Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

Now, talking about the batteries that we have on live...the only time I used it was on a brand new alt to run some distro missions without running out of cap. In order for the batteries to be useful you basically had to be getting aux cap or you would be just neuted out anyways, vs just fitting a cap recharger for a fraction of the fitting.

The issue with hidden stats: is that if you don't see something change on the screen, they get devalued because you have to know in the back of your head it's doing something instead of seeing the change.

What do you think of my idea if I may?

I'm assuming this is the idea you are referring to?

I like the concepts, but I'm worried about the recharge time being too quick. The one guy posted earlier in this thread about the cap battery only recharging when you have above a certain amount of capacitor. I like that because it helps limit the crossover with cap injection that we have with cap boosters. If we had those recharge times coupled with the capacitor threshold needed to recharge, I think we'd have a winner. I don't think it would be overpowered at that point (since it wouldn't recharge on it's own while under neut pressure, so Cap boosters would still have a role to play here), and it would finally be an interesting enough choice for me to consider mounting them - something which the current proposal from Fozzie doesn't do for me.

Yep exactly. The recharge values here are something I pulled of my rear view but also considering the reload times of cap boosters which can cripple you in a fight.
They are of course only a first draft value so we would have something to look and brainstorm with.

If we look at the cruise size example I thought 15 seconds for 1000 capacitor because a neuta-geddon is already going to a terrible fight and even with navy 400 cap booster charges you end up with 19.4 seconds without any module on.

That may look like a lot of cap but is actually less than 50% of a cruisers base cap value and of course a neuta-geddon will nuke that away again.
And of course I didn't want to make it too powerful so it wouldn't become mandatory by accident. I forgot to mention that you can only "inject" a full battery and not a "half-charged" one - though that would be interesting too.

The reason I chose below 50% base cap was so that the natural regeneration threshold would be oversaturated already so the capacitor regeneration would be slower after the "injection".

I admit that a capacitor cost sounds interesting but with us flying in the heavens and being exposed with solar radiation and other sources of energy it may complicate things too much.
A ships capacitor regenerates by magic so why would a battery be different?

I think you might be surprised what actual capacitor buffer would feel like on a ship. As it stands, there are precisely 0 ships that opperate on a buffer setup for cap. You can pile batteries PDS and Semiconductors onto a nestor, but its not really worth the slots to be honest. A lot of ships are fit solely buffer on shields or armor, and the raw time that gives you to DO something without needing to manage your own reps is quite popular.

If the batteries doubled or nearly doubled cap buffer AND added 25% resist, Cap "EHP" would increase significantly. lt wouldn't make you imune to a neut or two like a booster does, but it would give you potentially minutes of activity in an engagement. We might actually see Guardians/Scimi's using cap transmitters on someone outside the cap chain.

My point i guess is that nobody knows what flying cap buffer fit feels like, or if it would even work. I'd like to at least play with it as an idea on sisi for a while.

Also, don't forget that there is a skill that reduces CPU usage by 25% total, and the Pg usage is much less than a cap booster still. (on the medium and large)(small battery still has triple the acceptabe Pg usage numbers right now).

Table with NEW Capacitor batteries is very good!

Maybe ppl will start use batteries in pvp when they will get more capacitor and beter resistances.

Good change:)

i.e. there still ****...

I'm fairly certain they're reading the thread, because they responded to the point of the fitting requirements being too high, so they lowered the CPU. Which is kind of a joke, because the fitting requirements being too dang high (to paraphrase a meme) was probably only a third of the problem. The other two thirds of the problem, the much bigger part of the problem, is that the batteries they are presenting are still useless. I would freaking love it if they did come in here and spelled out how they envision these modules being used, because out of the two dozen modules they have, everyone has chimed in to say they're probably only ever going to use the small tech II for the resistance because none of these batteries come with enough buffer to justify the fitting cost.

And the devs still don't get it.

To use sales terms, they're trying to sell us a product we don't want because we have better alternatives and we have no use for what they're selling. And this reminds me of a real-world story I heard once.

So the story goes, one day a hardware company was selling a little device that a person could wear as a backpack, and through a hose, spray stuff on their lawn. They sold a few units. Everything was normal. Suddenly, sales of this one item spiked. When they were discussing with their customers why this was suddenly a hot item, they said they were removing the water tank, and just using the device to blow leaves around. The company had a great idea and re-made a new model of the device specifically to do that. And thus, the modern leaf blower was born!

So the story goes here, everyone is telling CCP they want a leaf blower. So CCP is introducing a yard sprayer with a larger water tank that is now completely unremovable and the device is heavier.

No thanks. This isn't what we're in the market for, we don't want your product, and your device is obsolete. We want the resistance, not so much the buffer, and certainly not at that cost. Go back to the drawing board and start again. They have been provided with dozens of great ideas from a lot of people in this thread, ranging from a slight re-tooling of the current stats and bonuses, to a complete overhaul of how the device is supposed to work. Each one has some merits and would make the device competitive. They should pick one and start working with it. Heck, if they wanted to be freaking awesome, they could take several radically different ideas from this thread and release several new module types to REALLY give us choices in how we fit ships and counter neuts.

Wouldn't that be awesome? Options! Fitting choices!

I know we're asking for Devs to come forward with what they think these will be used for, but I also repeatedly asked any of the players to put forth their ideas on how they'll use these batteries as presented. So far we have people saying they'll mount small tech II for the resistance on their logi chains, people saying they might mount them on capitals for the neut resistance, and people saying that they use the extra capacitor outside of combat to complete long-range jumps between gates while traveling. That is radically niche.

Where is the wide-use scenario for these things? Even semi-wide-use? How will these things ever been competitive? Where are they useful? To quote a piece of the famous scene from "A Few Good Men", as the judge says, "The court will wait for an answer."

Fozzie doesn't like to engage with the player base in his feedback threads, so don't hold your breath for any meaningful discussions with the devs.

It is pointless to try and get CCP to reinvent the cap battery. Focus your feedback on what it is currently designed for (increased cap pool and neut resistance) and the fitting costs.

how about adding an overheat function too them maybe increased e-war resistance