil while others aren't close to that (save for maybe malediction due to new khanid changes). saying it costs 1bil+ to make a curse a viable pvp ship is mute, this is the same as saying it cost 1bil to setup a nanophoon or nanodomi. The point is it doesn't require 1bil to make it viable nor does it require lots of skills, only took about 400mil to make the nanobs, this is same for curse, it doesn't require 1bil in implants. In other words a combat recon shouldn't mean that it can go out and wtfbbq ships easily, as of current imo the curse was just like nanobs, it had a choice, "kill or live" were as other ships it came accross there choice was "kill or die." So the question is was it "overpowering compared to other recon ships?" IMO yes, just as my domi was overpowering with nos completely destroying the cap of inty's/hac's/cruiser's in a matter of no time, not to mention being able to sustain my own tank while crushing his with his energy, leaving him with no tank and then the drones finish his capless tankless butt off. (unless passive tanked) But even against a passive tank it still comes down to leeching his cap and sustaining my own at almost no cost, so all the damage he would inflict until his cap was drained did very little to me while my damage still hurt him to that point. So in turn the curses nos was allowing the pilot to speed tank the whole time with very little loss of his own energy. But there are also those that armor tanked the curse, which leads still to infinite running of tank until opponents cap is dry before tanking effects the curse.
Kaben	Posted - 2007.08.03 10:17:00 - [87] Furthermore I'd like to add that a pilot who has recon 4 and flies a curse gets more energy drained and neutralized then heavy nos and heavy neuts. In other words if you felt the suckadom needed the nerf bat then it's pretty self explanitory the curse did as it draws more energy then the suckadom, only difference was curse can't use ogre II's. Also I flew a suckadom and back in the day flew a nanodom. I adapted when the nerf stopped nanos, I'll adapt on this. Please note I said I flew a suckadom, I don't anymore cause I'm adapting to this change, that way I am better suited to use my domi when the nerf happens. Yet I didn't complain during the nanobs nerf, cause they were overpowered and I won't complain for this, as it is overpowered and has been for quite some time, thankfully the devs are finally changing it. Only reason I'm complaining now is because this "omg omg I trained so hard to get my curse" I say bs to that, it's not that hard to get in a curse, and stop complaining cause it's already been proven that the curse isn't dead and to add to that the question is why did everyone seem to train curse as because for the most part nobody likes amarr ships? hmm, I wonder why....lol, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out.
Azirapheal Amarr Ore Mongers R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.08.03 10:21:00 - [88] has anyone ever considered the fact that the latest rounds of FOTM setups (nanophoon, curse pilg etc) have been solo wtfpwnmobiles? anyone want to hazarda guess why? the only reason ive trained for these is because i miss solo pvp, losec doesnt offer it any more and this was a good way to pick on an enemy alliances ratters and isk farmers (cough BOB) and yeah, we get nerfed again as an aside ive just updated my subscription for one more month, instead of my usual 6. Originally by: CCP Wrangler you're not supposed to feel like you're logging in to a happy, happy, fluffy, fluffy lala land filled with fun and adventures, that's what hello kitty online is for.
Null Byte Dragon's Rage Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2007.08.03 10:32:00 - [89] I didnÆt read all the posts so if this has been suggested already ignore this post. I'm not a fan of the NOS simply because I usually fly an interceptor and can see how this would benefit me greatly at first glance. However, I do think this approach to nerfing the NOS would not fix the warp in -> locked by 2-3 ships -> NOS -> dead, simply because pilots would just switch to a Neut for combating tacklers. ItÆs not even the fact that the enemy would be weaker overall having Neuts fitted instead of NOS due to less cap because both sides would have changed fittings, therefore changing nothing at all in battles except survivability would be less for active tanked ships. How about changing it so that Nos works in the way you can only suck the cap you have space for. I.e. if you have say 7990 cap/8000 cap and using heavy NOS, on that cycle you can only pull 10 cap. This would mean that you can still NOS your enemy to 0% cap but the cap sucked has been used in the battle and not just disappeared into space, and would remove the Neut element of the Nos. If you want to combat the dead-in-the-water syndrome maybe implement some kind of ratio system where heavy nos for e.g can still pull 100% of its potential on larger ships but say 10% on smaller ships like interceptors and 70% on cruisers. Similar to sig radius, actually maybe base it on sig radius? That would be even more interesting since you donÆt only have to worry about how much damage you will take by increasing your sig radius but also how much cap you would lose.
