These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Rebalance the Muninn
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#41 - 2015-07-01 09:11:58 UTC  |  Edited by: afkalt
Ah yeah, missed that. I use EFT more than pyfa: when I loaded it the muninn had higher EHP vs omni (my default).
Dregalis DeGraiden
Doomheim
#42 - 2015-07-01 11:25:38 UTC
Baali Tekitsu wrote:
The Muninn needs some serious tweaking, be it either a rework of the bonuses, or of the slot layout. In its current form it can neither fully support artilleries because of its lacking fitting resources nor can it be used as a competent brawler as it has the inherent weaknesses of the minmatar t2 resist profile combined with a weak armor tanking slot layout.
Artilleries as a weapon system are heavily dependent on utility modules like defensive webifiers or Tracking computers and the Minmatar T2 resist profile is atrocious for armor tanking as you have to plug two major resist holes opposed to the other races which have just one on their main tank profile.
I vote for either moving a lowslot to a midslot, a midslot to a lowslot OR trading the optimal range bonus for a armor resist bonus.
Each of those would put it in a much better place than it is now without destroying the current game balance, just make it a viable option for different playstyles.


CCP has decided to leave Minmatar in the backwater and has thus abandoned their hulls. I fear your plea will be heard upon deaf ears.
Segraina Skyblazer
Doomheim
#43 - 2015-07-01 12:07:59 UTC
SFM Hobb3s wrote:
Sac is getting an indirect boost with the next patch.
That being said, not even Black Legion flies Muninns anymore. I remember when they used to be our go-to fast response ship.


Where can I get more details about this please?
Segraina Skyblazer
Doomheim
#44 - 2015-07-01 12:12:08 UTC
Lloyd Roses wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
afkalt wrote:
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Low slot to mid slot, simplest change that would make it actually remotely viable.

Four mids to shield tank, it's EVE 101. And nobody armor tanks a Muninn unless they're awful and in a Zealot fleet (and I haven't even heard of a Zealot fleet since the HAC balance, thanks Ishtars!)


Or a high to a mid and more grid to make fitting arty not ridiculous (and the loss of the utility high limits AC builds abusing the grid for a neut up there) and keeps lows for projection/DPS.

Or they could just fix arty fitting in general, that'd be nice.


Fixing arty fitting would resolve a lot of issues with minmatar. No ship stats have to be modified, no extra grid/cpu to be abused by ac fits. It would only affect arty fits, as intended.

I still find it amusing that a broadsword does the muninns fleet role better. Same bonuses, same # of turrets, just falloff instead of optimal, and lose tracking. But you can get the same alpha and double the tank.

That being said, an extra mid is pretty damn important for the muninn to be viable. To keep it flexible , moving utility high to mid might be best. Though it would just be a repackaged SFI at that point i suppose. Can we get a free mid plz? I know.. no chance in hell.


Lemme contrast that for you!

HACs that have a utility high:
Vagabond (has active tank bonus)
Sacriledge (has resist bonus)
Muninn (has nothing)
(Coincidentally, those are the three *useless* HACs)

Now while the vaga's bonus is pretty dumb and the ship generally useless since it can't use blasters/pulses, scrap that and take a look at the sacriledge! Has one more mid, but one less lowslot. A resist bonus is about as good or better than an extra EANM. So basically a muninn is a sacriledge that mustn't use missiles but is stuck with projectiles, can't fit artillery and armortank, and has less dps than the sacriledge once fitting ACs. It then proceeds to effectively have one less slot, less drones, less cap.

CCPlease. It's like comparing a hyperion and a maelstrom.

Edit: Should mention the Sac is all but bad, had fights 1v5 and worse with the sac tanking 2 RHML BS without a sweat. So minmatar HACs are the things that really, really suck it hard.


Can you please share that Sacrilege fit with me please, even if you want to mail it to me in game is fine? I'd really like to know all about the sacrilege's potential.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#45 - 2015-07-01 13:49:52 UTC
Trinkets friend wrote:
lawl, someobody said Munnin.

Let's see. This, again. it basically explains everything. You can have an un-fit ishtar and it will outperform a fully fit Munnin.

the solution is to cheapen the powergrid costs of artillery and adjust the few ships which need adjusting to avoid egregious abuses of that. like the Cynabal; a 720 Artybal used to be barely doable, but if you make the 720mm as cheap to fit as a 425mm AC, suddenly you may find the Artybal having a bit too much PG spare, i dunno.

The balance of the Munnin was done with brains set in 2008 mode, when drones sucked and real men drove arty meta. But that's long gone - DDA's are now here, as are various other drone buff modules, and people can now target broadcasts, which results, more or less, in viable drone alpha +/- drone assign working.

Secondly, the most viable alpha fleets these days are Beam Legions, Slippery Petes and Attack battlecruisers.
* Why use the Munnin with 720's when the Tornado does the same job?
* You can't compete with a Beam legion as a fleet alpha ship because 140K EHP - you're never getting that out of a Munnin.
* For ultra-long range sniping you can't beat the Slippery Pete with a slow, high-sig arty platform like the Munnin, with a lower ROF and "better" alpha.

Armour brawling AC HAC? You use the Scythe Fleet with 90m sig versus this clunky piece of crap. You get better speed with Ab, full tackle, and can even go for a missile fit. Munnin sig is 125 (+35) and speed is 260 (-40m/s) compared to an SciFi. You lose about 5K EHP but you pick that back up with the cheapness (-150M) and lower sig radius, higher orbit velocity, and did i mention missiles?

It is abundantly clear the Munnin needs 10 slots.

it is abundantly clear the Munnin needs at least 200 PG more.

It is abundantly clear that artillery needs to be chopped down to within 5% of the PG cost of equivalent autocannons. eg;
T2 720mm 248 PG -> 160 PG (ie a 425mm +5 PG)
T2 650mm 196 PG -> 90PG (ie; a 180mm +10 PG)


While I agree with your points, the picture is alittle misleading. The Muninn has one more slot than ishtar, but its due to utility high.

Muninn
6H
3M
6L
=15

Ishtar
4H
5M (soon to be 4)
5L (soon to be 6)
=14

Also arty is not as focused on dps, as it is alpha. Based on your picture, arty has more than double the alpha of those bouncers. RoF is less, hence the difference in dps. The problem is that sentries have too much range/application to be on a cruiser. Arty cannot compete, even with that alpha.

Then because of its slot layout, low base EHP, and minny t2 resists on an armor boat, its ignored by most who would consider to solo in it. So its overshadowed by other ships in a fleet setting, and suboptimal in other cases.

Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS

Make the Muninn great again!
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#46 - 2015-07-01 13:57:21 UTC
I was thinking, what if we did to the muninn, what CCP did to the sleipnir. Drop a turret but give it some beefy bonuses to keep overall damage the same, and still keep the utility high?

Give it a 10% bonus to damage per level and 5% rof. Or 7.5% RoF and 5% damage to compensate the loss of turret. Or.. 10% dmg and 7.5% RoF Twisted.

That way we can move a high to a mid, but still keep a utility high. Making it different than SFI. This also helps to allieviate some fitting issues since we only need to fit 4 turrets, and not 5.

Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS

Make the Muninn great again!
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#47 - 2015-07-01 14:28:47 UTC
Just give it a straight up damage bonus. Make her an alpha monster.

Of course you should be careful, they might "buff" it like they did missiles. And by buff I mean nerf.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#48 - 2015-07-01 14:43:22 UTC
afkalt wrote:
Just give it a straight up damage bonus. Make her an alpha monster.

Of course you should be careful, they might "buff" it like they did missiles. And by buff I mean nerf.


RoF bonus is important as well. Having to wait 9-10s between shots with 720s is bad when you need to kill something now. But.. going for a 10-12.5% dmg bonus plus 5% rof bonus could be good and keep it different than sleip. Since sleip is the alpha monster atm (for med arty anyway).

Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS

Make the Muninn great again!
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#49 - 2015-07-01 14:55:06 UTC
I know, I just like the idea of a small agile REALLY high alpha ship. It's a little different from the run of the mill.
Dean Wong
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#50 - 2015-07-01 20:41:27 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
I was thinking, what if we did to the muninn, what CCP did to the sleipnir. Drop a turret but give it some beefy bonuses to keep overall damage the same, and still keep the utility high?

