These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Odyssey 1.1] Nosferatu mechanic change

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Paul Leonard Kersey
Doomheim
#141 - 2013-06-20 20:47:23 UTC
CCP: Fixing another problem by making it worse.

How about you stop playing with useless crap and work on keeping the server and sites from going down every day?
Akimo Heth
State War Academy
Caldari State
#142 - 2013-06-20 20:49:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Akimo Heth
Tasha Saisima wrote:
Why just not have it work against any ship as long as it has cap? Level restrictions makes no sense


Why do something simple and logical when you can make it convoluted and arbitrary to confuse the player base?

...Yes it makes perfect sense that a battleship with a very expensive deadspace NOS can't drain a single cap from a frigate with a 10k isk cheap NOS that can be permanently run on the huge battleship. Then the BS can fit a cheap Neut and perma cap the frigate in a single pulse ....and then we scratch our heads wondering why the BS still won't fit a NOS with CCP's wonderful change.
Rynnik
Evasion Gaming
The Ancients.
#143 - 2013-06-20 21:04:36 UTC
Two step wrote:
I agree that a fitting change is also needed. Why do they use MOREthe same PG/grid as Neuts?


FYP. And they also use MORE CPU.

---

Please take this opportunity to re-examine NOS fitting requirements across the board. I really think at the least they should be no harder to fit than an equivalent neut. The might really help the decision get a bit harder in high slots - especially in the realm of frigs.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#144 - 2013-06-20 22:57:56 UTC
Akimo Heth wrote:
You have to give CCP credit...

They came up with the one idea that simultaneously buffs NOS's for use in frigates where they're already popular due to their low cycle times and relative cap drain to fitting.

...while at the same time nerfing them for the large ships where they are not used at all due to weak drain, obnoxious fitting, and long cycle times....none of which were addressed with the change AT ALL.

Do you guys just see that no one is using NOS's and come up with the one idea that doesn't address any of the underlying issues or do you actually ask the player base why they're not fitting them?


Pretty much. I really cannot emphasise just how poorly thought out this idea is.

It's like the idea of an AB bonus to AFs - it sounded good at first, but then people realised that it would make lowsec AB AFs overpowered while leaving nullsec MWD AFs useless, thereby not solving any of the actual problems with AFs.
Perihelion Olenard
#145 - 2013-06-21 02:35:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Perihelion Olenard
I use a couple nosferatus on my navy Vexor. A small change is better than no change at all.

In addition to nosferatus improved I'd also like to see the ridiculous fitting requirements of the capacitor batteries reduced and the batteries themselves improved a bit. Right now, one may as well fit a downgraded cap booster.
Zircon Dasher
#146 - 2013-06-21 02:39:40 UTC
For being a module that is "useless" and "never used" these changes sure have shoved a corn cobb in some folks pipes.

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
Caldari 5
D.I.L.L.I.G.A.F. S.A.S
Affirmative.
#147 - 2013-06-21 03:24:55 UTC
Zircon Dasher wrote:
For being a module that is "useless" and "never used" these changes sure have shoved a corn cobb in some folks pipes.

This is mostly because it was good at one stage, however they nerfed it so bad that it was useless, and now they are saying that it is getting a fix/buff and they are actually nerfing it again(or at least in relation to Amarrian Ships)
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#148 - 2013-06-21 03:35:09 UTC
Caldari 5 wrote:
Zircon Dasher wrote:
For being a module that is "useless" and "never used" these changes sure have shoved a corn cobb in some folks pipes.

This is mostly because it was good at one stage, however they nerfed it so bad that it was useless, and now they are saying that it is getting a fix/buff and they are actually nerfing it again(or at least in relation to Amarrian Ships)

Quite the opposite actually.

Before the nerf Neuts were rarely used, even though they drained more cap. This was because although Neuts drained more, NOS not only drained your enemy but it was also a large help to every module you use that consumes cap.

It was vastly more useful than Neuts in most situations, which also explains why the fittings are as they are.

I'm not opposed to the fittings being evened out between the two systems, but even if they aren't NOS will once again become a very powerful tool in many situations. You will have a reason to make a choice between NOS and Neuts, as they will have different advantages in different situations.

And again, as Amarr are the most cap hungry race... as well as the most vulnerable to Neuting, Nos will once again become a valuable tool for them to use. Remember, it doesn't matter one whit how much cap you have respective to your opponent before the fight starts... what matters is how quickly your cap depletes in relation to your opponent. Gallante, with their cap hungry active repair bonuses and energy consuming weapons will benefit as well.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#149 - 2013-06-21 03:42:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Akimo Heth wrote:
Tasha Saisima wrote:
Why just not have it work against any ship as long as it has cap? Level restrictions makes no sense


Why do something simple and logical when you can make it convoluted and arbitrary to confuse the player base?

...Yes it makes perfect sense that a battleship with a very expensive deadspace NOS can't drain a single cap from a frigate with a 10k isk cheap NOS that can be permanently run on the huge battleship. Then the BS can fit a cheap Neut and perma cap the frigate in a single pulse ....and then we scratch our heads wondering why the BS still won't fit a NOS with CCP's wonderful change.

If your opponent has more capacitor than you, you can drain it and use it yourself. It doesn't get much simpler than that.

The BS has huge energy reserves for a frigate to leach, not the other way around.

BS fit with high cap using weapons and modules (like active repair) will benefit immensely from NOS when facing other BS or Caps (and often against BC's or even cruisers).

BS that are worried about frigate defense will continue to use Neuts, as will those using capless weapons (Drones, Missiles, Projectile).

It's called choosing the right tool for the job and the fit you are using.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#150 - 2013-06-21 03:45:15 UTC
Perihelion Olenard wrote:
I use a couple nosferatus on my navy Vexor. A small change is better than no change at all.

In addition to nosferatus improved I'd also like to see the ridiculous fitting requirements of the capacitor batteries reduced and the batteries themselves improved a bit. Right now, one may as well fit a downgraded cap booster.

Very much agreed.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Doed
Tyrfing Industries
#151 - 2013-06-21 03:46:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Doed
Reducing CPU/PG down to neut levels as others have stated is a good step in the right direction, possibly increase the amount drained/received or just received sliiightly.

Also please make all size NOS 3sec cycle time, 6sec when you're getting neuted in a Cruiser/BC is too long imo, makes activating DCU/hardners/point/web low cap guns etc horrid. 12 sec on Large Nos is just a nightmare, despite not being as useful as small/med NOS will be.
Akimo Heth
State War Academy
Caldari State
#152 - 2013-06-21 03:47:42 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Caldari 5 wrote:
Zircon Dasher wrote:
For being a module that is "useless" and "never used" these changes sure have shoved a corn cobb in some folks pipes.

This is mostly because it was good at one stage, however they nerfed it so bad that it was useless, and now they are saying that it is getting a fix/buff and they are actually nerfing it again(or at least in relation to Amarrian Ships)

Quite the opposite actually.

Before the nerf Neuts were rarely used, even though they drained more cap. This was because although Neuts drained more, NOS not only drained your enemy but it was also a large help to every module you use that consumes cap.

It was vastly more useful than Neuts in most situations, which also explains why the fittings are as they are.

I'm not opposed to the fittings being evened out between the two systems, but even if they aren't NOS will once again become a very powerful tool in many situations. You will have a reason to make a choice between NOS and Neuts, as they will have different advantages in different situations.

And again, as Amarr are the most cap hungry race... as well as the most vulnerable to Neuting, Nos will once again become a valuable tool for them to use. Remember, it doesn't matter one whit how much cap you have respective to your opponent before the fight starts... what matters is how quickly your cap depletes in relation to your opponent. Gallante, with their cap hungry active repair bonuses and energy consuming weapons will benefit as well.


It's only "quite the opposite" if you're a frigate or cruiser and they were already popular on such platforms which is the major drawback of this change (even an Amarr BS will rarely be able to NOS a cruiser unless the BS is dangerously low). Have you ever used a NOS on a BS? They don't add all that much to cap regen even when they do work and have a huge cycle time which is what people are complaining about (relative to their obnoxious fitting). For less fitting you can just fit a neut which drains way more and always works against any target, not just another BS.
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative
#153 - 2013-06-21 04:24:39 UTC
I'm there with some of the detractors to this. I get that the 'more cap than' mechanic is essentially meant to stop a large nos from popping all the cap a frigate has in one cycle.

As I obviously mistakenly understood the mechanics, Nos worked much like neuting, only at a much smaller rate. You could neut a target and drain everything it's got quickly, or you could nos a target and do it only about half as fast, but you get the return.

Like I said, I was mistaken. But what's wrong with that system? If the enemy has no cap, you get no cap. It's not as efficient as a neut, but you get cap instead of it going into thin air?

Am I possibly missing some issue with coding that?

If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality. That "griefer/thief" is probably more sane than you are. How screwed up is that?
Akimo Heth
State War Academy
Caldari State
#154 - 2013-06-21 04:39:10 UTC
Ruze wrote:
I'm there with some of the detractors to this. I get that the 'more cap than' mechanic is essentially meant to stop a large nos from popping all the cap a frigate has in one cycle.

As I obviously mistakenly understood the mechanics, Nos worked much like neuting, only at a much smaller rate. You could neut a target and drain everything it's got quickly, or you could nos a target and do it only about half as fast, but you get the return.

Like I said, I was mistaken. But what's wrong with that system? If the enemy has no cap, you get no cap. It's not as efficient as a neut, but you get cap instead of it going into thin air?

Am I possibly missing some issue with coding that?


...but a large ship can pop a frigate with a large neut in a single pulse for less fitting so why is that limitation placed on NOS's? The cap gains from a single NOS pulse is almost in the noise (plug in a deadspace large NOS into EFT and look at your cap regen and that assumes 100% uptime on the NOS), oh and it only works some of the time versus ships your size and almost never against a ship smaller, oh yea and it only drains about a third that of a neut, oh yea and it takes more fitting than a neut which has none of these drawbacks....oh yea...wait which of these deficiencies is CCP addressing?

They should change the cycle times to 3 seconds across all sizes and make them drain whenever the target has cap, simple system that doesn't favor frigates over BS in a completely arbitrary way like the proposed system does and better balances heavy NOS's versus heavy Neuts. Done.
Akimo Heth
State War Academy
Caldari State
#155 - 2013-06-21 05:08:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Akimo Heth
Ranger 1 wrote:
Akimo Heth wrote:
Tasha Saisima wrote:
Why just not have it work against any ship as long as it has cap? Level restrictions makes no sense


Why do something simple and logical when you can make it convoluted and arbitrary to confuse the player base?

...Yes it makes perfect sense that a battleship with a very expensive deadspace NOS can't drain a single cap from a frigate with a 10k isk cheap NOS that can be permanently run on the huge battleship. Then the BS can fit a cheap Neut and perma cap the frigate in a single pulse ....and then we scratch our heads wondering why the BS still won't fit a NOS with CCP's wonderful change.

If your opponent has more capacitor than you, you can drain it and use it yourself. It doesn't get much simpler than that.

The BS has huge energy reserves for a frigate to leach, not the other way around.

BS fit with high cap using weapons and modules (like active repair) will benefit immensely from NOS when facing other BS or Caps (and often against BC's or even cruisers).

BS that are worried about frigate defense will continue to use Neuts, as will those using capless weapons (Drones, Missiles, Projectile).

It's called choosing the right tool for the job and the fit you are using.


The point is that high cap using BS will still benefit from a neut more in every situation. The amount drained by large NOS's is pitiful. One of the reasons they're only used on frigates (before this change makes it even worse) is that the amount they drain versus a frigate's cap size and cap usage is much more balanced than at the BS level.

For example, assuming 100% drain uptime which is safe to assume at the frigate level but laughable to assume at the BS level.....

Small Corpus A-type NOS - 3.33 GJ/s
Frigate total cap (Executioner in this case) - 360 GJ

Large Corpus X-type NOS - 10 GJ/s
Battleship total cap (Armageddon in this case) - 6641 GJ

So the BS's have around 15-20 times the total cap but the large NOS's only drain 3x the amount as small's, oh and it has a 12 second cycle time. You realize that 10 GJ/s for the very best large NOS is barely enough to keep a single Tach 2 turret firing right? Lets not pretend it is a huge bonus to high cap use BS's, it's not a huge bonus to ANY BS.