Kaben	Posted - 2007.08.03 10:34:00 - [90] The thing that I find most interesting about this is I remember alot of the massive nerfs to omgwtfpwnmobiles. Everytime people would say "no please don't do this" and others said "adapt or die", but then there turn came to the nerf bat and they're saying no no, please don't kill my ship. (next will be the nanovaga) muhahaha...lol.

Kaben	Posted - 2007.08.03 11:01:00 - [91] Originally by: Null Byte I didnÆt read all the posts so if this has been suggested already ignore this post. I'm not a fan of the NOS simply because I usually fly an interceptor and can see how this would benefit me greatly at first glance. However, I do think this approach to nerfing the NOS would not fix the warp in -> locked by 2-3 ships -> NOS -> dead, simply because pilots would just switch to a Neut for combating tacklers. ItÆs not even the fact that the enemy would be weaker overall having Neuts fitted instead of NOS due to less cap because both sides would have changed fittings, therefore changing nothing at all in battles except survivability would be less for active tanked ships. How about changing it so that Nos works in the way you can only suck the cap you have space for. I.e. if you have say 7990 cap/8000 cap and using heavy NOS, on that cycle you can only pull 10 cap. This would mean that you can still NOS your enemy to 0% cap but the cap sucked has been used in the battle and not just disappeared into space, and would remove the Neut element of the Nos. If you want to combat the dead-in-the-water syndrome maybe implement some kind of ratio system where heavy nos for e.g can still pull 100% of its potential on larger ships but say 10% on smaller ships like interceptors and 70% on cruisers. Similar to sig radius, actually maybe base it on sig radius? That would be even more interesting since you donÆt only have to worry about how much damage you will take by increasing your sig radius but also how much cap you would lose. I aggree on the fact of they will fit neuts as I have one on my domi now for that exact reason. As per the first fix you posted it will lead to the scenario of the nos boat (domi) will still continue to use said bs's own energy to keep his own tank going, yes it seems viable but here's the thing. A domi pilot will use mwd to spend a little energy to start the drain on his own cap to start sucking said ship's cap. On the second fix you mentioned this would require an even higher % loss. ie. large nos on capitols 100%, on bs 75%, cruiser 50% and frig 25%, in which case the nos setups still would be viable and overpowered. This is actually simular to the sig nerf someone suggested. Which isn't enough of a nerf to stop heavy nos from being overused and I changed your change to a more severe sig nerf. Please if you ? the reason why the "devs" chose this option please go to the dev blog, click comments, head to page 33 or 34 and look for the dev posting. In here it states they had 4 problems with the way nos currently worked and this option was the only one that corrected all 4 probs. If you want to make an idea to better fix nos, make a solution that fixes all 4 of the probs as the dev states most of the ways people currently have suggested fixing nos only corrected 1 or 2 of the probs with nos.
totemiser sneaklord	Posted - 2007.08.03 12:47:00 - [92] well all i can say is this nerf just changed my skill training for the next 6 months.. i was about 3-4 weeks from being able to fly a pilgrim and go and kick pirate ass but now that the pilgrim is basically being nerfed to a non-combat scout/covert cyno field deployer i think ill change my whole setup and go for the HAC's instead as the only class of ship that will be able to hold their own against almost any other ship upto battleships im just glad i havent gone out and spent the 250mill plus on the ship and mods yet since i can now use that to get the HAC ill be needing now well done ccp for removing the ammar ability to sneak around like the other races and have a chance to dent the pride of our enemys....


Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.