open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked Nosferatu and Khanid changes on the test server, new Blog by Fendahl
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 40 41 42 43 [44] 45 46 47 48 ... : last (59)

Author Topic

Hellspawn01
Amarr
Posted - 2007.08.03 14:10:00 - [1291]
 

Originally by: William DeMeo
Fact remains it's almost impossible to kill an inty without nos.

Drones, jammers, small guns, missiles work too Ive heard.

PhantomVyper
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2007.08.03 14:15:00 - [1292]
 

Originally by: Voltaeis Gemini

This is the worst example ever... the game is rock paper siccors not rock rock rock.. how would your nos boat have handleld a sniper rokh at 200 km?


He would have warped away... Rolling Eyes

Amaldor Themodius
Psykotic Meat
Posted - 2007.08.03 14:31:00 - [1293]
 

Would be nice if CCP developed a quarterly player census by evemail inviting players to vote on these core rules modifications.. The forum trolls have far too much sway in this game and exert heavy influence. A reasonably small number of players (by comparison to total player base) post similar / identical threads and spin there ideas from mole hills into mountains that dont appear to align with the broader player community..

The current forum system is so rotten it borders on corrupt and steps should be taken to prevent it from worsenin. Already the large mega allainces have developed strategies to encourage members to lobby the forums / ccp to undertake their interests as game development(Goons & BOB being the most obvious). What is needed imho is transparency and a quarterly census would achieve that by providing a snap shot of the quantitative values recieved once the voting player had cast their vote. Alliances would still group think and use collaboration but at least their influence would not extend beyond the single vote of each eve player.

Light me up flamers / forum trolls im sure u have a comment or twenty to pass on why you disagree with introducing fairness and transparency to the game.. OH and in relation to what prompted this post -- THE NOS NERF IN THIS FORMAT IS THE SINGLE WORST GAME INNOVATION OF 2007 (TO DATE)---

PhantomVyper
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2007.08.03 14:37:00 - [1294]
 

Originally by: Amaldor Themodius
OH and in relation to what prompted this post -- THE NOS NERF IN THIS FORMAT IS THE SINGLE WORST GAME INNOVATION OF 2007 (TO DATE)---


Care to give any reason why this nos nerf is bad?

Because I haven't seen a single reason written here on why this Nos change is such a bad thing.

We have seen people post some very usefull thoughts on why certain ships who are supposed to use Nos are now nerfed, and CCP has replied that they will look into, but other than that, not a single coerent post about it...

Amaldor Themodius
Psykotic Meat
Posted - 2007.08.03 14:59:00 - [1295]
 

Originally by: PhantomVyper

Care to give any reason why this nos nerf is bad?

Because I haven't seen a single reason written here on why this Nos change is such a bad thing.

We have seen people post some very usefull thoughts on why certain ships who are supposed to use Nos are now nerfed, and CCP has replied that they will look into, but other than that, not a single coerent post about it...


Shocked there are 43 pages before this one with numerous criticisms im not going to reiterate that which has already been discussed, likewise there are some strong veiws in the ships and modules forum same topic.. or was it that u didnt consider them coherent? Laughing

Hammar Wolf
Wolf Echelon
Combined Planetary Union
Posted - 2007.08.03 15:01:00 - [1296]
 

Originally by: PhantomVyper
Originally by: Amaldor Themodius
OH and in relation to what prompted this post -- THE NOS NERF IN THIS FORMAT IS THE SINGLE WORST GAME INNOVATION OF 2007 (TO DATE)---


Care to give any reason why this nos nerf is bad?

Because I haven't seen a single reason written here on why this Nos change is such a bad thing.

We have seen people post some very usefull thoughts on why certain ships who are supposed to use Nos are now nerfed, and CCP has replied that they will look into, but other than that, not a single coerent post about it...


Vyper come on man get over yourself. There are pages and pages of posts about why its bad, terrible, wont work out, etc. and many with good reasoning. Sorry that all the thousands of posts have not been sufficiently coherent for you. And please stop wearing kneepads for the devs.

Amaldor Themodius
Psykotic Meat
Posted - 2007.08.03 15:03:00 - [1297]
 

Originally by: torN Deception
Edited by: torN Deception on 03/08/2007 11:22:40
Edited by: torN Deception on 03/08/2007 11:21:12
Edited by: torN Deception on 03/08/2007 11:20:39
A while back when CCP first mentioned it was thinking about nerfing NOS down the road(not so far down the road it turned out), you mentioned one possible nerf as making NOS sig radius penalized. This seems to me both a far fairer solution, but a more elegant one as well.

