Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ithildin
Gallente The Corporation The Corporation Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.12 16:17:00 -
[31]
Problem with nosferatus is that they've got a wee bit restrictive range, and that their vampire amount is a bit too linear (a small turret doesn't have half the range and half the damage of a medium turret).
The smaller ones are perhaps a bit too ineffective, were a simple signature based modifier introduced. But a signature based modifier strikes slightly wrong, giving Minmatar the best defence and Caldari T2* the second best - the two races who should, perhaps, have the inverse defences.
* for some reason the Gallente T2 ships are fatter than the Caldari T2 while it is the reversed for T1. At least if you look at the HACs.
Originally by: Allantia NOS needs a serious nerf across the board IMHO. What other offensive weapon in the game hits 100% of the time, always with 100% effectiveness and with no way to counter it (other than fitting your own NOS)? NOS should be treated more like a turret I would think - give it an optimal range, falloff range, tracking speed, take the target's sig radius into account, and etc.
When you ask like that, I must answer "missiles" with the granted amendment that they are only 100% accurate with 100% efficiency on same size or larger. But that's just spite, you know. - EVE is sick. |
Allantia
Caldari FW Inc
|
Posted - 2006.11.12 16:29:00 -
[32]
Quote: When you ask like that, I must answer "missiles" with the granted amendment that they are only 100% accurate with 100% efficiency on same size or larger. But that's just spite, you know.
Missiles however are affected by sig radius and velocity, and can be countered (effectiveness reduced) by hardeners and defenders, suck tho they do. There's nothing remotely comperable for NOS.
|
Azerrad InExile
|
Posted - 2006.11.12 17:01:00 -
[33]
Just give nos an activation cost, cut its range in 1/2, add some fall-off and finally add signature resolution to nos. This way your nos has a chance of missing depending on range and size of target and you will pay a penalty when it does. Also, even when it does hit you will get a (nos amount - activation cost) increase in cap making nos less effective at supporting your own tank.
|
ragewind
Caldari VersaTech Interstellar Ltd. SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.12 17:31:00 -
[34]
leave nos as it is its fine.
nos dose no damage it is the only BS sized counter to small ships as it a bs takes too long to log frigs and has near no chance of hitting them, so its nos and run.
any counter moduals need to be limited in fiting requirements to BS only.
it may not be perfict but nos isnt that broken it needs otherthings in the game looking at first befor it gets riped apart and leave interseters as practically the only viabel ships for small acail stuff in the game
|
Takahashi Arran
Havoc Inc
|
Posted - 2006.11.12 17:54:00 -
[35]
Originally by: ragewind leave nos as it is its fine.
nos dose no damage it is the only BS sized counter to small ships
except from those drone thingammies that all BS have, and those webber doodahs, and them sensor boosters that insta-lock and then hit the frigate while stationery... you get the idea
|
Azerrad InExile
|
Posted - 2006.11.12 18:01:00 -
[36]
Originally by: ragewind nos dose no damage it is the only BS sized counter to small ships as it a bs takes too long to log frigs and has near no chance of hitting them, so its nos and run.
Drones.
|
Nihilion Saro
Gallente The Imperial Commonwealth Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.11.12 18:23:00 -
[37]
God! There is nothing wrong with NOS. Quit your <bleaped>in' whining. I'm so sick of gunnery/missile players griping because, as it turns out, their myopic view of the game doesn't ensure them victory against everyone all the time.
If you think you can do nothing but mwd up to a ship where you have supreme F@#$ing advantage with your uber blasters and t2 ammo, think again. It is perfectly reasonable that there be a counter to it.
I'm so sick of you whiners. I really hope CCP isn't that stupid. Leave NOS the way it is. There is nothing wrong with it.
|
Pham Sirge
VersaTech Interstellar Ltd. SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.12 20:33:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Pham Sirge on 12/11/2006 20:35:23 Hi all,
Just had a thought, dont know if something similar has been brought up so please no flames.
Why not make a mod that limits what cap can be nos'ed.
Say: Anti Nos Mod 1 Prevents cap drain(from another ship) passed 50% +200 Cap (something similar so the mod isnt completely situational)
Then the nos player can hurt the enemies cap but cant completely kill it off, It would also allow the nos to screw with the enemies tanking ability without negating it.
