Player Features and Ideas Discussion

If memory serves, NOS and Neuts have the same PG needs, it's CPU which is higher for NOS (and I wouldn't mind that changed).

Pretty much all Amarr ships have cap issues when using lasers, regardless of type. Mega Pulse lasers can burn through it pretty quickly with their high ROF. Also a Nightmare, while having some advantages due to fewer weapons, is often an active shield tanker which burn cap quickly.

Again, NOS are not intended to fully supply your cap needs... but they do wonderful things to supplement your effective cap recharge (that trickle prolongs your cap life under duress noticeably).

Great change! Makes little difference in use for fighting the same size ships but I definitely see supers being nos'd into the ground

It would be nice to have it fall off by a cycle or two worth of cap so it puts you slightly ahead of your opponent.

Or if there was always a small neutralizing effect regardless of how much cap either party has. The neutralizing effect is subtracted from the cap you get in return, if any. That way a large nos could still put pressure on a frig, maybe 2 could cause it some serious issues but of course it doesnt have the cap crushing power of a single large

maybe because NOSs dont need cap boosters to run it all the time

I never liked nos being more useful than a cap injector and I definitely don't like nos trumping neuts. Neuts should be an effective means to generate an escape opportunity vs tacklers not only for killing a tank.

I say

1. Give nos activation cost. Not much. 1 should suffice. That way if one gets fully drained, then the only solution is wait a tic or cap boost. Besides, if neuts require cap then nos should too. Nos will still greatly increase cap recharge rate once they activate, but they should require an energy reservoir to get the engine running as it were.

actually, what I'd really like to do is give nos and neuts the same ratio of drain/activation cost.

2. Giving them an activation cost would normally make the module deactivate and give a "Capacitor is Empty" message. This would be no good. So lets keep the current set-and-forget player interaction. Make the module go briefly inactive as if it were loading ammo automatically, so It starts firing again once it meets the activation cost.

I do not want any 4 nosed tacklers flying around fitting an extra webber or point because a cap booster became superfluous.

Are there currently popular cap booster/heavy nos fits used that I'm not aware of? Not just fits where its possible to fit the heavy nos, but preferable to fit it over a heavy neut or something else. After this nerf goes through they won't all of a sudden become viable. That's what everyone minus Ranger 1's main problem is, heavy nos's currently don't have a place in the meta and this nerf will only further solidify that rather than do something about it for non-frigates.

Considering that these changes haven't gone into effect yet, no, there aren't any.

Popular opinion doesn't bother me much anyway. Popular opinion was that the changes to the Armageddon and Dominix would render them useless.

Neuts will always be popular for those with only a basic understanding of cap warfare. They are a simple tool that are relatively easy to use with a generic cookie cutter fit. NOS, on the other hand, are slowly getting to the point where they are again useful for those that prefer to take cap warfare to a higher level... although they do still have a ways to go before the truly come into their own again.

You're scarily deluded. Heavy Nos, lolz.

I'm quite content with their use increasing dramatically in every size of ship from BC's on down the line, with Neuts remaining (and rightfully so) the cap warfare module of choice for the ships best equipped to leverage them (BS) unless you have a highly specialized fit.

I have used NOS effectively from pre-nerf to the present day, across a wide variety of combat characters and ship types (including BS). I've learned that unless you are going to be fighting other BS a Neut is the best tool for the job on a BS hull. It most effectively leverages the cap advantage a BS has over smaller vessels. This won't change, nor does it need to.

Now if you ARE fighting primarily other BS hulls, then you have some room to get creative with a NOS fit. This won't change after the buff either, despite claims otherwise. At that point it simply comes down to fit.

The main part of this buff is to make NOS much more reliable and attractive to use on medium size hulls and smaller. This works well and balances nicely with Neuts as Neuts tend to a less effective tool the smaller you go in hull size (to the point where with frigate size Neuts the only target you have available that will be significantly harmed by your small Neut is another frigate... although you don't seem to view that as a problem ).

Needless to say NOS and Neuts are not the only modules that work better for one size of ship over another. EVE is full of examples, yet you continue to ignore this fact. Unless you'd have us believe that the best defense for a BS is usually a speed tank, and the best way to kill drones/frigates is with a small smart bomb.

NOS: Less effective against targets smaller than your size.
Neuts: Less effective against targets larger than your size.
Both viable (depending on fit) vs same size targets.

I've said repeatedly that more tweaking could be done (and likely will be eventually done), but this is an excellent start.

You're going to get a shock.

BC Nos will be nerfed in usefulness and reliability against frigates and cruisers - I don't think this can be disputed, even by you. Against other BCs, nothing much really changes. Against BS and caps, it gets more useful on paper - but not in a way that is sensible to leverage in game. This is because fights involving large ships generally involve more ships on the field. BCs could use Nos effectively against caps or BS - but in those scale of fights, where the objective of cap warfare is to nuke an opponent's cap and turn off his hardeners or guns, you're far better off using neuts, with their 3x greater drain rate, fuelled by injectors. Yes, you can theorise fancy tricks to use with Nos, but it's just not worth it in-game. The drivers to fit neuts over Nos on BCs will become even stronger.

And really, the same argument applies to cruisers, too. There is more of a niche for your Nos here, because cruiser vs. combat BC is an type of engagement more common, and more commonly involving fewer ships. But the choice between neuts and Nos still remains, and it's not credible to think that, unless specifically fitting in advance for that engagement, a cruiser will choose to drop a neut, surrendering its flexibility and reliability against all targets, and its abilities to defend against frigates in particular.

Under the current system, what is the difference between a cruiser operating at 50% cap and a BS operating at 50%?
Answer: Nothing. Under the current system the cruiser gets nothing for using a NOS.

What is the difference between a cruiser operating at 50% of it's cap points and a BS operating at 50% of its cap points?
Answer: The difference is that under the new system the BS still has plenty of cap for the cruiser to leach.

Meaning that vs the proper target NOS become much, much more reliable.

Yes indeed, we have been through this before.