I think it's fair to say that 90% of the whining about NOS is due to heavy NOS. That's because nosferatu are the only offensive highslot module that are completely unaffected by the target's qualities. Sig radius, velocity, tracking, none of it matters. Unlike missiles or turrets, it's just as effective against a tiny interceptor doing 5km/s in orbit, and a huge battleship doing 10m/s. That becomes the biggest problem when the disparity between the target's ship class and the module size of the NOS is largest, which means heavy NOS.

That means that a heavy nosferatu is 100% effective against anything from a frigate up to a dreadnought. Since you're draining the same amount of cap per module activation in fact, that makes heavy nos far more effective against smaller ships than it is against larger ones, comparatively. You can blow away the cap of anything BC sized or smaller pretty quickly, and with it MWD and repping capability, if not weapon use as well.

So instead of overreacting and turning one of the most prominent modules in EVE all but useless, why not take the obvious solution that has been raised again and again in the "nerf NOS" threads and simply make nosferatu dependent on sig radius? A heavy diminishing nos will drain the full amount from a target with a sig radius of 400 or larger, but against a target the size of a thorax, or even more so a crow, it will drain far less capacitor while its activation cost for the battleship remains the same regardless.

The proposed solution changes none of this. Instead of fitting a large NOS on every battleship, players will stick on a heavy neut instead. It's still not sig penalized, which means it's still as effective as absolutely destroying the cap of any smaller ships that try to engage. Smart PvPers will still fit cap boosters because it'll let them field more durable tanks.

The reason NOS are so ubiquitous in that last empty slot on pretty much all battleships is because they're effective against everything. It means that ratting ships can very effectively deal with things like interceptor tacklers, or even hostile HACs, because a battleship-sized NOS will nuke their cap.

Make nos sig radius penalized and all of a sudden it is like other offensive modules only completely effective against ships the same class or larger. It no longer becomes the no-brainer choice to fill the final slot on a battleship but a module that has to be weighed against the other options.

To quote the devblog, NOS are "too powerful since there is no compromise involved." IT goes on to bring up the example of a battleship using its NOS against a frigate. The sig radius solution solves that exact issue.

Even if CCP doesn't think this is the right way to go, I'd at least like to know why. After all, they were considering as a solution a while back. Why did they think it was insufficient to fix NOS?


Here is one fellow who makes some good points and valid criticisms of the NOS nerf in its current form.. i think his idea is much better than the CCP nerf..

Borasao
Ex Coelis
The Bantam Menace
Posted - 2007.08.03 15:05:00 - [1298]
 

Edited by: Borasao on 03/08/2007 15:12:48
Edited by: Borasao on 03/08/2007 15:06:48
Originally by: Baynex
ShockedWARNING LOGIC PRESENT BELOW THIS LINE!Shocked
---------------------------------------------
Nos is a weapon, make it use a hardpoint!


Make it a turret? Dominix still fits a rack of them.
Make it a launcher? We get even more whining than this nerf.
Make it a new type of weapon hardpoint? We have no idea how much of a code change and database change this will introduce and doesn't even address some of the core concerns (one of which is making interceptor pilots' life hard) because the NOS mechanism itself is unchanged.

PhantomVyper
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2007.08.03 15:13:00 - [1299]
 

Originally by: Amaldor Themodius
Originally by: torN Deception
stuff


Here is one fellow who makes some good points and valid criticisms of the NOS nerf in its current form.. i think his idea is much better than the CCP nerf..


No it is not. Like alot of people said, the sig radius proposal doesn't solve the problem that an entire class of ships is completelly rendered uselless (Interceptors), by a module that in todays environment is overused because it possesses much more advantages than drawbacks. As soon as the Interceptor (or any frigate for that matter), used its MWD it see itself completelly without cap. So that sugestion wouldn't solve what CCP perceives as one of the issues with the current Nos.

The neut will not replace the nos in most setups, therefore interceptors (and assault frigates), will be allowed to perform their role. Not only this but active tanks / energy using weapons will become more powerfull because not only will the nos continue to work for them, they won't be affected by it.

If there are so many posts on why this change is so bad, again without getting into the specific nos ships that CCP said they would be getting into, then it won't be so hard for you to find one.

Hellspawn01
Amarr
Posted - 2007.08.03 15:31:00 - [1300]
 

Originally by: PhantomVyper
Originally by: Amaldor Themodius
OH and in relation to what prompted this post -- THE NOS NERF IN THIS FORMAT IS THE SINGLE WORST GAME INNOVATION OF 2007 (TO DATE)---


Care to give any reason why this nos nerf is bad?