This could really just be an additional battery type, like "Shielded Cap battery" giving up some of the cap storage for shielding ability.
, Pham Sirge
|
Korad Konstentyn
Shadowdancers Digital Press
|
Posted - 2006.11.12 20:55:00 -
[39]
one solution to Nos I havent seen suggested yet:
the Nos is a *huge freaking energy shower* from the target ship to the nos'ing ship
if a shield extender raises my signature radius, why isn't a Nosferatu an even large energy signature that screams SHOOT ME HERE!
sig radius modifications seem one of the most underused, yet potentially most subtle, balancing tools in EVE. the WCS modifications already realized that sig radius is a viable game balance tool, why not do the same for Nos? Make each active Nos a +25% nerf to your sig radius.
Having the equivalent of +1 target painter per active Nos would turn off their I-Win nature, and make Nos'ing someone more of a (worthwhile) risky manouver.
disclaimer: as someone with horible perc/will, I fly a lot of Nos-Domi setups myself.
|
ragewind
Caldari VersaTech Interstellar Ltd. SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.12 22:01:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Takahashi Arran
Originally by: ragewind leave nos as it is its fine.
nos dose no damage it is the only BS sized counter to small ships
except from those drone thingammies that all BS have, and those webber doodahs, and them sensor boosters that insta-lock and then hit the frigate while stationery... you get the idea
when drones can track and hit 5-6K ms interceptors and vagas then they can be called a counter as it is how they laff at them kill the drones then kill the ship.
weber drones yeah nice one go check the stats 25m3 space so that leave very few BS that can really fit them in case they find an interceptor gang if there was a full range of drones for this function maybe.
sensor booster yeah they work but not everyone fits for fleet fast locking, if there in travel fit then that isnt the most used mod perticually for any ship shield tanking.
|
|
Takahashi Arran
Havoc Inc
|
Posted - 2006.11.12 22:26:00 -
[41]
Originally by: ragewind ]when drones can track and hit 5-6K ms interceptors and vagas then they can be called a counter as it is how they laff at them kill the drones then kill the ship.
warrior 2 max velocity = 5040*1.5(drone nav 5- it is a 10% skill right? if 5% then meh).. when you get those out ceptors tend to cry. naturally they're not going to kill a vaga but the vaga is just evil.
|
ragewind
Caldari VersaTech Interstellar Ltd. SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.12 22:49:00 -
[42]
so you are saying you need to basically have all level5 skills to kill an interseptor and that with this nerf nos craze then the vags will become godly as it currently out dose drones/fighters and missiles explosion viscosity so hos do you kill stop them then currently it is nos.
as i said there is much more that needs balanceing befor we nerf nos which isnt broken it just annoys people
|
Audri Fisher
Caldari The Keep THE R0CK
|
Posted - 2006.11.13 01:32:00 -
[43]
The dommi is NOT a nos ship! It is a ammar racial weapon, which is why they are the only ships to get bonuses to them. Yes you can fit a nos on a dommi, you can also fit lasers if you so desire....
|
Hllaxiu
Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2006.11.13 01:55:00 -
[44]
Gallente drone ships should be fitting blasters or rails, not nos! --- Our greatest glory is not in never failing, but in rising up every time we fail. - Emerson |
Tindajii
|
Posted - 2006.11.13 02:47:00 -
[45]
How about a steep stacking penalty to NOS (more than 2 makes them useless) and give a boost to Neuts (increase the amount neturalized vs the amount of cap used) and no stacking penalty on the neuts. Naturally the stacking penalty would not take effect to ships that have built in NOS bonuses now (like the recon nos ships).
just a thought
|
Nyx Opet
Caldari Thundercats RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.13 05:42:00 -
[46]
i like the idea of cap batteries being immune to nos. makes em much more useful. i also like the idea of nos being more amarr oriented, but nos really does not need to be nerfed too much. --- What I have shown you is reality. What you remember, that is the illusion. |
rodgerd
Gallente ClanKillers Dusk and Dawn
|
Posted - 2006.11.13 07:18:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Hllaxiu Gallente drone ships should be fitting blasters or rails, not nos!
Great. Please point me at the drone ship that has the PG to fit enough blasters to damage worth a ****, the MWD to get close, the cap to run it for more than 5 seconds, and enough of a tank that it won't fall apart when a frigate looks at it sideways.
