These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Odyssey 1.1] Nosferatu mechanic change

First post First post
Author
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#681 - 2013-09-10 19:08:07 UTC
Morwen Lagann wrote:
Fanatic Row wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
does that mean you can neut NPC's dry?
This exactly.

NPCs might have a base cap tied to their stats. But nothing leads us to believe that the capacitor and cap usage is actually something that the server is spending CPU cycles on keeping track of.

NPCs can perma-mwd and fire uninterupted, even when being heavily neuted.

Have you actually tested this, or is it just theory?

Nos and neuts do (or did prior to the patch at least) have a minor effect on NPCs - they apply a modifier that decreases the chances of an NPC repairing itself.

This wouldn't do much against incursion rats, of course, since those don't have local tanks.

Neuts had a negative effect on an NPC's ability to tank damage, NOS did not have this effect. Instead they provided cap to you for a limited amount of time.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Rocky Deadshot
In The Goo
EVE Trade Alliance
#682 - 2013-09-10 21:48:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Rocky Deadshot
CCP Rise wrote:
It seems that my earlier post that PVE players would not be affected by this change was inaccurate. Sorry for giving you guys bad information on that.

After reviewing the actual effect of this change on PVE we have decided to leave it alone and let it function in the new way, which mirrors the way it works in PVP, rather than try to split the function of NOS into a PVE and PVP version. Along with the consistency this provides, we also prefer that under the new mechanic you can't infinitely NOS any NPC nearby and instead have to work a bit harder to take full advantage of energy vampires.

I've seen speculation that NPCs have 1GJ cap and that's why % based drain always worked before, but now does not. This is not the case and most NPCs have base cap that is slightly below average base cap for their class. As an example, incursion BS rats have around 3800GJ base cap, meaning that a player BS would be able to NOS them successfully at between 50% and 75% of its cap total. Just like player vs player situations, NOSing NPCs in a ship class higher than yours should be very easy.

Again, sorry for the misinformation, if you have more questions about this please post them here.


First: I see you guys are watching Reddit.

Second: My armeggedon with my skills and no cap increasing implants or mods has a cap pool of 7750 GJ, based on info provided by eveinfo.com, the average mission NPC BS has about 3000 GJ. This is roughly 38% of my cap... meaning my cap has to be dangerously low for this module to be useful.
I'd seriously suggest, and i can't believe i'm saying this, that you guys BUFF NPC cap pools. I'd say 5000GJ would be respectable... making heavy NOS at least somewhat useful.
Samas Sarum
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#683 - 2013-09-10 22:13:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Samas Sarum
CCP Rise wrote:
It seems that my earlier post that PVE players would not be affected by this change was inaccurate. Sorry for giving you guys bad information on that.

After reviewing the actual effect of this change on PVE we have decided to leave it alone and let it function in the new way, which mirrors the way it works in PVP, rather than try to split the function of NOS into a PVE and PVP version. Along with the consistency this provides, we also prefer that under the new mechanic you can't infinitely NOS any NPC nearby and instead have to work a bit harder to take full advantage of energy vampires.

I've seen speculation that NPCs have 1GJ cap and that's why % based drain always worked before, but now does not. This is not the case and most NPCs have base cap that is slightly below average base cap for their class. As an example, incursion BS rats have around 3800GJ base cap, meaning that a player BS would be able to NOS them successfully at between 50% and 75% of its cap total. Just like player vs player situations, NOSing NPCs in a ship class higher than yours should be very easy.

Again, sorry for the misinformation, if you have more questions about this please post them here.


Wow, final nail in the coffin for heavy NOS's, bang up job on that quality control before patches go out. Can we just save 6 years and change the mechanic now, or can CCP explain what they see as the niche (however small) of heavy NOS's is now that PvE is out the window?

You can say it is to balance heavy neuts being more effective than small but it isn't like small neuts are completely worthless (when compared to their alternatives) like heavy NOS's are. They drain frigates just fine and always work on any platform no matter what you're fighting, completely different than a heavy NOS.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#684 - 2013-09-11 08:10:38 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Gypsio III wrote:
FFS not this nonsense again Ranger1, I've explained this twice already.

If you're under cap pressure from a larger ship then you will be neuted to zero cap in very quick order. When you're at zero cap there is no difference in Nos operation between the two mechanics - the Nos provides the same amount of cap at the same rate in both situations.

Not only are you incorrect again, but you didn't actually read what was posted.



I simply don't know how to explain this in words simple enough for you any more. Goodbye.
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#685 - 2013-09-11 09:19:50 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
I simply don't know how to explain this in words simple enough for you any more. Goodbye.

That's what you get for being so abstract! Smile

Simple way of visualizing it:
Two cylindrical containers one with twice the height (or diameter) of the other are connected with a narrow pipe at their bottoms (these are the capacitors).
When both are full of water the pressure differential will make the water flow into the smaller container (frigate NOS'ing anything bigger).
When the water volume is equal in the two containers the water does not move at all as there is no pressure difference to move it.
With one container empty the water will flow in that direction but at a rate dictated by the width of the pipe (NOS max transfer rate) or the pipe will burst.

