| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Soldarius
United Highsec Front
The 99 Percent
188
   |
Posted - 2012.03.27 07:04:00 -
[61] - Quote
The reflection idea is just too weird. Using a cap battery to give a hard floor which nos/neut can't touch could be useful. But then good-bye whelpfleet.
Nos already has a major hindrance in that it can't drain another ship below your ship's current cap level. I dunno. I don't really have much issue with neuts. Working as intended.
"How do you kill that which has no life?" |
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
204
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 07:12:00 -
[62] - Quote
I dislike the idea of making Cap Batteries give a % of cap that can't be touched even more than the chance to reflect the Neut/Nos.
A % resistance to drain amount might not be bad if it's matched with scale of mod to ship and stacking penalties.
Anyone have more info on the Nos buff (or rather reversal of the heavy nerf it received a few years back)? |
Empl Tash'cran
Golden Lobster Social Network
1
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 08:47:00 -
[63] - Quote
Adding another mechanic that relies on dice rolls is silly.
Just remove the sodding batteries FFS. |
uredo
ZERO HEAVY INDUSTRIES
9
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 12:52:00 -
[64] - Quote
Empl Tash'cran wrote:Adding another mechanic that relies on dice rolls is silly.
Just remove the sodding batteries FFS.
QFT
|
Kingwood
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
61
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 13:03:00 -
[65] - Quote
Absolutely ******** idea. Would really like to know who came up with that one.
I actually thought CCP might have learned from the screwed up ECM mechanics, but I guess not - let's just introduce more random dice rolls.
Waiting to see where this is going, but I can't imagine them stopping at cap batteries if they actually go through with this. |
Zarnak Wulf
CTRL-Q
Iron Oxide.
295
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 14:14:00 -
[66] - Quote
Keeping o portion of the capacitor immune from nuets would be very noob AND frigate friendly. Imagine a hero rifter that an't have it's propulsion mod or warp scrambler turned off via nuets. |
Kingwood
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
61
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 14:25:00 -
[67] - Quote
Zarnak Wulf wrote:Keeping o portion of the capacitor immune from nuets would be very noob AND frigate friendly. Imagine a hero rifter that an't have it's propulsion mod or warp scrambler turned off via nuets.
And you don't see anything wrong with that? |
Zarnak Wulf
CTRL-Q
Iron Oxide.
295
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 14:43:00 -
[68] - Quote
I see the possibility of alot more dead Hurricanes and Cynabals. There is nothing wrong with that at all. And didn't you just indicate you'd prefer nuet resistance/ immunity to chance based mechanics? |
Kingwood
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
61
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 14:47:00 -
[69] - Quote
I stated I'd prefer even something as ******** as complete neut immunity to a chance-based mechanic. It was an overstatement to get my point across.
Being completely neut immune is not a good mechanic either. There needs to be at least a possibility of being able to neut a point/scram off a tackler, and cap booster/nos counter neuts effectively enough already.
Neut resistance on a cap battery is fine, though. I hope CCP takes a look at that at least before introducing more "lol my dice beat yours" mechanics into Eve. |
Stabs McShiv
MINUS4
4
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 14:52:00 -
[70] - Quote
Why not just give them a multiplication modifier on your current base cap amount that should more then make up for the horrible fitting requirements and should improve nuet resistance and cap regen in line with the fitting reqs just cap the totals at ranges for the intended ship class so they wont work well on caps though a large battery on a carrier or dread should probably be equivalent to 1/4 to 1/2 SMC allowing more fitting options with rigs just stack nerf the hell out of them and if they are removed - the cap they give as a % of total cap from the new unfitted total to prevent abuse via other carrier hangers
Dosnt seem to hard |
zero2espect
ZERO HEAVY INDUSTRIES
42
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 15:03:00 -
[71] - Quote
for the record i'd like to see nemesis modules for all recon class ships. that my friend will bring some crazy variety to setups and ships. |
HeavensGuard
The Rapscallions
1
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 19:36:00 -
[72] - Quote
ive been flying curses and pilgrims my whole eve life, and to think that on occasion a neut will be reflected back doesnt seem to bother me, when it does get reflected i dont think it would do much since it costs so much less cap to activate the neut compared to how much it actually neuts
but that said i do agree in the fact that curse/pilgrim are getting screwed over again when other recons are still dominant in their respectable fields
i do miss the good old days when nos was awesome and curses/pilgrims just owned, but looking back i guess it was somewhat op :P
You think you die and everything will be sugar and rainbows ? |
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
205
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 19:45:00 -
[73] - Quote
Something along the lines of this:
Standard sized cap battery gives 36% cap drain and destabilization resist
Over sized cap battery gives 54% cap drain and destabilization resists
Under sized cap battery gives 18% cap drain and destabilization resists
Small Battery = Frigate/Destroyer, Medium Battery = Cruiser/Battlecruiser, Large Battery = Battleship
* Caps can only get an undersized battery by using a Large Battery.
Resists from Batteries don't stack, 1 fitted battery gives the same resists as 3 fitted batteries. Ship just uses the resist of the largest best battery fitted.
If my rough calculations are correct a resist profile of 36% would mean an unbonused ship without implants would be destroying roughly the same cap on the target as used to run the Neut... well at Energy Emission 4 it would doing slightly more cap damage to itself, and at 5 slightly more to the target.
HeavensGuard,
Yes I hope the talk of NOS nerf reversal happens because, the module is already pretty useless outside of frigates. |
Zircon Dasher
91
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 00:57:00 -
[74] - Quote
When do we get to talk about the upcoming Curse, Bhaal, etc buff?
I mean, anyone who actually paid attention to the new module info knows that cap battery changes are a precursor to buffing NOS/Nuet buffs.
|
Cambarus
Baros Reloaded
146
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 01:00:00 -
[75] - Quote
Zircon Dasher wrote:When do we get to talk about the upcoming Curse, Bhaal, etc buff?
I mean, anyone who actually paid attention to the new module info knows that cap battery changes are a precursor to buffing NOS/Nuet buffs.
Given how long neuts have been broken, I doubt it. |
Trinkets friend
Obstergo
Persona Non Gratis
238
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 01:08:00 -
[76] - Quote
I have chewed the cud on this one over night. I will side with the "percent chance is idiotic" crowd
CCP Soundwave said he wants to shake up the way modules work, so that the 'doctrine' fits of yesteryear and today get shaken up. This is all well and good, but this proposed shake-up for cap batteries is stupid, clunky, and impractical.
Looking at the way ships in EVE are constructed, they have shield, armour, hull, capacitor as their basic attributes. For each of these four physical attributes every ship gets a base amount, and they have base resistances - except of course capacitor. Shield and capacitor work in a similar way, in that they are actively regenerating attributes based on energy; hull and armour are passive based on physical matter and hence can't regenerate.
For modules, for each of the four base attributes of the ship, you have a class of modules which do the following things
1) adds to the raw HP of the attribute (shield extenders, plates, cap batteries; hull version missing
2) adds a percentage of HP (shield version missing; regenerative membranes; bulkheads; PDU's
3) Confers a resistance modifier, and is both both active and passive (eg; Invuls, EANMs, DCU, capacitor version missing
4) actively ads to the attribute (hull and armour repairers, shield boosters, cap boosters
5) adds to the passive regeneration of the attribute (CPR's, SPR's; armour and hull versions missing for obvious reasons)
Because capacitor is vital to the operation of every ship except the brick drake, there are special modules which exist to attack the capacitor of an enemy ship. One concrn with introducing a reflection chance to neuts with a capacitor battery is that this is unprecedented in the context of all other forms of weaponry aside, perhaps, from defender missiles (luls, them). The thing is, this is just a random thing that happens passively to attack/defend and is a side effect of having a module which is funtionally identical to a shield extender. It makes no sense
Being pedantic here, the capactior booster acts more as a capacitor battery, in that consumables (even with a battery-like icon!) are expended to add short term bursts of energy to the ship. Like, you know, using batteries. So, if CCP wants to revamp things, just rename capacitor boosters to capacitor batteries, and rename the capacitor battery to capacitor extenders. This would solve the mental problem I have of figuring out what the hell and how the hell the capacitor battery is supposed to function; yes, extending your capacitor (like adding LSE's) increases your nett regenration of your capacitor, and acts as extra armour vs capacitor warfare. But really, they should be lowslot modules and should be rebalanced
Lets take, for instance, a Cyclone, level 5 skills. Base is 2730Gj capacitor, which is kind of equivalent to 1/2 of the base shield hp of 5490. Also note that cap and shield hp regeneration rates are similar. A LSEII gives 2650 shield, but a large cap battery gives 700 Gj - which is nearly 1/4 of the LSEII. LSE costs 165MW and 46Tf and the large cap battery costs 275MW and 100Tf.