-- Not the opinions of my corp or my alliance. |
Jim McGregor
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.11.13 08:04:00 -
[48]
Some of you gallente players obviously dont understand game balancing.
--- Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune | Eve Pirate |
Zaphod Beblebrox2
|
Posted - 2006.11.13 10:51:00 -
[49]
There is 1 very good reason why I would hate to see NOS get the mega nerf you are asking for here and that reason is HAC's especially the Vagabond.
The Vagabond tanks like a battleship, does damage almost as well as a battleship (better against smaller targets) and fly's faster than a interceptor. (where exactly is the balance here?)
There is only 1 weapon that gives a battleship a chance against HAC's and that is NOS. To stand any chance of killing a Vagabond in my Raven I have to fit 2 prototype webbers and a warp disruptor of some sort to prevent it from escaping thus killing my tanking resistances. With this severely reduced tanking ability I need all the NOS I can get to counter the Vagabond I win button.
|
Quantum Joe
|
Posted - 2006.11.13 17:46:00 -
[50]
I have a good idea to nerf NOS. If you use one, your ship blows up.. hope that's extreme enough for everyone.
Domi for the win!
|
|
Father Weebles
Wreckless Abandon
|
Posted - 2006.11.13 18:01:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Hllaxiu Gallente drone ships should be fitting blasters or rails, not nos!
give the domi a little more pg, say 12k
"Welcome to EVE, where inflation is out of control." |
Patch86
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.13 18:06:00 -
[52]
Edited by: Patch86 on 13/11/2006 18:07:54 Edited by: Patch86 on 13/11/2006 18:07:00 Edited by: Patch86 on 13/11/2006 18:06:46 Shamelessly ripped from my own thread about Nos:
1: Make Nos more skill point based.
First job is to reduce the effectiveness of Nos. Without wanting to think too hard about exact numbers (balancing isn't exactly my speciality ), we'll call it a 50% reduce in Nos'd Cap amount. So the Heavy Nosferatu I would drain 50 Cap, instead of the current 100. You can futher Nerf this with giving it 50% of it's current range- HN I would now be 10.5km instead of 21km.
Introduce 2 new skills, both of which bring Nos effectiveness back up. The first skill would improve the Nos amount by 20% per level, while the second skill would increase Nos range by 20% per level. Obviously at level 5, that skill will give a 100% boost, bringing Nos back to it's current effectiveness.
2: Bring in a countermeasure.
Pretty simple, bring in a module called something like "Capacitor Battery Shielding". For each one of these modules equipped, a certain percentage of your Cap (for the sake of numbers, we'll call it 15%) becomes untouchable from energy drainage weapons. That'd be off the bottom of your Cap- the Nos'er will be able to drain all but the last 15% of your Cap with one module equipped.
I'm not decided on whether this should be medium or low slot, this module. Logic would kind of dictate it, being a countermeasure and a capacitor object should be in the mid slots (as with most Cap mods), but I feel that mid-slots are already under enough strain as it is, what with EWAR, Cap modules and shield boosting. Maybe the answer would be to have the lower-skill version in the mid slots, with a higher skill version in the low slots, as some modules (tracking computers?) already have. That way the CCP slot pattern is still maintained, but mid slot users (shield tankers) are still able to fit them without a setup nerf. -----------------------------------------------
|
Ruato
Gallente Gurgleblaster Industries
|
Posted - 2006.11.13 18:37:00 -
[53]
Quote: Pretty simple, bring in a module called something like "Capacitor Battery Shielding". For each one of these modules equipped, a certain percentage of your Cap (for the sake of numbers, we'll call it 15%) becomes untouchable from energy drainage weapons. That'd be off the bottom of your Cap- the Nos'er will be able to drain all but the last 15% of your Cap with one module equipped.
Why people are preaching this 'last 15% undrainable" is beyond me.
If they do it, nos users just add energy neutralizer in their setup (they already have plenty of them equipped im sure). And after that its same story all over again, but this time 'nerf energy neuts!".
Adding modules to shield from NOS is a good idea, but i think it should reduce effectiveness of NOS, not make last 15% undrainable (because that idea is completely useless). --- Get rid of those *bleep*ing secure containers. *bleep*! |
Yggdrassil
Amarrian Missionaires
|
Posted - 2006.11.13 19:57:00 -
[54]
Should take some more time considering wether I myself think its a good idea or not - but... Not in the mood for that.