In the latter case (ie. what Gypsio tried saying), where one is completely empty, it does not matter one iota whether one uses volume or percentages .. it does however come into play earlier when there is something in both containers as 51% volume of the large container is equal to more than 100% volume of the smaller (twice the height or diameter).

My biggest grievance is that they don't allow for over-pressure. Would be sweet if a higher volume difference allowed for higher drain, but guess the hamsters would demand more nuts.
Naomi Anthar
#686 - 2013-09-11 09:27:21 UTC
Ranger 1 still alive in NOS topic ... god save us all. For me you can remove nos module at all ... thank you Ranger 1 for this.
CCP Ytterbium
C C P
C C P Alliance
#687 - 2013-09-11 09:48:43 UTC
Unpinning - 1.1 has been released.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#688 - 2013-09-12 08:04:42 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
Gypsio III wrote:
I simply don't know how to explain this in words simple enough for you any more. Goodbye.

That's what you get for being so abstract! Smile.


Oh I'm sure that Ranger1 does understand the problem really. But his "rebuttal" to the point that a ship being neuted down to zero cap would see no benefit from the mechanic change was to describe a situation where the ship wasn't actually being neuted at all. It wasn't that what he said wasn't correct, the problem was that it was entirely irrelevant to the point being made.

It's very difficult to discuss things with someone who'll just ignore what you say, construct a different scenario to support his own position, then declare victory. What?
John-Luck Pickard
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#689 - 2013-09-17 10:08:15 UTC  |  Edited by: John-Luck Pickard
CCP Rise wrote:
It seems that my earlier post that PVE players would not be affected by this change was inaccurate. Sorry for giving you guys bad information on that.

After reviewing the actual effect of this change on PVE we have decided to leave it alone and let it function in the new way, which mirrors the way it works in PVP, rather than try to split the function of NOS into a PVE and PVP version. Along with the consistency this provides, we also prefer that under the new mechanic you can't infinitely NOS any NPC nearby and instead have to work a bit harder to take full advantage of energy vampires.

I've seen speculation that NPCs have 1GJ cap and that's why % based drain always worked before, but now does not. This is not the case and most NPCs have base cap that is slightly below average base cap for their class. As an example, incursion BS rats have around 3800GJ base cap, meaning that a player BS would be able to NOS them successfully at between 50% and 75% of its cap total. Just like player vs player situations, NOSing NPCs in a ship class higher than yours should be very easy.

Again, sorry for the misinformation, if you have more questions about this please post them here.


Part of the problem seems to be that the NOS simply won't do anything at all in a PvE scenario. This is regardless of what capacitor the user is at. I'm not looking for infinite, but if I'm at 20/6700 capacitor I would expect the module is meant to have some sort of effect so long as you're using it on an NPC with 21 capacitor or more?

Obviously, this module has seen a lot more use in missions than incursions, would a mission NPC battleship have vastly different stats? Anomalies? What leads to this wildly unpredictable behavior where it can indeed do nothing at all?

Has this been tested, confirmed to be the desired functionality of the module in a PVE-scenario and labeled working as intended, or is the module not functioning as described in PVE being considered a bug?
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#690 - 2013-12-12 12:13:42 UTC
So, three months on, has anything changed with Nos? Has its use increased significantly? Are we seeing Nos being significantly "more popular on all cruiser class, and several BC's"?
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#691 - 2013-12-12 12:21:55 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
So, three months on, has anything changed with Nos? Has its use increased significantly? Are we seeing Nos being significantly "more popular on all cruiser class, and several BC's"?



I'd wager not

Since it takes 5 NOS's to equal one neut most of the time...I'd as soon use the Nuets and have y'know weapons
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#692 - 2013-12-12 12:51:38 UTC
if they half the fitting requirements on nos people would be able to fit them on ships more often especially frigs.

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

Naomi Anthar
#693 - 2013-12-12 13:40:24 UTC
Where are you Ranger 1 ? You did post like 100 times how this will help nos and how often people will use it. What happend ?

I said this change is garbage and i can even go further often people use less nos than before.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#694 - 2013-12-12 15:13:24 UTC
I dunno what Ranger1 was on. I've never seen someone argue so eloquently for a position that was so obviously wrong. Normally on these forums there's a good correlation between literacy and accuracy, but with him it went haywire.

He predicted that Nos would "become more popular on all cruiser class, and several BC's". It was a "courageous" prediction to make, given that relatively few combat cruisers have the utility slots to actually fit a Nos. He was predicting that cruisers would not just prefer Nos to neuts, but would actually use Nos in preference over turrets/launchers too. Crazy. What?
Naomi Anthar
#695 - 2013-12-12 17:43:23 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
I dunno what Ranger1 was on. I've never seen someone argue so eloquently for a position that was so obviously wrong. Normally on these forums there's a good correlation between literacy and accuracy, but with him it went haywire.

He predicted that Nos would "become more popular on all cruiser class, and several BC's". It was a "courageous" prediction to make, given that relatively few combat cruisers have the utility slots to actually fit a Nos. He was predicting that cruisers would not just prefer Nos to neuts, but would actually use Nos in preference over turrets/launchers too. Crazy. What?


Not only that, he was defending this NOS rebalance so hard that he denied all "nay sayers" ... he just created wall of text every single time someone said "no this won't help NOS" - he was one man wall. Wall that succeded in basically destroying NOS.

Because what are chances NOS will get another rebalance pass , when we got one recently ?

Yes my dear friends - NOS is in WORSE state than it was before. I could see some niche spot for previous NOS. Not anymore.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#696 - 2013-12-12 18:53:36 UTC
I wouldn't be quite so harsh. The niche of Nos as a mod capable of keeping tackle running under neuting has remained, largely unchanged by the mechanic change, so small and arguably med Nos aren't worse off than before - they just weren't improved to any meaningful extent either. People are still using small and med Nos to keep tackle running under neuting, they just aren't using them in their "intended" role, of cap warfare against larger ships - because neuts are so much more effective at that.

What annoyed me most was the waste of time, the missed opportunity to properly fix the thing, and the casual lack of care regarding heavy Nos, which really is basically worthless now despite being the Nos that most needed help. I also suspect that, as long as the current mechanic is retained, heavy Nos will prove impossible to balance, because of its inherent unreliability.

I wonder if CCP has any stats regarding usage of Nos of various sizes in PVP situations? Blink
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#697 - 2013-12-12 23:39:12 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
I wouldn't be quite so harsh. The niche of Nos as a mod capable of keeping tackle running under neuting has remained, largely unchanged by the mechanic change, so small and arguably med Nos aren't worse off than before - they just weren't improved to any meaningful extent either. People are still using small and med Nos to keep tackle running under neuting, they just aren't using them in their "intended" role, of cap warfare against larger ships - because neuts are so much more effective at that.

What annoyed me most was the waste of time, the missed opportunity to properly fix the thing, and the casual lack of care regarding heavy Nos, which really is basically worthless now despite being the Nos that most needed help. I also suspect that, as long as the current mechanic is retained, heavy Nos will prove impossible to balance, because of its inherent unreliability.

I wonder if CCP has any stats regarding usage of Nos of various sizes in PVP situations? Blink


I use NOS in skirmish pvp. I use a HAC to point unwary targets and keep a small NOS in a high slot in order to ensure I can hang on to them until everyone else arrives. I do the same in an astero too (which is a surprisingly good and strong covert tackler)

I've also tried a stratios with 4 small nos in the high slots - it's excellent for tackling neut ships. An ishtar would be as good.

The reason I use small nos has nothing to do with cap amount in my target and everything to do with cycle time.

It basically means that a ship with heavy neuts can't wrong-foot me with well timed neut cycles, and escape my scrams.

Having said that, I would use a heavy nos in a hyperion when engaging battleships or cruisers in order to augment the cap booster, freeing one mid slot for some ewar.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".

Kahega Amielden
Rifterlings
#698 - 2013-12-12 23:51:23 UTC

I'd be perfectly happy with the Nos only being reliable against up-sized target if it wasn't harder to fit than a neut. As it stands, it's only useful sometimes, and even then not that useful.

Fun fact: Even a small nos (The least **** of the nosferatus) requires five times the powergrid of a 150mm autocannon, and two and a half times the CPU (this is assuming no weapon upgrades or AWU, both of which make the comparison less favorable for nos).

That means that any particular Minnie frigate will end up using more PG to mount a nos than all of its guns combined (unless it's a full rack of 200s, in which case you'll use about the same).

Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#699 - 2013-12-13 00:00:07 UTC
Kahega Amielden wrote:

I'd be perfectly happy with the Nos only being reliable against up-sized target if it wasn't harder to fit than a neut. As it stands, it's only useful sometimes, and even then not that useful.

Fun fact: Even a small nos (The least **** of the nosferatus) requires five times the powergrid of a 150mm autocannon, and two and a half times the CPU (this is assuming no weapon upgrades or AWU, both of which make the comparison less favorable for nos).

That means that any particular Minnie frigate will end up using more PG to mount a nos than all of its guns combined (unless it's a full rack of 200s, in which case you'll use about the same).


That's fair though isn't it? Sucking energy from some remote capacitor in a directed way is a very much more difficult technical proposition to lobbing lead in his direction.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".

Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#700 - 2014-03-10 10:47:50 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Kahega Amielden wrote:

I'd be perfectly happy with the Nos only being reliable against up-sized target if it wasn't harder to fit than a neut. As it stands, it's only useful sometimes, and even then not that useful.

Fun fact: Even a small nos (The least **** of the nosferatus) requires five times the powergrid of a 150mm autocannon, and two and a half times the CPU (this is assuming no weapon upgrades or AWU, both of which make the comparison less favorable for nos).

That means that any particular Minnie frigate will end up using more PG to mount a nos than all of its guns combined (unless it's a full rack of 200s, in which case you'll use about the same).


That's fair though isn't it? Sucking energy from some remote capacitor in a directed way is a very much more difficult technical proposition to lobbing lead in his direction.


I wouldn't say so. One requires energy to move the turret, load ammo and processing power to track the target. The other is just a simple modification to your ship's energy receiver array that tricks your target into directed power towards you.



Big smile