It's no wonder they're only used on frig's and this change doesn't address any of the actual downsides of NOS's and only makes it more lopsided. Let's fix the actual issues involved instead of making a poorly thought out arbitrary change and then not touch them for years.
Caldari 5
D.I.L.L.I.G.A.F. S.A.S
Affirmative.
#156 - 2013-06-21 06:07:16 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Our plan for this is fairly simple - we want to make successful NOS activation based on relative cap amount, not percentage.

This means if you turn on your NOS, and you have 125 cap in your cap pool, and your opponent has 370, the NOS works regardless of relative % cap.

The biggest effect here will most likely be that any time you're fighting up a class (frig vs cruiser, cruiser vs BS, etc) NOS will become a much more attractive choice. It also means that in fights with several ship sizes present, deciding on a target for your NOS should be more intuitive (target something big).


Ranger 1 wrote:
Caldari 5 wrote:
Zircon Dasher wrote:
For being a module that is "useless" and "never used" these changes sure have shoved a corn cobb in some folks pipes.

This is mostly because it was good at one stage, however they nerfed it so bad that it was useless, and now they are saying that it is getting a fix/buff and they are actually nerfing it again(or at least in relation to Amarrian Ships)

Quite the opposite actually.

Before the nerf Neuts were rarely used, even though they drained more cap. This was because although Neuts drained more, NOS not only drained your enemy but it was also a large help to every module you use that consumes cap.

It was vastly more useful than Neuts in most situations, which also explains why the fittings are as they are.

I'm not opposed to the fittings being evened out between the two systems, but even if they aren't NOS will once again become a very powerful tool in many situations. You will have a reason to make a choice between NOS and Neuts, as they will have different advantages in different situations.

And again, as Amarr are the most cap hungry race... as well as the most vulnerable to Neuting, Nos will once again become a valuable tool for them to use. Remember, it doesn't matter one whit how much cap you have respective to your opponent before the fight starts... what matters is how quickly your cap depletes in relation to your opponent. Gallante, with their cap hungry active repair bonuses and energy consuming weapons will benefit as well.


I think maybe we are reading this differently.
I'm reading "cap pool" as being the total amount of cap possible to have in a given fitting. Thus Amarr typically having the largest cap pool will never be able to NOS a ship in the same class as they have a larger cap pool to start with. Where as the Minimatar typically having the smallest cap within a class will pretty much always be able to use a NOS.
Akturous
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#157 - 2013-06-21 07:10:22 UTC
An alliance mate had a great idea, in order to make nos's a legitimate option for anything other than a frigate, they should operate similar to a cap battery in that they reflect the affect of neuting back onto the neuter.

Since nos's are effectively a defence against neuting, having them reflect back the neuting effect would give them a proper role.

Food for thought.

Vote Item Heck One for CSM8
Valleria Darkmoon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#158 - 2013-06-21 07:47:04 UTC
Well no one flies battleships anymore and since Large NOS sound to me to be in the same boat as NOS is in right now generally speaking this certainly won't make battleships any more enticing.

On the flip side all hail the tight orbit cap-stable frigate giant killers.

I like that NOS sounds like it will actually be a thing again but it sounds very much to me like Large NOS is still useless or at least extremely unreliable.

Reality has an almost infinite capacity to resist oversimplification.
Dave Stark
#159 - 2013-06-21 07:53:33 UTC
i'll admit, i have never really used a nos/neut but i really don't get why the drain effect on the nos modules should have any kind of restriction on it. surely you turn the module on and you should just drain cap from the target ship no questions... seems strange to have a long list of terms and conditions attached to it.
Muad 'dib
State War Academy
Caldari State
#160 - 2013-06-21 07:58:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Muad 'dib
People that think that a nos should be running their intire active tank while boning the targets cap are living in a fantasy world.

Its just a leach that trickles available cap FROM then to YOU the effect is not meant to be anything like a neut for the target. Think of it more like providing your cap recharge while stealing theirs, a bit of a boost at an inconvenience to the target, not a direct assault on their cap.

Cosmic signature detected. . . . http://i.imgur.com/Z7NfIS6.jpg I got 99 likes, and this post aint one.