Because I haven't seen a single reason written here on why this Nos change is such a bad thing.

We have seen people post some very usefull thoughts on why certain ships who are supposed to use Nos are now nerfed, and CCP has replied that they will look into, but other than that, not a single coerent post about it...

Care to explain whats so good about the change?

Argen Tano
Posted - 2007.08.03 15:58:00 - [1301]
 

Edited by: Argen Tano on 03/08/2007 15:58:37
Originally by: PhantomVyper
Originally by: Amaldor Themodius
Originally by: torN Deception
stuff


Here is one fellow who makes some good points and valid criticisms of the NOS nerf in its current form.. i think his idea is much better than the CCP nerf..


No it is not. Like alot of people said, the sig radius proposal doesn't solve the problem that an entire class of ships is completelly rendered uselless (Interceptors), by a module that in todays environment is overused because it possesses much more advantages than drawbacks. As soon as the Interceptor (or any frigate for that matter), used its MWD it see itself completelly without cap. So that sugestion wouldn't solve what CCP perceives as one of the issues with the current Nos.

The neut will not replace the nos in most setups, therefore interceptors (and assault frigates), will be allowed to perform their role. Not only this but active tanks / energy using weapons will become more powerfull because not only will the nos continue to work for them, they won't be affected by it.

If there are so many posts on why this change is so bad, again without getting into the specific nos ships that CCP said they would be getting into, then it won't be so hard for you to find one.


Care to explain why you missed the part, where someone suggested it should be based on base sig, and not modified sig, such as when the MWD is active?

Borasao
Ex Coelis
The Bantam Menace
Posted - 2007.08.03 15:58:00 - [1302]
 

Edited by: Borasao on 03/08/2007 16:00:26
Originally by: Hellspawn01

Care to explain whats so good about the change?


a) Interceptor pilots could function against NOS. To kill an interceptor, you have to fit NEUT which you'll have to use at a cost (no longer free to be immune from intercteptors)
b) Killing someone's cap completely would no longer be "free". You have to use your own cap to completely kill a target's cap.
c) It nerfs the FOTM setups like DomiNOS. To achieve the same thing fit NEUTs but it will make the overall ship weaker (no longer able to fit super strong tank in addition to killing target's cap)
d) FOTM Curse setups would not be as good. You actually have to think and work a little to remain strong with that ship. No more F1-F5, launch drones, /afk, sammich, return to loot wreck... if you see a Curse when you're in a BS, it may actually be either really dangerous because the pilot is good or piloted by a FOTM pilot and you can kill him. Even FOTM pilots will still be deadly to almost anything smaller than a BS. It also brings its soloability more in line with other recon ships. FOTM pilots will obviously be hit hardest by the NOS nerf (and will whine the loudest).
e) Cap unstable setups (Megathrons use these a lot and almost all Amarr BS setups) would have some defense against NOS since their cap is always pretty low. Those setups will still benefit from fitting a NOS but if you want to kill the cap of someone in that setup, you have to fit a NEUT.
f) "Cap warfare" actually has meaning... you have to fight it like a battle instead of F1-Fx, /afk
g) NOS is still viable defensively (and for free other than fittings) to help maintain your cap but is no longer an offensive weapon. NEUT is the offensive weapon (as it always had been).

How about those to start with?

Fager
Caldari
5 Inch Incorporated
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
Posted - 2007.08.03 16:01:00 - [1303]
 

Originally by: speedcat
Enuf is enuf :-)
1) The people who tells us that everything a curse or gallente pilot wants to, he can also after the new patch... >> then WHY, WHY you want to change it ??? huh?

2) The people who fears Large NOS on a battleship (I repeat: BATTLESHIP), that kind of ship in every movie destroys everything almost alone... it's not for fun called large NOS, and NO, a battleship pilot don't want to be scrambled through a single Rifter for the whole day... it's called BATTLEship for a reason !!! It's called LARGE NOS for a reason.
And believe it or not, I hate those ships, I don't even fly a NOS-Domi... my Domi (rest in peace) was fitted with a tank and gang support instead of the da*n NOS.

3) CCP... please, stop nerfing. Some people said it already in here. They learnt from others fittings, they learnt from getting NOSed because of getting to close to a Domi, this is a lesson which I learnt also by myself. But there are also possibilites to withstand a NOS-Domi.
Not even the Passive-Shield-Tank-Nerf was that hard. This NOS Nerf changes a lot of fittings, funny fittings, excellent fittings for absolutely no reason. Only because some incompetent (not even Noobs) wanna be professionals whined the whole day instead of train themselfs.
The Domi has already been nerfed in speed together with the Phoon. And this was great, it really gave no reason a Battleship was flying that fast. It was a joke and it's history.

