Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Fixed that for you.

Again, just to clarify the "Large NOS are ineffective vs smaller ships" issue, only select BS modules are designed to be effective against smaller vessels.

Ineffective vs frigates:

Large Missile systems.
Large Guns of any type.
Large NOS

Frigate defense systems:

Small drones
Smart bombs
EW (in all it's flavors including Webs and Scrams)
Neuts.


NOS used to fit into both category's equally well, but that was redundant with Neuts and overpowered even without infinite drain ability (even if a NOS's drain effect had stopped when the frigate was capped out).

Now it will be in it's proper place in relation to Neuts and role (useful against larger vessels, ineffective against smaller, fit dependent vs same size... and not making Neuts redundant). NOS will defacto be operating in a similar fashion to other BS weaponry... useful against a proper target but of relatively limited usefulness vs targets it is ill suited for.

Use the right tool for the job, and fit to maximize the usefulness of that tool.

One option for further balancing (if you really feel that Neuts are still overwhelmingly better) would be to specify that Neuts can only be effective against an opposing ship if you have MORE cap than your target... if you really want to be fair about it. But the truth is that the large amount of cap you burn when using a Neut is designed to defacto fullfil that limitation. Heh, although it would certainly give people a reason to work cap batteries into their fits.

I don't like the changes.

Nos are generally only useful in small scale or solo engagements and as it is right now smaller ships are in many ways already balanced against their bigger counterparts. Giving them a way to achieve infinite cap skews the balance for no reason. Better to maintain the current balance rather than try to force a module back into use (its just one module, better to leave it be than to try to change the entire ship class meta).

I'm in favor of either leaving it alone, or even just deleting the Nos from the game totally.

yk

EDIT: edited for grammar

I didn't make this decision, and never claimed to. I'm making factual observations.

Yes and as said before, since that is their intent just changing the system to drain as long as the target has cap to drain is by far the simplest and reliable system and makes more sense from a player's point of view (especially new players learning the game).

If this is decided to be OP then tweak the amount drained until it isn't OP instead of adding nonsensical, arbitrary mechanics like comparing relative or absolute cap amounts when deciding to drain and then giving no indication to the user if it is working or not.

... which would still allow them to be used in an anti tackle role, effectively obsoleting Nuets. Even at a somewhat reduced amount of drain, they would still be able to be used in a much more offensive manner (completely draining other ships and especially tacklers) while still benefiting you through cap increase instead of cap expenditure as a Neut does.

Or perhaps to avoid this you would prefer their drain amount be taken so low that they are effectively useless for any ship to mount.

This is specifically what they are trying to avoid.

This.

What pushed neuts ahead of vamps wasn't the Vamp mechanics, rather it was that CCP gave Neuts over 2x the amount of cap power than their corresponding Vamps were given. For example, a Heavy Neut II drains 600 units per 24 secs , whereas a Heavy Vamp II could only have transferred 240 units in that same amount of time, in defense of the neuts, even at optimal conditions. 2 Neuts vs 2 vamps = neuts win for the most part. That's why no one chooses them, they are outmatched in their stats.

What CCP Rise is recommending gives an infinite cap option to smaller ships with Nos fighting bigger ships, but that's not the best way to balance the module. The current Nos mechanic is quite creative IMHO and brings a self-balancing to the module even between ship classes as the relative amount of cap is actually more important than the absolute amount of cap in cap management. With CCPs proposed changes, the Nos would then be OP in small ship vs large ship engagements, but simultaneously still be outclassed in equal ship class engagements (BC with 2 Neuts vs BC with 2 Nos for example).

More balanced would be just to increase the amount of energy a vamp could transfer in comparison to their neuting counterpart (a 75% boost in their current stats for example). That would maintains the current balance in the ship class meta and brings the Nos ship closer in terms of utility to their neuting cousins without being OP IMHO.

My 2isk

yk

Way i see it, while large neut and nos have a fairly balanced PWG need comparing to weapons, in medium its competable only with the highest class weapons.

As neut is a very powerful tool and can effect allright vs your own size and very well when fighting down, i can see why its requirements are reasonable.
also, with the amount it drains it can totally win a cap war and turn the tide of the fight.

In case of Nos, you plan to fight up a size, means you must squeeze every point of DPS if you really wanna win (nos is not gonna win you the cap war) and thus the PWG requirements makes it a petty choice in most cases cause you gotta compromise too much for it

that is, Neut and Nos PWG can't be the same req levels

You see, what you're doing here is playing your straw man game again. You argued that absolute Nos would be a boost to tacklers under neuting. I then demonstrated that it doesn't make a blind bit of difference, and you respond by pretending that that was never your argument in the first place. This is... childish. Stop it. Man up and deal with each point, stop this weaselly conflation of issues.

Your new argument that some frigates need the Nos to be cap-stable while not being neuted has a small amount of merit. Actually, it's not your argument, I brought it up a few pages back. But never mind. By which I mean that it's deeply niche, if existent at all. Give me some fits.

Your new argument that Nos on cruisers as defence against neuts will be boosted falls foul of the same problem that I just described for frigates. You claim that significantly more cruisers will fit Nos after this change - I'll state quite happily that, for cruisers without Nos/neut bonuses, this is nonsense. By the way CCP is acting I think I'll get a pretty good chance to be proven right, too.

I do not dispute your numbers, only your interpretation of them. Any fool can spout numbers without understanding their meaning and effects on realistic in-game environments. Such as understanding why a change to absolute Nos doesn't actually help tacklers using Nos as neut defence...