Give it a 10% bonus to damage per level and 5% rof. Or 7.5% RoF and 5% damage to compensate the loss of turret. Or.. 10% dmg and 7.5% RoF Twisted.

That way we can move a high to a mid, but still keep a utility high. Making it different than SFI. This also helps to allieviate some fitting issues since we only need to fit 4 turrets, and not 5.



Best idea so far for the Muninn overhaul. 100% support.

1. Drop one turret, but boost the damage bonus to maintain damage like a 5 turret ship.
2. Drop optimal for a slightly higher fallout bonus. (IMO a heavier fallout bonus prevents Muninn from been OP)
3. Move one turret spot for a Mid-slot. (IMO Muninn badly needs that 4th mid, like the Rupture.)
4. Swap the armor HP with the shield HP.

If CCP insist on the Muninn as an armor HAC, then,

1. Drop one turret, but boost the damage bonus to maintain damage like a 5 turret ship.
2. Improve the tracking bonus, drop optimal for a slightly higher fallout bonus
3. Move one turret spot for a Low-slot.

Oh last thing, signature radius of Minmatar ships are just too big. I suggest reducing them for a more unique taste.
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#51 - 2015-07-01 22:10:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Lloyd Roses
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
I was thinking, what if we did to the muninn, what CCP did to the sleipnir. Drop a turret but give it some beefy bonuses to keep overall damage the same, and still keep the utility high?

Give it a 10% bonus to damage per level and 5% rof. Or 7.5% RoF and 5% damage to compensate the loss of turret. Or.. 10% dmg and 7.5% RoF Twisted.


It's a minmatar ship, not a gallente one. Dream on. (We're prolly all dreaming with you right there)
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#52 - 2015-07-02 01:24:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Trinkets friend
Stitch Kaneland wrote:


Also arty is not as focused on dps, as it is alpha. Based on your picture, arty has more than double the alpha of those bouncers. RoF is less, hence the difference in dps. The problem is that sentries have too much range/application to be on a cruiser. Arty cannot compete, even with that alpha.

Then because of its slot layout, low base EHP, and minny t2 resists on an armor boat, its ignored by most who would consider to solo in it. So its overshadowed by other ships in a fleet setting, and suboptimal in other cases.


Alpha fleets are 2008. Alpha damage is not a virtue anymore in any way, it's all damage application, and here i agree that the damage projection and tracking of ishtar drones is far superior to any medium arty boat, and causes the problem.

Also, PYFA says ishtar bouncer vollet is 1997. 650mm volley damage from a DPS-fit arty Munnin is 2300. So...what was your point? The Ishtar does 20% more DPS, and 15% less alpha than a 650mm fit Munnin. I know what I'd want, given the advantages it has in terms of tank, mobility, fitting and EWAR.

Munnins with 720's get 3,500 alpha and 444 DPS. Barely competitive considering the tracking is worse.
650 = 0.043
Ishtar = 0.02 to 0.034 with two scripted Omnis and 56 + 54km
720's = 0.0359 with 22 + 22km (fusion) 444 DPS and alpha of 3700
720's = 0.0377 with 72 + 22 ( RF Carb Lead) 185 DPS and 1771 alpha
720's = 0.00898 with 81 + 22 (Tremor) 257 DPS and alpha of 2308

Considering the DPS and ROF, drone alpha is a thing. The ishtar can equal the tracking and exceed the DPS at long ranges of the Munnin, hands down, when the Munnin uses long-range ammo like Carb lead or Tremor. You're talking 2000 drone alpha vs 1700 for equal tracking, or 2300 alpha and zero tracking. Drones all the way, mate.

The other problem is that the Munnin lacks enough utility slots. While it might have extra slots, the pic shows the real difference: the ishtar basically has all its slots as utilities. Shield ishtar - fill the lows with DDA's and Omnidirectional Tracking Enhancer, fill highs with DLA's - fantastic tracking, good tank, uber projection, 500 DPS.
Armour Ishtar - lower DPS but lower sig, and even better tracking and EWAR. Damps, TP's, Omni Links out the wazoo, Drone Nav computers - a cornucopia of choices! And the "debuff" coming where they swap in another low for a mid, you'll just see better tanks or Omni Enhancers.

Our poor Munnin, though:
Shield Munnin. No tracking. Arse tank. Arse mobility. Arse projection. And as we've proved above, no effective alpha.
Armour Munnin. Middling Tracking, Arse mobility, arse tracking, arse DPS. No fitting latitude. And also, no alpha.

Did I say it has no alpha?

The problem is as much the ammo choices and fitting cost of 720's as anything else.
You could deal with the tracking if Fusion ammo hit out to 80km and you got 440-ish DPS. But you don't.
You could deal with the DPS if the alpha was double (yes, I did say that) but you'd be basically wanting a Tornado. So a bit stuck there cause we can't increase alpha on mediums (and nado's are cheaper anyway).
You could deal with all the above if you could fit 720's and a tank and not devote rigs to ACR's.

Honestly, the ammo is the problem.
You don't choose long range drones and get literally 40% of the damage. Gardes go 480, Wardens 400 - that's 80%. Carb Lead is 40% of the DPS of Fusion. Imagine if Carb lead did 80% of the DPS of Fusion!

~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
Justin Cody
War Firm
#53 - 2015-07-02 01:48:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Justin Cody
Baali Tekitsu wrote:
The Muninn needs some serious tweaking, be it either a rework of the bonuses, or of the slot layout. In its current form it can neither fully support artilleries because of its lacking fitting resources nor can it be used as a competent brawler as it has the inherent weaknesses of the minmatar t2 resist profile combined with a weak armor tanking slot layout.
Artilleries as a weapon system are heavily dependent on utility modules like defensive webifiers or Tracking computers and the Minmatar T2 resist profile is atrocious for armor tanking as you have to plug two major resist holes opposed to the other races which have just one on their main tank profile.
I vote for either moving a lowslot to a midslot, a midslot to a lowslot OR trading the optimal range bonus for a armor resist bonus.
Each of those would put it in a much better place than it is now without destroying the current game balance, just make it a viable option for different playstyles.


Drop the missile high slot and make it a 6th turret slot. Increase grid and CPU to adjust for the additional turret grid use.

The tracking bonus is amazing and adding the extra 80 dps for that turret (assuming 2x gyros, arty spec 4, and republic fleet emp medium) adds 20 dps to the overall 720 fit. But the volley goes up by about 624 to around 3,800 for a volley. That's a heavy hit.

For an AC version - you add another 178 dps bringing it up to over 700 dps with ridiculous tracking (between 0.249 and 0.298 with 2x TE II's and a t2 metastasis rig)

That would fix it right up.

The eagle also needs a boost since it has no drones, low dps, low tracking, a gigantic EM hole and is slow. It also deserves a 6th turret slot.
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#54 - 2015-07-02 06:13:35 UTC
Justin Cody wrote:


Drop the missile high slot and make it a 6th turret slot. Increase grid and CPU to adjust for the additional turret grid use.

The tracking bonus is amazing and adding the extra 80 dps for that turret (assuming 2x gyros, arty spec 4, and republic fleet emp medium) adds 20 dps to the overall 720 fit. But the volley goes up by about 624 to around 3,800 for a volley. That's a heavy hit.

For an AC version - you add another 178 dps bringing it up to over 700 dps with ridiculous tracking (between 0.249 and 0.298 with 2x TE II's and a t2 metastasis rig)

That would fix it right up.

The eagle also needs a boost since it has no drones, low dps, low tracking, a gigantic EM hole and is slow. It also deserves a 6th turret slot.


What crack are you smoking?

Tracking isn't the problem. Your 700 DPS AC Munnin will still only get 2.25 + 12.9km range, so you have 700 DPS against something at point-blank range.

So now your ship is competing with a Deimos (850 DPS) which, in case you missed it, can run a cap stable AAR + MAR fit and tank your Munnin forever. You've dunked your utility high for very little at all.

Can i also mention, here, that the Deimos is actually faster than the Munnin, can tank all the Munnin can put out (512 DPS tank easily done) and has 4 mids, so it gets cap booster, scram and web. The Munnin can't dictate range with only 3 mids, or if it can it gets no cap boosting or utility EWAR, or shield tank, so you have to toss in an AAR. With one AAR it can't scram-kite anything, so it's basically cactus.

Munnin can't take on the Sacrilege, because the Sac can tank it forever. Also, again, 4 mids, blah blah.

Cerberus vs Munnin? Surely you jest. Easiest hypothetical battle ever, Cerb all the way all the time: faster, better damage projection, no tracking problems, cruisy fittings, etc etc.

Munnin vs Zealot? Pulse Zealot due to Scorch Supremacy. AAR-fitted Zealot can kite the Munnin easily, because it's faster. Again, a minmatar ship kited by something else. I mean, Vagabond is Vagabond but surely the slowest HAC shouldn't be Minmatar?

The Eagle is in a different league entirely. Firstly, EM hole? Only compared to the Munnin's T2 minmatar resist profile. It's a Caldari HAC, it gets plenty of mids to fill that hole. Even with the invuls OFF it gets more EHP than a Munnin. Secondly, it's a boat with optimal range bonuses. A blaster Eagle gets 15.6 + 10.5km range (Null M), which is 12km more optimal than the Munnin and 8.35 + 3.75 with Void for 522 DPS. A smidge less range in falloff but, you know, that fit also has 109K EHP, so good luck beating that with a Munnin.

The Eagle is fine. Maybe you just use it badly.

~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
Justin Cody
War Firm
#55 - 2015-07-02 06:23:07 UTC
Dean Wong wrote:
[quote=Stitch Kaneland]I was thinking,

Oh last thing, signature radius of Minmatar ships are just too big. I suggest reducing them for a more unique taste.


They have the lowest base sigs of any race in the game. I am not sure what you are on about.
Justin Cody
War Firm
#56 - 2015-07-02 06:32:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Justin Cody
Trinkets friend wrote:
[quote=Justin Cody]Redacted for Space/quote]

What crack are you smoking?

Tracking isn't the problem. Your 700 DPS AC Munnin will still only get 2.25 + 12.9km range, so you have 700 DPS against something at point-blank range.

So now your ship is competing with a Deimos (850 DPS) which, in case you missed it, can run a cap stable AAR + MAR fit and tank your Munnin forever. You've dunked your utility high for very little at all.

Can i also mention, here, that the Deimos is actually faster than the Munnin, can tank all the Munnin can put out (512 DPS tank easily done) and has 4 mids, so it gets cap booster, scram and web. The Munnin can't dictate range with only 3 mids, or if it can it gets no cap boosting or utility EWAR, or shield tank, so you have to toss in an AAR. With one AAR it can't scram-kite anything, so it's basically cactus.

Munnin can't take on the Sacrilege, because the Sac can tank it forever. Also, again, 4 mids, blah blah.

Cerberus vs Munnin? Surely you jest. Easiest hypothetical battle ever, Cerb all the way all the time: faster, better damage projection, no tracking problems, cruisy fittings, etc etc.

Munnin vs Zealot? Pulse Zealot due to Scorch Supremacy. AAR-fitted Zealot can kite the Munnin easily, because it's faster. Again, a minmatar ship kited by something else. I mean, Vagabond is Vagabond but surely the slowest HAC shouldn't be Minmatar?

The Eagle is in a different league entirely. Firstly, EM hole? Only compared to the Munnin's T2 minmatar resist profile. It's a Caldari HAC, it gets plenty of mids to fill that hole. Even with the invuls OFF it gets more EHP than a Munnin. Secondly, it's a boat with optimal range bonuses. A blaster Eagle gets 15.6 + 10.5km range (Null M), which is 12km more optimal than the Munnin and 8.35 + 3.75 with Void for 522 DPS. A smidge less range in falloff but, you know, that fit also has 109K EHP, so good luck beating that with a Munnin.

The Eagle is fine. Maybe you just use it badly.


The Muninn (the 2 n's go at the end my friend) can hit with those AC'd out to 20-30km if you use it as a shield buffer/kite ship.

If you want to armor tank it you can do it quite well...but it fits a role as more of a skirmisher and with that amazeballs tracking bonus it is very good at killing tackle. It can't go toe to toe with a sacrilege no, nor can it with a blaster deimos. But it does perform a fleet role very well including small gang arty kite with armor.

Using it in a 1v1 role is about as dumb as a 1v1 eagle. You just don't do it.

If you fight a zealot you can out kite him. Zealots are super slow and scorch may seem great but it bounces off a muninn. The zealot is in no way faster than a muninn. It isn't the slowest hac.

Try this on for size

You can engage with RF Phased plasma against the zealots lowest resists and engage out to as far as 50km or switch to tremor and engage all the way out to 100km for 255 dps...which isn't bad.

Similar fit zealot
Dean Wong
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#57 - 2015-07-02 06:38:48 UTC
Justin Cody wrote:
Baali Tekitsu wrote:
The Muninn needs some serious tweaking, be it either a rework of the bonuses, or of the slot layout. In its current form it can neither fully support artilleries because of its lacking fitting resources nor can it be used as a competent brawler as it has the inherent weaknesses of the minmatar t2 resist profile combined with a weak armor tanking slot layout.
Artilleries as a weapon system are heavily dependent on utility modules like defensive webifiers or Tracking computers and the Minmatar T2 resist profile is atrocious for armor tanking as you have to plug two major resist holes opposed to the other races which have just one on their main tank profile.
I vote for either moving a lowslot to a midslot, a midslot to a lowslot OR trading the optimal range bonus for a armor resist bonus.
Each of those would put it in a much better place than it is now without destroying the current game balance, just make it a viable option for different playstyles.


Drop the missile high slot and make it a 6th turret slot. Increase grid and CPU to adjust for the additional turret grid use.

The tracking bonus is amazing and adding the extra 80 dps for that turret (assuming 2x gyros, arty spec 4, and republic fleet emp medium) adds 20 dps to the overall 720 fit. But the volley goes up by about 624 to around 3,800 for a volley. That's a heavy hit.

For an AC version - you add another 178 dps bringing it up to over 700 dps with ridiculous tracking (between 0.249 and 0.298 with 2x TE II's and a t2 metastasis rig)

That would fix it right up.

The eagle also needs a boost since it has no drones, low dps, low tracking, a gigantic EM hole and is slow. It also deserves a 6th turret slot.


NO NO NO NO NO NO!
No more power creeps. All OP and most authors wants is to make the Muninn useful. Adding a 6th turret and PG for it will only make it overpower and in a few months, CCP will nerf artilleries to the floor because of a single ship's hull and it's bonus. (Ishtar/Drakes)

Everytime CCP buff something, they end up nerfing it 6 times over. It is like taking one step forward, 6 steps back.

One last thing, the Muninn is the same size as the Zealot. Don't think that qualify Minmatar's ships having the lowest base sig.
Maybe I misquote myself but there are a few Amarrian ships classes and hulls which are either the same size or smaller.
Justin Cody
War Firm
#58 - 2015-07-02 06:44:22 UTC
in fact the muninn can tank the zealot without an issue

http://i.imgur.com/6vHVC9v.png
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#59 - 2015-07-02 08:16:16 UTC
Seriously, all you have to do to fix the ship is just move that utility high into a mid slot. I was astounded that they left it at 3 during the initial rebalance; it's not like projectile turrets eat up a lot of cap and need a nos to help them out like lasers do. What?
HiddenPorpoise
Jarlhettur's Drop
United Federation of Conifers
#60 - 2015-07-02 08:41:54 UTC
Catherine Laartii wrote:
Seriously, all you have to do to fix the ship is just move that utility high into a mid slot. I was astounded that they left it at 3 during the initial rebalance; it's not like projectile turrets eat up a lot of cap and need a nos to help them out like lasers do. What?
Why do you think that high slot is for a nos?
If the only change is slot shifting low to mid is something I'd prefer. For my needs I'd switch an enhancer to a comp.