How about a shield penalty for each fitted nosferatu. Kind of makes sense too - you got to open/reduce your shields power to transport the energy to your ship.
This would add some penalty for using it - but... not much - and only toward shield tankers
Another option might be to increase the repair systems duration - this would affect all but passive shield tankers.
Problem is - when the Kali goes live, it will in effect be a huge boost to all ships that currently rely on nos'es. The Dominix, especially, will be a LOT better in small fights in Kali than they are currently, due to the HP boost. Many other ships will have problems having enough cap to even run their guns long enough for long battles.
Yggdrassil |
ragewind
Caldari VersaTech Interstellar Ltd. SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.13 20:24:00 -
[55]
ow look a nos loses shields idea nice save the nos domi and nerf caldari again nice idea come on if you have an idea think it trough it must be balanced.
|
Patch86
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.13 20:44:00 -
[56]
Edited by: Patch86 on 13/11/2006 20:45:11
Originally by: Ruato
Quote: Pretty simple, bring in a module called something like "Capacitor Battery Shielding". For each one of these modules equipped, a certain percentage of your Cap (for the sake of numbers, we'll call it 15%) becomes untouchable from energy drainage weapons. That'd be off the bottom of your Cap- the Nos'er will be able to drain all but the last 15% of your Cap with one module equipped.
Why people are preaching this 'last 15% undrainable" is beyond me.
If they do it, nos users just add energy neutralizer in their setup (they already have plenty of them equipped im sure). And after that its same story all over again, but this time 'nerf energy neuts!".
Adding modules to shield from NOS is a good idea, but i think it should reduce effectiveness of NOS, not make last 15% undrainable (because that idea is completely useless).
Just to clarify- it'd apply to both Nos and Neutralisers. Adding an extra Neut would'nt get that last 15% any more than the Nos would.
Edit: Just realised the bit that mentioned that isn't in the bit I snipped from my other thread. Inserting -----------------------------------------------
|
Yggdrassil
Amarrian Missionaires
|
Posted - 2006.11.13 20:50:00 -
[57]
Originally by: ragewind ow look a nos loses shields idea nice save the nos domi and nerf caldari again nice idea come on if you have an idea think it trough it must be balanced.
That was what I pointed out in my original post... That it would affect shield tankers (caldari) only, if the penalty was on shield hp.
Personally, I believe the option with increasing the repair system duration would be a better one. Mainly because the more nos'es you use - the harder the penalty will be. As for not affecting passive shield tankers - thats kind of ok too. Passive shield tankers.... well - they generally doesn't really need the cap they suck in anyway
If you put a 20% penalty on repair systems duration per nos' - you get interesting figures:
Base cycle: 10 sec. 1 nosferatu: 12 sec. 2 nosferatu: 14.4 sec. 3 nosferatu: 17,3 sec. 4 nosferatu: 20,7 sec. 5 nosferatu: 24,9 sec. 6 nosferatu: 30,0 sec.
So for every nosferatu you add - you are able to repair less and less efficiently. Making the race more interesting in a 1 vs 1, nos-dommi vs blasterthron: will mega run out of cap first - or nosser out of structure?
Yggdrassil |
Yggdrassil
Amarrian Missionaires
|
Posted - 2006.11.13 20:53:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Patch86 Edited by: Patch86 on 13/11/2006 20:45:11
Originally by: Ruato
Quote: Pretty simple, bring in a module called something like "Capacitor Battery Shielding". For each one of these modules equipped, a certain percentage of your Cap (for the sake of numbers, we'll call it 15%) becomes untouchable from energy drainage weapons. That'd be off the bottom of your Cap- the Nos'er will be able to drain all but the last 15% of your Cap with one module equipped.
Why people are preaching this 'last 15% undrainable" is beyond me.
If they do it, nos users just add energy neutralizer in their setup (they already have plenty of them equipped im sure). And after that its same story all over again, but this time 'nerf energy neuts!".
Adding modules to shield from NOS is a good idea, but i think it should reduce effectiveness of NOS, not make last 15% undrainable (because that idea is completely useless).
Just to clarify- it'd apply to both Nos and Neutralisers. Adding an extra Neut would'nt get that last 15% any more than the Nos would.
