Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Here's the funny thing. NOS are already being used as "a tool for fighting up a class". The percentage-mechanic was never a problem when fighting up a class. In a frig vs. cruiser, a frig can wear down his cap. And if he can't, then he's already cap stable.

You're implementing a change claiming it will solve a problem that never existed, and at the same time nerfing them in down-class use. And you expect this change will make NOS more popular?

Edit: you need to sit down and understand in what situations a NOS is being used/could be used. Off the top of my head:

1) Can stability in passive fits (e.g. ab+scram). The ship needs the NOS to remain cap stable even when running only the most essential mods - propulsion and point.

2) Cap stability in active fits (e.g. ab+scram+armor rep/ewar). The ship is cap stable without an armor rep, and needs the NOS to maintain cap stability (or increase number of cycles) with the armor rep running.

3) Cap stability under neut pressure. The ship is cap stable, but fits a NOS to maintain cap stability under a Neut.
3.1) under one neut of your ship size (small, med, large).
3.2) under one neut of a higher ship size = under two neuts of your ship size.
3.3) under one neut down a class (e.g. med nos to counter one small neut).

4) Cap stability under NOS.
etc.

When you can answer these questions and provide me with a reason to fit a NOS that will address all of these scenarios, then people will use them.

Well, it'll certainly make small Nos more popular. But it'll be at the expense of small neuts, reflecting the greater offensive capabilities of Nos on frigates against larger ships. But why do we need this? Small Nos with a % mechanic already works okay as a defensive mod, and small neuts provide the offensive option. Merging the two is a partial return to awful old-style self-fuelling Nos which I think must be avoided, even if restricted to small ships vs. large ones.

And, of course, heavy Nos with an absolute cap mechanic will be of almost no use at all. You can EFT up some interesting self-fuelling Nos Bhaalgorn or Legion etc. fits for sucking out capitals, which may have some applications in WHs, but the problem remains that if your objective is to cap out a capital ASAP, then neuts are still superior and in those sort of fights you'll have the Guardian or Archon support to keep cap flowing for the neuts anyway. So, what role for heavy Nos?

CCP Rise, I can only emphasise how important I think it is to maintain and fix Nos within its class-independent, strictly defensive role, rather than trying to grant it size-related offensive capabilities that not only intrude into neuts' gamespace by offering a limited return to old-style self-fuelling Nos, but also render heavy Nos, which needs help most of all, almost entirely worthless.

Fix Nos by cutting all sizes' cycle times to 3 s, cutting fitting requirements to well below that of neuts and increasing drain rates on different-sized Nos to better reflect the cap requirements of different ship sizes and to emphasise Nos's genuinely useful role as a defence against neuting.

CCP Rise, can you please address the following two items that keep coming up over and over again as it pertains to Heavy NOS's (and to a lesser extent mediums)

1) Fitting costs both PG and CPU as compared to Heavy Neuts. As has been concluded by various arguments, with this change you intend small ships to use primarily NOS and large ships heavy Neuts but is there a reason heavy Neuts are cheaper to fit than heavy NOS's given their greater usefulness overall in the larger classes?

2) Cycle times should be 3 seconds across the board. 12 seconds cycle time isn't useful as a neut defense which is primarily where people see NOS's having their use and with that long a cycle time, cap boosters will always be more useful.

I've begrudgingly accepted your mechanic change and intended role of NOS's being better on small ships fighting large. I agree with the above poster that the change is a sideways move as small ships burn cap faster and will usually be at a smaller % cap anyway and so this won't have much a change. Addressing the above 2 concerns should give heavy NOS's at least a fighting chance of ever being fitted again after this nerf.

I pretty much agree with this. I'd love to see the nos actually be a viable replacement on amarr ships for a cap booster (well, at least to keep guns firing), but I just don't see that happening right now. I'm not happy with where the change is at, but unfortunately, I can't offer a better idea. Making it truly useful and viable while not making it not instantly cap out a frigate like a neut is something I can't figure out. I only use them on frigates at the moment.

The mechanics for Cap Batteries, Sensor Boosters, or NOS do not change with different ship sizes. The only thing that changes to make such items more beneficial one one ship class than another is are the base capabilities of the ship in question.

There is NO arbitrary rule saying frigates can NOS a BS but not the other way around, it's simply the base capabilities of the ships in question that make success less likely.

The points you made in this support I can support (at least to a degree).

Any news about buffing/changing Medium and Large NOSes so that they are actually useful, maybe ?

So maybe we should vote? as i previosly wrote it should be % of Current cap + fixed amount, but with limitations.

rise i do have to say i like the idea.

but for it to work well medium and large nos needs thier fittings and cycle time to be fixed.

Permanent spider tanking cap immunity, how not to like it if on top enought slots for regular SB+ASB.

Indeed nice idea.