So, firstly, regardless of any other considerations, the large cap battery actually needs to give more capacitor for its cost in powergrid and CPU. Right now, it is 1/6th as effective a way of increasing your battle performance by armouring against capacitor warfare as the LSE equivalent. Armour, a bit trickier to compare as its low-slot tanking. Also, the LSE adds raw HP which take advantage of the resistances in the shield, which generally the average pilot also buffs the performance of, whereas you have no resistance in the capacitor
So, if CCP wants to shake things up a bit, where to from here with the cap batteries? Clearly, the first step in addressing cap warfare measure/countermeasure balance is to actually provide countermeasures which are viable; part of the solution is of course cap boosters which allow you to actively tank against neuts. Right now, there's no buffer against neuts that is actually viable.
Would making the large T2 cap battery (ie; T2 LCB) give 1400Gj capacitor, for a cost of about 160MW and 50Tf unbalance the game? Not neccessarily. We may see the odd neuting geddon fitting 2 T2 LCB's, MWD, point, as a way of providing a pool of energy to feed its neuts. We may see Maels with large shield booster / T2LCB / CPR / CCC combos permatanking missions like gods - not that they can't do this anyway. We may see T2 LCB Ishtar fits perma MWDing about like clowns, or LCB-fit Cynabals and other such malarkey. But just as likely we will see people fitting a T2 LCB to a battlecruiser such as a Brutix or a Drake to armour against neuting
This will do more to address any staleness in the current application and doctrines of capacitor warfare, aside from providing energy draining missiles or other crazy ****.
Secondly, maybe CCP should look at the idea of a module to provide a resistance vs neuting. There are two low-slot capacitor modules; the capacitor power relay and capacitor flux coil. No one ever uses cap flux coils on anything because they gimp your max capacitor which negates their benefit of increased recharge rate (seriously, its stupid); perhaps replace these with a module that hardens the capacitor against neuting by 20%. You will doubtless see these deployed ubiquitously on capitals and Amarr PVP ships which are afraid of neuts.
The skilful employer of men will employ the wise man, the brave man, the covetous man, and the stupid man.
Sun Tzu
@trinketsfriend on twatter
|
Zircon Dasher
92
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 01:18:00 -
[77] - Quote
Cambarus wrote:Zircon Dasher wrote:When do we get to talk about the upcoming Curse, Bhaal, etc buff?
I mean, anyone who actually paid attention to the new module info knows that cap battery changes are a precursor to buffing NOS/Nuet buffs.
Given how long neuts have been broken, I doubt it.
Doubt is good. I usually doubt everything until I see it on Tranq, so I share your view.
On the flip side, nuets are not "broken" right now. If anything, what is "broken" is the game changes in the past 2 years that have resulted in nuets being necessary on everything used in non-blob fights and cap kills. But that is a different thread I think.
Consider things from a larger perspective: if they wanted to just nerf nuets and buff NOS there are a myriad of ways to do so without considering a "reflect spell" approach. However, if (for example) they wanted to give NOS thier old functionality back a reflection module is about the only real viable counter. |
YuuKnow
164
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 01:43:00 -
[78] - Quote
Yeah, they whole game mechanic of bouncing back a neut is kindof stupid.... what is it really accomplishing?
Why don't have just reduce the amount of cap effected a bit. It would serve the same purpose.
yk |
Cambarus
Baros Reloaded
146
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 02:05:00 -
[79] - Quote
Zircon Dasher wrote:Cambarus wrote:Zircon Dasher wrote:When do we get to talk about the upcoming Curse, Bhaal, etc buff?
I mean, anyone who actually paid attention to the new module info knows that cap battery changes are a precursor to buffing NOS/Nuet buffs.
Given how long neuts have been broken, I doubt it. Doubt is good. I usually doubt everything until I see it on Tranq, so I share your view. On the flip side, nuets are not "broken" right now. If anything, what is "broken" is the game changes in the past 2 years that have resulted in nuets being necessary on everything used in non-blob fights and cap kills. But that is a different thread I think. Consider things from a larger perspective: if they wanted to just nerf nuets and buff NOS there are a myriad of ways to do so without considering a "reflect spell" approach. However, if (for example) they wanted to give NOS thier old functionality back a reflection module is about the only real viable counter.
The reflect idea is stupid, and that seems to be what everyone here thinks, but that doesn't change the fact that neuts are OP as they are now, and any utility high NOT containing a neut is considered to be a niche mod. The bhaal/curse are fine as they are, but every other ship and their dog fitting neuts is a major problem and I'm almost inclined to side with the idea of reflecting neuts back (despite it being a terribad mechanic) if it means the presence of neuts becomes less ubiquitous. |
Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
80
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 02:10:00 -
[80] - Quote
You could give cap batteries a 100% chance to reflect neuts and I still wouldn't fit a cap battery over a cap injector. It would just lead to people specifically fitting a ship that would wreck a curse.
It's a bad idea. I don't think it'll ever make it to sisi let alone TQ.
Now can we please get back to nerfing ecm and boosting damps? |
Emiko Luan
Ekchuah's Shrine Comporium
50
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 02:35:00 -
[81] - Quote
I prefer the "capacitor integrity" idea more than the percent chance. Having cap batteries give a resistance to the neut/nos ammount (10% less drain per cycle per battery?) Having resistances for other stats than damage might be worth looking into.
If it's % chance I predict ECCM levels of whining about being "perma neuted"
+welcome to my world+
http://venomzer0.deviantart.com |
Zircon Dasher
92
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 02:55:00 -
[82] - Quote
Cambarus wrote: that doesn't change the fact that neuts are OP as they are now, and any utility high NOT containing a neut is considered to be a niche mod. The bhaal/curse are fine as they are, but every other ship and their dog fitting neuts is a major problem
I guess I don't see many lazor/hybrid boats or boats with active tanks sporting a few nuets in thier highslots. Nor do I see many fleet/ med. gang boats that operate outside of 12/24km using them. Maybe you do though.
What I see is a lot of solo/small gang buffered capless weapon toting boats being forced to use them as frig defense. I also see a fair number of frig 1v1 types in buffered capless weapon platforms (again) using them.
Quote:and I'm almost inclined to side with the idea of reflecting neuts back (despite it being a terribad mechanic) if it means the presence of neuts becomes less ubiquitous.
Ah so even IF nuets are OP you agree that reflection is a better mechanic than what is currently available. Since nuets could not be OP if the counters were effective. |
Trinkets friend
Obstergo
Persona Non Gratis
238
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 09:00:00 -
[83] - Quote
People who say neuts are OP are the guys who sperge ECM drones at people.
neuts are fine as is. Truly, they are. You can neut out only a slight bit more capacitor than your foe, and you do less DPS and often have to sacrifice tank or EW to fit a cap booster (which is a multiplier for neuts). All of which doesn't neccessarily help you win a toe-to-toe slugfest against a gank-tank fit enemy when you've given up gank for neuts.
Lets take, eg, a dual neut cane vs a brick harby. The cane's only advantage vs the Harby is the neuts for capping him out. But if the harby has a cap booster to keep his guns firing he can keep the DPS and tackle on the cane and outlast. If the Harby has no cap booster, he's toast. I guess that being OP starts with the victim's fiting window.