Edit: Just realised the bit that mentioned that isn't in the bit I snipped from my other thread. Inserting
It sounds good, really - but... If you're cap is drained to 15%, the last bits of cap won't last long due to the way cap recharge works (provided you are running stuff that uses a bit of cap). In combination with cap injectors it would work good though.
Yggdrassil |
Patch86
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.13 21:06:00 -
[59]
Edited by: Patch86 on 13/11/2006 21:06:55
Originally by: Yggdrassil
Originally by: Patch86 Edited by: Patch86 on 13/11/2006 20:45:11
Originally by: Ruato
Quote: Pretty simple, bring in a module called something like "Capacitor Battery Shielding". For each one of these modules equipped, a certain percentage of your Cap (for the sake of numbers, we'll call it 15%) becomes untouchable from energy drainage weapons. That'd be off the bottom of your Cap- the Nos'er will be able to drain all but the last 15% of your Cap with one module equipped.
Why people are preaching this 'last 15% undrainable" is beyond me.
If they do it, nos users just add energy neutralizer in their setup (they already have plenty of them equipped im sure). And after that its same story all over again, but this time 'nerf energy neuts!".
Adding modules to shield from NOS is a good idea, but i think it should reduce effectiveness of NOS, not make last 15% undrainable (because that idea is completely useless).
Just to clarify- it'd apply to both Nos and Neutralisers. Adding an extra Neut would'nt get that last 15% any more than the Nos would.
Edit: Just realised the bit that mentioned that isn't in the bit I snipped from my other thread. Inserting
It sounds good, really - but... If you're cap is drained to 15%, the last bits of cap won't last long due to the way cap recharge works (provided you are running stuff that uses a bit of cap). In combination with cap injectors it would work good though.
Bearing in mind you always have the option to fit several........
But its a fair point, and as I said in my original post, 15% is just a number for a numbers sake. Lets instead call it 25% per module, for contrast. That'd be 25% cap untouchable (practically the golden 30%, certainly not far off considering recharge modules and cap injectors). 2 modules would have 50% of your cap untouchable.
When I wrote it, I was thinking that there wouldn't be any stacking penalties. But if you wanted each individual module stronger, you could make a stacking penalty to compensate. Lets say 30% base, with a standard "% of whats left", resistance style stacking scheme. 30% for your first module (70% drainable), 23% or so for your second module (47% drainable, 53% protected), 16% or so for your third (31% left drainable, 69% protected) etc. -----------------------------------------------
|
Nihilion Saro
Gallente The Imperial Commonwealth Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.11.14 05:28:00 -
[60]
Edited by: Nihilion Saro on 14/11/2006 05:29:51
Originally by: Yggdrassil
That was what I pointed out in my original post... That it would affect shield tankers (caldari) only, if the penalty was on shield hp.
Personally, I believe the option with increasing the repair system duration would be a better one. Mainly because the more nos'es you use - the harder the penalty will be. As for not affecting passive shield tankers - thats kind of ok too. Passive shield tankers.... well - they generally doesn't really need the cap they suck in anyway
If you put a 20% penalty on repair systems duration per nos' - you get interesting figures:
Base cycle: 10 sec. 1 nosferatu: 12 sec. 2 nosferatu: 14.4 sec. 3 nosferatu: 17,3 sec. 4 nosferatu: 20,7 sec. 5 nosferatu: 24,9 sec. 6 nosferatu: 30,0 sec.
So for every nosferatu you add - you are able to repair less and less efficiently. Making the race more interesting in a 1 vs 1, nos-dommi vs blasterthron: will mega run out of cap first - or nosser out of structure?
Absolutely NO FRIGGIN' WAY. If they do this, i'm quitting eve. Why do you all hate nos so much? It takes all our high slots and doesn't do any damage. A t2 heavy has a range of only 25km. And its not even that powerful. A couple of heavy nos on a battleship isn't going to drain them out of a fight. Do you have any idea how quickly a t2 blasterthron eats through a domi? The domi is destroyed before those nos make a dent.
Oh, and don't forget that the domi is already getting two other nerfs in kali--1) drones don't get HP bonus that ships get, and 2) EW is nerfed.
So stop your griping. If they nerf nos and my corpmates can somehow convince me not to quit eve, i dont know what i'll do. Probably just train caldari or blasters and join the choir of whinage until there is nothing left in the game accept missiles and blasters.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |