Ships & Modules

for those that know, it is proposed that capacitor batteries have a % chance that they will reflect back to the aggressor, a cycle of cap warfare. eg. I have a neut fitted, I start draining somebody, they have a cap battery fitted, i roll "unlucky" instead of the target getting drained I do

I had it confirmed that the current testing off this A. is applied to cap warfare specialist ships and b. currently applies the bonuses effect amount with the exact words "if you fly a curse, you're pretty much ******!" (said with much glee)

so I ask you all, why

i can understand non specialist ships having this effect apply, along the lines of "you want to neut somebody do the training, spend the isk and use a ship designed for it" e.g. the curse and bhaal have immunity from the effect while a neut domi
doesn't

I could also understand of each of the other specialties also had a "nemesis" module. e.g. a falcon jams a target with a eccm fitted has a % chance of dropping all its target locks or arazu points something with a stab and it can't warp for 20 seconds

but again I'm astounded why the curse and similar ships get such another massive Nerf (remember the nos change) while falcons and arazus continue to be insta win shiithin respective fleets (and yes I know that falcons should be compared to
pilgrims but I'm just happy that one of the Amarr recons is ok, I don't want to ask for the impossible and ask for the pilgrim to actually be not made even more worse

I mean its not like you can't already fit a cap booster as defence from cap warfare which is much better than the effect of an eccm.

the long run I understand why the nos Nerf went thru (even though i still fondly re member the curse glory days) but seriously this is just a Amarr screw job


thoughts people?

I can only imagine what happens when Curse's 5 medium neuts gets reflected back. Not a thought I would like to have.

Still the question is.. who's going to fit a cap battery ? :) You won't have space for it in pvp fits, none of the shield pvp fits will ever have one and armor ones mostlikely won't have one. Maybe the myrmidon could squeeze one in.

But still.. you're making this a whole lot too big of a thing.

But capitals will be neuted by multiple enemies, even if they reflect half of neuting, it won't give them anything substantial.

Sounds to me like one of the changes needed to make local tanking even remotely viable in PvP along with the hinted at new local reps and fuel and whatnot.

Also as pointed out, fitting cap batteries is a pain in the ass. Oversized batteries are the only ones that actually give a credible amount of cap and they're all but impossible to fit on any decent setup, even assuming you do have the spare slot for one. Fitting the right size battery give you practically nothing so it will be a mod like eccm, literally only really useful when you're being neuted.

On the flipside of the coin if you're the one flying the neuting ship and you're in any kind of decent fleet with logis you should have spare cap transfers so getting the odd neut cycle fired back at you is going to make bugger all dfference.

-They are trying to revive a dead module. Other than Nanoishtars once upon a time this is used as much as marmite in Greece...

-A cap booster will be 10x the problem for someone relying on neuting you than a battery is.

-I agree however that neuting back a poor Curse is OTT. On the other hand giving Curse an immunity to this would contradict the purpose of the change to a great extent (or maybee not).\

-If I cna be so bold as to make a suggestion (since you ask for thoughts)n I would say instead of 5% chance to hit back make it complete immunity to the first two heavy/medium neuts to hit your ship (... the batttery aside form providing extra cap armor your capacitor containers maximizing their integrity blahblahblahblah)

This would allow a LOT of additional tactical potential... like ships with small neuts perma running and would divide the cap boosting world into two choices (a) injector for temprary boost to local cap (tank - neuts etc) and immunity to neuts or (b) battery for permanent small local cap increase and immunity to heavy (and med?) neuts...

Potential ....

EDIT Arguably this would be worse for a Curse than losing a bit of cap once in 20 cycles lol so balancing needed.

I think you're forgetting they need cap to activate them. I would consider that a downside

inb4 "because of CURSE"

I'm not particularly bothered by this notion, and I fly pretty much ONLY neut boats.

There are simply not a lot of pvp ships that have slots/need to fit a cap battery; Mid slots are always at a premium on pvp vessels and I doubt there is a whole lot of folks willing to slap an otherwise-useless module on their ship for a chance to negate a neut cycle.

The only thing I'm slightly worried about is Carriers becoming even more stupid in triage tactics by reducing the enemy ability to neut them out.

What exactly is the problem that they are trying to fix here?

Cap-based warfare is currently in a pretty well-balanced state at the moment, I think.

Neut's already have a many counters e.g. cap boosters

Are we risking that balance just to make Capacitor Batteries more popular?! Really?