The skilful employer of men will employ the wise man, the brave man, the covetous man, and the stupid man.
Sun Tzu
@trinketsfriend on twatter
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
965
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 09:24:00 -
[84] - Quote
Jorma Morkkis wrote:Limvala Adur wrote:This isn't good because? Neuts, for their impact on a fight, have NO drawbacks what so ever. You simply have the ability to neut down a ship, without giving it any though. Let's put it this way: what happens to Curse when its capacitor runs out of juice? You can't use any of modules that keep Curse alive. - You can't use neuts - You can't use tracking disruptors - You can't use MWD/AB
What happens to Falcon when you fit ECM and he can't brake your lock? -he's dead
What happens to Arazu/Lachesis when it uses damps in ships fighting closer than 20km? -ho w8
What happens if Rapier/huggin...forget, those don't care that much.
If those are neuted:
Can't use propulsion modules
Can't use defense modules
Can't use offensive modules
And the stupid thing is that neuts can be used by everyone and his cat. |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
50
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 09:32:00 -
[85] - Quote
How will it be calculated, stacked chance per battery or something?
Any one have a good idea as to how one goes about neuting down a Triage carrier in less than five minutes if it packs 4-5 batteries .. CCP thinking so far outside the box that it is a dot on the horizon.
Batteries should have some benefit attached to them given their insane fitting cost, making their contribution to cap (or even half for that matter) immune to neuting would be infinitely better than this feedback/mirror concept.
My guess is that CCP have run out of low-hanging fruit so are resorting to picking up rotten pieces from the ground, duct taping them to the branches and 'selling' them as bona fide LH FruitGäó |
Meditril
T.R.I.A.D
Defiant Legacy
55
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 12:59:00 -
[86] - Quote
I think this is a refreshing idea of CCP. Neutralizers are a big problems for frigates, so if I would decide to dedicated one of my precious medium slots to save a bit of my cap from being neutralized this sounds fair to me. Currently everyone is fitting Neutralizers on almost every Cruiser or BC for PVP. So if there is a way to avoid then meaybe less people will fit them and then also less people will need to avoid it. Sounds like this will add some more spice to the game. |
Smiling Menace
Star Nebulae Holdings Inc.
227
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 13:16:00 -
[87] - Quote
I honestly wish people would stop posting stuff they heard/saw at Fanfest.
It stands to reason that CCP will want to try/test new and radical ideas to make EVE more interesting or varied but that doesn't mean it's set in stone!
Until you actually see a Dev Blog saying Amarr are getting shafted (again) then don't start going all emo until then?
Oh and by the way? Cap boosters are not a counter to neuts. They negate the effects on your ship of the neuts but they do nothing to counter the nueting in the first place. This 'idea' would be a handy counter but I cannot imagine any reason why I would give up a mid slot for a battery on the off chance I get neuted. I never see Curses that often to worry about them. Falcons on the other hand......
Just thought I would go all emo and throw that in there.  |
Cedo Nulli
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
97
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 17:10:00 -
[88] - Quote
I guess people are missing the mainpoint here .... This is a not so covert buff to minmatar and their non-cap way of doing things.
Faster basespeeds on ships ... All of their weapons are non-cap using ... Most of basic combat ships sport a neut as a standard equipment. Plentiful slot layouts to throw in those batteries.
Its a good idea for cap batteries to be more used then in that 1 niche setup that nobody has ever seen ... But another "lets make minnies even better as end result" change is just garbage. |
Zarnak Wulf
CTRL-Q
Iron Oxide.
298
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 17:27:00 -
[89] - Quote
It is a Minmatar nerf. Minmatar are the most likely to fit a nuet. They have the fittings and the utility high spots for it. A cap battery also takes away from shield yanking or tackle. |
Smiling Menace
Star Nebulae Holdings Inc.
228
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 18:07:00 -
[90] - Quote
Zarnak Wulf wrote:It is a Minmatar nerf. Minmatar are the most likely to fit a nuet. They have the fittings and the utility high spots for it. A cap battery also takes away from shield tanking or tackle.
You are aware that they can also armour tank pretty well? |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |