Test Server Feedback

I did some testing on the test server with a friend and the new cap batteries.

Me: Rifter. All capacitor skills to V. Rifter has a small t2 cap battery, meta 4 small nos.

Him: Pilgrim. One small meta 3 neut, bonused by 80% (Recon Ships IV).

I measured the time it would take for him to bring my Rifter down to 0% cap from full.

Cap battery and nos off: 29.6 seconds
Cap battery on, nos off: 1 minute, 46 seconds
Cap battery off, nos on: 1 minute, 10 seconds
Cap battery on, nos on: Cap stable at 40-50%.

No hard numbers for the effect of the neut reflection on my friend's Pilgrim, other than there was a noticeable difference. I suspect that very cap-fragile neuting ships, or ships that neut you for an extended amount of time, would potentially have serious problems with this.


However, the fitting costs of cap batteries are still substantial - 37.5 CPU, 10 PG for a small t2 battery, in addition to a midslot. This is far too much. It is 22.5 CPU more than a t2 nos, and occupies a far less valuable slot (midslot as opposed to utility high). Additionally, a nos will help you more once you are actually capped out.

This is to say nothing of a cap booster. It occupies the same slot as a battery and only costs 15 CPU 5 PG for a t2 small. Boosters allow you to completely ignore being utterly capped out, your only limitation being cargo capacity.

Suggestion: Boost cap battery fittings significantly, in the realm of 10 CPU 5 powergrid if not less. It's worse than a cap booster, but provides a modest boost to total cap and some resistance against neuting.

Also, since this is related to neut mechanics - Nos needs a boost. I suggest that the actual cap drained should vary based on the difference in % cap between the ships. A 0% cap ship nosing a 100% cap ship should be stealing the equivalent of 1.5-2 neuts worth of cap, whereas the difference should be almost nothing when a ship with 45% noses a ship with 50% cap.

The whole cap battery change sounds like it is an attempt to create a counter to neuts so that active tanking isn't taken completely off the table for PvP due to the threat of being neuted. I really don't think this will be enough, though.

Shield tanking ships traditionally have extra CPU to account for the difference in resource needs. Capacitor Batteries, like T2 plates, have high resource needs which is why they aren't used. T2 plates would be used far more if their needed resources didn't neuter the rest of the fit due to a vastly lower cost compared to Meta 4 plates.

I'm still trying to wrap my head around what CCP was thinking with nerfing amarr neuting boats. See my very serious and not at all sarcastic post here- https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1027230#post1027230

That being said, I would surmise that Curse, Pilgrim, and Sentinel will now be forced to arm themselves with cap batteries to give that new stupid **** mechanic right back at their target. I'm sure the server will love calculating reflected cap gyrations on top of everything it already calculates. And god help you trying to fit a cap battery, cap booster, neuts, a tank, and maybe a weapon or two or combat probe launcher on a neut boat.

Of course they will probably not receive any bonus buff or fitting buff to overcome this new necessary costly module to make their ships simply work. Only Caldari and ECM boats get simultaneous compensatory 30% per level bonus and fitting buffs if their ships are slated for alteration . We will probably have to stay satisfied with the current 20% per level for amount and the current fitting stats.

As I said in my post in the other thread it's not like there aren't already existing counters to neuts. And a buff to cap batteries could be accomplished in other ways. No, let's have a whole new mechanic that the server will have to calculate and transmit to each person's client. Excellent solution to a non-existent problem.

Oh well, I will look forward to further posts if someone runs more tests. Please run some trials with curse or pilgrim fit with a cap battery or even a BS fit with a large battery v a neut boat fit with a medium battery. It seems it will become needlessly complicated for the game and for players and just push more people away from all the racial ewar except for ecm. Minmatar recons will still get use for their webs. Gallente for their long points. Maybe Amarr recons will get use for tracking disruptors to mildly **** up missiles, but i doubt it. They certainly will lose neuting ability it appears.

It is ecm of which there are still complaints on the forums, not neut boats. But of course let's nerf neut boats

or a nos

You can't counter neuts with a cap injector or a nos ? These don't work on a small ship at all due to cycle duration differential ?

But why not, when an eccm is so easy to fit on a frig, and you will then be able to laugh at an ecm boat or ecm drones. Really one eccm is so op on any ship against ecm.

And that eccm reflects the ecm back on the ecm boat. About time CCP nerfed neut boats the same way.

We certainly couldn't nerf the module itself and give the specialized ship an increased bonus to compensate. Nope that has never happened in the game. I mean look at the last ecm nerf, the ecm boats got nothing in return and now you never see them.

one man's trolling is another man's sarcasm?

well as long as they get within 12km because a med neut on a cane is not oversized. and then there is the small nos on the frig or a small cap injector that are already in-game counters.

Precisely, what are they smoking?


Yes. I can only hope this is some reverse psychology experiment on CCP's part to nerf Neut boats in this way - to finally nerf ecm in the near future by adding a similar reflective component to fitting an eccm. that would fix the ecm problem and the lack of fitting an eccm.

edit- Of course then they would add a reflected damp effect from fitting a sensor booster, a reflected web effect from fitting a prop mod, a reflected TD efeect from fitting a TC or TE, and a reflected scram effect from fitting one or two warcp core stabs leaving the only non-reflectable and suddenly totally overpowered ewar module the target painter

it's only a "nerf" to nuets if the rifter has a cap battery. You're assuming all ships fit the same?

I agree that it'll only be used for people who want to screw over neuting ships, but as it is it's not as if it's the end of the world for neuting ships - at the 12.5% of neuts reflected for a single large cap battery, it takes my solo-fit heavy missile/duel nuet Curse from cap stable to capping out in two minutes, assuming I'm perma-running everything on the battery target.

In that time they'll be capped out, and I can drop to only one neut to keep them down - at which point I'm once again cap stable. Not to mention that any neuting ship should have plenty of time to notice what is going on when they run into one of the rare ships that will sacrifice fittings/a mid slot for a cap battery.

I'm not sure this is the best thing CCP could have done to buff cap batteries, but anything that promotes niche fittings and shakes things up is decent in my book. I don't think it's a terrible nerf to neut boats, which I already find more intimidating than ECM boats in many situations. (ECM boats can't keep you from running, afterall) The point about it being particularly rough on oversized neuts is a good one as well, and a concept I rather like.

I would rather want cap batteries to provide resistance to neut/nos than to drain cap back from neuter ship.

like... one cap battery reduce amount of drain cap by 20% per neuter/nos