4)To everyone thinking after this the NOS-Domis will vanish. You're wrong, as I said in another posting, a Domi has the Powergrid and the CAP to maintain the Neuts. But all the smaller ships with great fittings haven't.

5) JUST DON'T DO IT THIS WAY CCP... IT's WRONG AND YOU NOW IT !

6) Others said it before. The people who can think out of the box can also think about a method to get a NOS-Domi down. It happens, every day, NOS-Domis exploding and people are happy with their idea to get them down. THIS IS EVE!

Stop being happy with this patch as it is... think for everyone and not only for your ship you currently flying... or should we nerf that d*mn speed of the Vagabond... Stabber? Other Minmatar-Ships... should this also been nerfed? Or is just "standard" for Minmatar-Pilots that they are 5 times faster than everyone else, can deal every damage and can take quite good?

Is it? NO, okey then stop... and CCP... your fans inside this game gave you some very good ideas to implement good solutions which are not "nerfing", they are just great.

br
speed


1)Curse and pilgrims will have a harder time doing what they did if they even can do what they did. Most ppl point out that they are still effective and balanced not DEAD.

2)Battleships can still use neutralizers to fend of small ships. They cant use a universal NOS for it thou.

3) They are just taking away the ability of NOS performing its own and the neutralizers job, it truly was Universal in use and even easier to fit then the neutralizer. They are Balancing NOS to neutralizers and many other systems. When most of the suggestion said to ppl whining about NOS is train it yurself.. it shows how bad it really is. NOS is to good and have no other module in its category as good as itself. This isnt balanced.

4)If the new era will bring Neutralizer Domis then yeahaa good for them, the domis will still be good if it works. However a Neutdomi won kill its enemies CAP/Providing its Tank/Fending Of small and big ships alike with one module. NEUT domis can fend of small ships, kill Big ships CAP but at expense of its own Tank and Cap.

5)I trust CCP takes and valuates both the bad and good points with this change and make a decision if they can find and use a better change.

6)Please see out of your little domi box, there are more wrongs with NOS then just on domis Domis. I want to fit other stuff then it, but currently all other options are inferior in all ways. Thinking out of the NOS-Box is pointless.

Im flying caldari for the record.

PhantomVyper
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2007.08.03 16:02:00 - [1304]
 

Originally by: Borasao
Edited by: Borasao on 03/08/2007 16:00:26
Originally by: Hellspawn01

Care to explain whats so good about the change?


a) Interceptor pilots could function against NOS. To kill an interceptor, you have to fit NEUT which you'll have to use at a cost (no longer free to be immune from intercteptors)
b) Killing someone's cap completely would no longer be "free". You have to use your own cap to completely kill a target's cap.
c) It nerfs the FOTM setups like DomiNOS. To achieve the same thing fit NEUTs but it will make the overall ship weaker (no longer able to fit super strong tank in addition to killing target's cap)
d) FOTM Curse setups would not be as good. You actually have to think and work a little to remain strong with that ship. No more F1-F5, launch drones, /afk, sammich, return to loot wreck... if you see a Curse when you're in a BS, it may actually be either really dangerous because the pilot is good or piloted by a FOTM pilot and you can kill him. Even FOTM pilots will still be deadly to almost anything smaller than a BS. It also brings its soloability more in line with other recon ships. FOTM pilots will obviously be hit hardest by the NOS nerf (and will whine the loudest).
e) Cap unstable setups (Megathrons use these a lot and almost all Amarr BS setups) would have some defense against NOS since their cap is always pretty low. Those setups will still benefit from fitting a NOS but if you want to kill the cap of someone in that setup, you have to fit a NEUT.
f) "Cap warfare" actually has meaning... you have to fight it like a battle instead of F1-Fx, /afk
g) NOS is still viable defensively (and for free other than fittings) to help maintain your cap but is no longer an offensive weapon. NEUT is the offensive weapon (as it always had been).

How about those to start with?


/win!

PhantomVyper
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2007.08.03 16:08:00 - [1305]
 

Originally by: Argen Tano

Care to explain why you missed the part, where someone suggested it should be based on base sig, and not modified sig, such as when the MWD is active?


Ok, how about that change wouldn't make anything for the fact that even against ships its own size its incredibly overpowered when compared to other modules of its category (neuts are considerably harder to fit and kill your own cap whille nos helps it), and completelly ruins setups that are perfectly viable without the after-patch nos (Amarr pulse ships mostly)?

Good enough?

me bored
Posted - 2007.08.03 16:11:00 - [1306]
 

The curse is the single most brokenly imbalanced ship in the game and it needed to be nerfed. It's no good crying because your pwnmobile is getting put in line with other ships. So you can't kill every ship in the game 1v2 anymore boohoo.

Fager
Caldari
5 Inch Incorporated
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
Posted - 2007.08.03 16:13:00 - [1307]
 

Originally by: Hellspawn01
Just strange that a nos takes mostly more than 1 cycle to kill an intys cap while a neut kills it instantly and then call nos overpowered.

Large named nos eats 120cap/12s at 25km range
Large named neut eats 600cap/24s at 25,2km range while draining less than 500cap (depends on skill, down to 375cap if Im correct)

So a L named neut kills 5x (!) times more cap than a nos and it isnt overpowered??? 3 of those damage active tanked ships in 2-3 cycles very hard so you need 5 L named nos to counter 1 L named neut and on top of that at 30% cap of your target, he can neut you but you cant nos him. Where is the logic behind this crap?


Your logic is flawed mate.

Nos drain 5x faster then Nos.
Nos Drains and gives wich makes it 2x effective. Now Neut is only on paper 2.5x effective. Then account that Neut also kills your cap 60% as good approx according to your stats. This Halves it yet again on paper in usefulness to 1.25x NOS. Then you have another drawback of harder to fit and the fact is has twice the activation time and such...

NOS is to good couse it was so universal, easy to fit and only had fitting as a drawback. NOS can today be used on anything from a BS to a Frig just as effective doing the job of neutralizer and NOS at the same time.

With this change the Neutralizers uses and NOS uses will be VERY different. Making both valid options to different setups.

Hope you can see some of the logic behind the neutralizer.

Ashhtar
Posted - 2007.08.03 16:13:00 - [1308]
 

Shocked stoOop that change !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i'm an amarrian, and i never chose my 'race' for having all this launcher on my ships !!!
don't change anything on our ships !!!

AMARR like and skill energy turret, and if i would like have missile i choose caldari and skill missile !!!!!!!!!!ugh

who is the stupid guy have say all that change ??? if you change that what i do ?? i skill and wait 5 month for using it ??Twisted Evil

Borasao
Ex Coelis
The Bantam Menace
Posted - 2007.08.03 16:16:00 - [1309]
 

Originally by: Ashhtar
if you change that what i do ??


Continue flying the turret ships just as good as you ever did? (Crusader, Retribution, Zealot, Absolution)

Fager
Caldari
5 Inch Incorporated
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
Posted - 2007.08.03 16:18:00 - [1310]
 

Originally by: PhantomVyper
Originally by: Borasao
Edited by: Borasao on 03/08/2007 16:00:26
Originally by: Hellspawn01

Care to explain whats so good about the change?


a) Interceptor pilots could function against NOS. To kill an interceptor, you have to fit NEUT which you'll have to use at a cost (no longer free to be immune from intercteptors)
b) Killing someone's cap completely would no longer be "free". You have to use your own cap to completely kill a target's cap.
c) It nerfs the FOTM setups like DomiNOS. To achieve the same thing fit NEUTs but it will make the overall ship weaker (no longer able to fit super strong tank in addition to killing target's cap)
d) FOTM Curse setups would not be as good. You actually have to think and work a little to remain strong with that ship. No more F1-F5, launch drones, /afk, sammich, return to loot wreck... if you see a Curse when you're in a BS, it may actually be either really dangerous because the pilot is good or piloted by a FOTM pilot and you can kill him. Even FOTM pilots will still be deadly to almost anything smaller than a BS. It also brings its soloability more in line with other recon ships. FOTM pilots will obviously be hit hardest by the NOS nerf (and will whine the loudest).
e) Cap unstable setups (Megathrons use these a lot and almost all Amarr BS setups) would have some defense against NOS since their cap is always pretty low. Those setups will still benefit from fitting a NOS but if you want to kill the cap of someone in that setup, you have to fit a NEUT.
f) "Cap warfare" actually has meaning... you have to fight it like a battle instead of F1-Fx, /afk
g) NOS is still viable defensively (and for free other than fittings) to help maintain your cap but is no longer an offensive weapon. NEUT is the offensive weapon (as it always had been).

How about those to start with?


/win!

Nice compressed list of many pros there mate (hellspawn01)
/signed
c) i think its more of a FOTYear in the case of NOSdomi heh.

zero2espect
Amarr
ZERO HEAVY INDUSTRIES
Posted - 2007.08.03 16:19:00 - [1311]
 

every day i'm going to post the same thing.

the only way to fix the problem is to create NOS SLOTS. make the USELESS Utility Slots on Amarr useful.

there is a difference in this thread b/n amarr need for nos and the overpowered gallente argument.

i am sick an tired of pilots stating how useful this will be for amarr....how does it benefit our laser and repping requirements to fit a neut and bring the targets cap down AFTER ours.

again..having 5 ships NOS another and have NONE OF THEM leach any cap out of the target is plain stupid.

end.

Vampire Lord
Endless Destruction
Imperial 0rder
Posted - 2007.08.03 16:21:00 - [1312]
 

Edited by: Vampire Lord on 03/08/2007 16:24:45
Originally by: PhantomVyper
Originally by: Amaldor Themodius
Originally by: torN Deception
stuff


Here is one fellow who makes some good points and valid criticisms of the NOS nerf in its current form.. i think his idea is much better than the CCP nerf..


No it is not. Like alot of people said, the sig radius proposal doesn't solve the problem that an entire class of ships is completelly rendered uselless (Interceptors), by a module that in todays environment is overused because it possesses much more advantages than drawbacks. As soon as the Interceptor (or any frigate for that matter), used its MWD it see itself completelly without cap. So that sugestion wouldn't solve what CCP perceives as one of the issues with the current Nos.

The neut will not replace the nos in most setups, therefore interceptors (and assault frigates), will be allowed to perform their role. Not only this but active tanks / energy using weapons will become more powerfull because not only will the nos continue to work for them, they won't be affected by it.

If there are so many posts on why this change is so bad, again without getting into the specific nos ships that CCP said they would be getting into, then it won't be so hard for you to find one.


NOS/Webbers are anti inty mods. NOS forces them to keep distance and Webbers if they inty pilot is smart enough to get into range will get them killed. STFU plz. Inty's used properly are one of the hardest ships to kill. They fly 5-12km/s. That is there role dumbass. Fast moving hit and run ships. They only have to worry about Large NOS as they can fly out of any other NOS's range an tackle. There only fear is Large NOS. If people stopped crying an start thinking Eve would be a better place.

me bored
Posted - 2007.08.03 16:24:00 - [1313]
 

Originally by: Ashhtar
Shocked stoOop that change !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i'm an amarrian, and i never chose my 'race' for having all this launcher on my ships !!!
don't change anything on our ships !!!

AMARR like and skill energy turret, and if i would like have missile i choose caldari and skill missile !!!!!!!!!!ugh

who is the stupid guy have say all that change ??? if you change that what i do ?? i skill and wait 5 month for using it ??Twisted Evil


It's not like anyone used khanid ships before this change and you're perfectly free to continue not to. I don't think I've seen a sac in pvp since pre missile nerf.

RossP Zoyka
Posted - 2007.08.03 16:24:00 - [1314]
 

Originally by: Duhmad IbnRa
Originally by: RossP Zoyka
Originally by: Falun Assad
Edited by: Falun Assad on 02/08/2007 15:03:40
Originally by: CCP Fendahl


This specific mechanics was chosen for Nosferatus since it has the following desirable properties:

  • Separates Nosferatus from Energy Neutralizers: Nosferatus for leeching cap, neuts for draining
  • Protects ships from being insta-drained by Nosferatus
  • Having a large capacitor capacity should be an advantage, not a drawback
  • Keeps nos effective for leeching cap


While many of the alternative solutions address one or more of these points, the mechanics we are now testing is the only one that satisfies all of the above.




Please reread one of the made proposals:

Originally by: N1fty
Edited by: N1fty on 01/08/2007 12:06:09
Edited by: N1fty on 01/08/2007 11:33:23

Current NOS change on SISI based on cap % difference is good. This % of recharge idea is a LOT BETTER, and I already had ideas about making NOS based on recharge rates.


IdeaLets say the mega regens at a peak of 20 cap/sec and compare the two systems:

ArrowOLD NOS:
First Nos takes 8.3 Cap/s : mega has 11.7 Cap/s regen.
Second Nos takes 16.6 Cap/s : mega has 3.4 Cap/s regen.
Third Nos takes 24.9 Cap/s : mega has -4.9 Cap/s regen.

Its the unstacked cap killing properties of nos that are the biggest issue, especially Large NOS vs frigs.


ArrowNEW NOS: Im going to say new nos takes 40% of regen.
First Nos takes 0.4*20 = 8 Cap/s : mega has 12 cap/s regen.
Second Nos takes 0.4*12 = 4.8 Cap/s : mega has 7.2 cap/s regen.
Third Nos takes 0.4*7.2 = 2.88 cap/s : mega has 4.32 cap/s regen.
TOTAL Nossed: 15.68 Cap/s leaving the mega with 4.32 cap/s






With this mechanic Neuts are clearly seperated from Noses.

Ships wont get zapped aka insta drained.

Having a big capacitor gives you more time before suffering from the Noses effects.

The Nos is still effective for leeching, although it can be debated if there should be a stacking penalty.

Additionally this change allows you to stay alive for a very long time although being nossed by using a cap booster.

So, why dont you try this one?

Probably the only valid argument against the NOS nerf I've read so far on this entire damn thread. That being said, I still like the Dev's idea better because if someone Neuts you to hell you can make a comeback by using bunches of NOS. Your idea will gimp it 2much


I dont see your point, because if he Neuts you at 20.83 while using 15,625 (at best skill with Heavy Neut I), you will still regen at 7,17 (Heavy Nos I) while reducing his regen down to 12 Cap/s.
Bottom line, he neuts, you nos, you win.
so Neuts only make sense in combo with Noses, and vice versa if you want to kill his cap, but nos will work fine alone to sustain your own tank with out being overpowered..


Misread your post, my bad. But now this just turns things back around against the neuts. Guy neuts you, so you nos him back, his cap is gone quick and yours is regained completely. NOS outperforms neuts in every way. Sure the NOS loses effectiveness as he gets lower, but his NEUTS are not only pointless to use vs. NOS but utterly detrimental vs. NOS.

At least with Dev suggestion guy neuts you, you NOS him back up till the point your capacitor match up in recharge % and the NOS stops. NOS would be the clear counter to neuts but not going to drain him to zip forever and ever after you turn it on to do this counter. So NEUTS are pointless to use vs. NOS, however you aren't sure to lose if you do get NOS'd while NEUTing.

Hellspawn01
Amarr
Posted - 2007.08.03 16:27:00 - [1315]
 

Ok, we have mixed thoughts about the pvp use of those changes. Im not that of a pvp expert like some of those long-post-writers above.

But what about the pve part?

Borasao
Ex Coelis
The Bantam Menace
Posted - 2007.08.03 16:39:00 - [1316]
 

Originally by: Hellspawn01
But what about the pve part?


Yeah... that's a big question that wasn't even touched in the Dev response. I know at one time I used NOS in PvE a bit (but don't anymore) and it definitely made a difference. If I were to guess, I think they'll say that it won't change for NOS on NPC ships but who knows.

Borasao
Ex Coelis
The Bantam Menace
Posted - 2007.08.03 16:44:00 - [1317]
 

Originally by: zero2espect
every day i'm going to post the same thing.

the only way to fix the problem is to create NOS SLOTS. make the USELESS Utility Slots on Amarr useful.



And others will keep posting every day that your solution does not address one (among several) of the key issues with a heavy NOS which is that it is free immunity from interceptors and it makes interceptors against large ships almost useless. If you have a NOS slot, you are *still* immune because simply making a dedicated NOS slot does not change the way the NOS works (against interceptors). Unless you're saying that you'd completely remove the ability for many ships to fit NOS at all... and that would be a little more painful than the currently proposed changes... just wait until you hear the whining when Dominix (and whoever else) pilots can't fit a NOS/NEUT *at all*.

Mari Onette
Amarr
Equilibrium.
Posted - 2007.08.03 16:44:00 - [1318]
 

Edited by: Mari Onette on 03/08/2007 17:18:48
Originally by: Aramendel
With max skills, no rigs, implants or damagemods and t1 ammo you get mostly EM 94.5 dps for the new version with 3 rocket launchers and a dual light pulse.

With 3 dual light pulse and 1 rocket launcher you deal 105 dps currently.

So you will deal less dps, not much though. If you shoot sansha/bloods you should do about the same dps as now due to hitting the weakest resistance more often.
Vs other targets it will deal a good deal less effective dps, though.


So basically, if I'm not firing EM rockets in a malediction, I loose 25% of my damage potental.
If feels to me there should be a 5% bonus to therm missiles as well.

PhantomVyper
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2007.08.03 16:52:00 - [1319]
 

Originally by: zero2espect
every day i'm going to post the same thing.

the only way to fix the problem is to create NOS SLOTS. make the USELESS Utility Slots on Amarr useful.

there is a difference in this thread b/n amarr need for nos and the overpowered gallente argument.

i am sick an tired of pilots stating how useful this will be for amarr....how does it benefit our laser and repping requirements to fit a neut and bring the targets cap down AFTER ours.

again..having 5 ships NOS another and have NONE OF THEM leach any cap out of the target is plain stupid.

end.



I don't care how many times you'll post it it doesn't make it true.

Why would you wan't to put a neut in an Amarr laser ship?! That doesn't make any sense... Yes Amarr is the race that is boosted the most from this change. Why? Because thanks to our heavy energy requirements to keep our guns and tanks running the Nos will continue to be just as effective in helping us with our cap problems, whille we will be safe from the overabundance of Nos that are in the game currently! How is this so dificult to understand?

And the nos slots proposal doesn't solve the problem that a single nos ruins an Interceptor pilot's day without having any real drawback to its user.

Finnally fit neuts to those 5 ships and the target will be out of energy in no time, or better yet, fit some guns in them and watch that target ship die...

Duhmad IbnRa
Gallente
EvE Dynamo
Posted - 2007.08.03 17:11:00 - [1320]
 

Originally by: RossP Zoyka
Originally by: Duhmad IbnRa
Originally by: RossP Zoyka
Originally by: Falun Assad
Edited by: Falun Assad on 02/08/2007 15:03:40
Originally by: CCP Fendahl


This specific mechanics was chosen for Nosferatus since it has the following desirable properties:

  • Separates Nosferatus from Energy Neutralizers: Nosferatus for leeching cap, neuts for draining
  • Protects ships from being insta-drained by Nosferatus
  • Having a large capacitor capacity should be an advantage, not a drawback
  • Keeps nos effective for leeching cap


While many of the alternative solutions address one or more of these points, the mechanics we are now testing is the only one that satisfies all of the above.




Please reread one of the made proposals:

Originally by: N1fty
Edited by: N1fty on 01/08/2007 12:06:09
Edited by: N1fty on 01/08/2007 11:33:23

Current NOS change on SISI based on cap % difference is good. This % of recharge idea is a LOT BETTER, and I already had ideas about making NOS based on recharge rates.


IdeaLets say the mega regens at a peak of 20 cap/sec and compare the two systems:

ArrowOLD NOS:
First Nos takes 8.3 Cap/s : mega has 11.7 Cap/s regen.
Second Nos takes 16.6 Cap/s : mega has 3.4 Cap/s regen.
Third Nos takes 24.9 Cap/s : mega has -4.9 Cap/s regen.

Its the unstacked cap killing properties of nos that are the biggest issue, especially Large NOS vs frigs.


ArrowNEW NOS: Im going to say new nos takes 40% of regen.
First Nos takes 0.4*20 = 8 Cap/s : mega has 12 cap/s regen.
Second Nos takes 0.4*12 = 4.8 Cap/s : mega has 7.2 cap/s regen.
Third Nos takes 0.4*7.2 = 2.88 cap/s : mega has 4.32 cap/s regen.
TOTAL Nossed: 15.68 Cap/s leaving the mega with 4.32 cap/s






With this mechanic Neuts are clearly seperated from Noses.

Ships wont get zapped aka insta drained.

Having a big capacitor gives you more time before suffering from the Noses effects.

The Nos is still effective for leeching, although it can be debated if there should be a stacking penalty.

Additionally this change allows you to stay alive for a very long time although being nossed by using a cap booster.

So, why dont you try this one?

Probably the only valid argument against the NOS nerf I've read so far on this entire damn thread. That being said, I still like the Dev's idea better because if someone Neuts you to hell you can make a comeback by using bunches of NOS. Your idea will gimp it 2much


I dont see your point, because if he Neuts you at 20.83 while using 15,625 (at best skill with Heavy Neut I), you will still regen at 7,17 (Heavy Nos I) while reducing his regen down to 12 Cap/s.
Bottom line, he neuts, you nos, you win.
so Neuts only make sense in combo with Noses, and vice versa if you want to kill his cap, but nos will work fine alone to sustain your own tank with out being overpowered..


Misread your post, my bad. But now this just turns things back around against the neuts. Guy neuts you, so you nos him back, his cap is gone quick and yours is regained completely. NOS outperforms neuts in every way. Sure the NOS loses effectiveness as he gets lower, but his NEUTS are not only pointless to use vs. NOS but utterly detrimental vs. NOS.




But that is the good thing, if you really wanna do cap warfare you have to use Noses and Neuts, just one of them wont work. If u just want to boost your cap, you can either use a booster(saves u from noses as well) or trade a weapon for a nos.
So mounting a nos means protection from nos or neuts but not dedicated cap killers, while neuts only make sense against ships without noses or in combo with a nos.
Thats a huge variety, which is imho desirable


Pages: first : previous : ... 40 41 42 43 [44] 45 46 47 48 ... : last (59)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only