Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Scaraith Baal
|
Posted - 2009.10.18 20:38:00 -
[1]
Sensor Dampeners seem to be the poor brothers of ECM reducing your targets range by varying degrees and with varying levels of success and don't seem to be of much use currently in the game will stop
I would suggest the following change to Sensor Dampeners:
Instead of dampening a ship's targeting ability they should no longer be called Sensor Dampeners but Module Dampeners.
A Module Dampener would affect one type of slots on your targets ship, either high mid or low, randomly "turning off" one or more of your target ships modules in that high, mid or low slot.
I understand ECM effectively "turns of" all of the modules on a given ship if successful.
A module dampener would randomly turn off certain modules on a given ship if successful.
The way to balance the two then could be that ECM is more difficult to achieve than Module Dampening, giving players a choice between the high risk, but highly effective tactic of ECM, or the lower risk but possibly less effective tactic of module dampening.
This would mean possibly nerfing ECM a little to balance it against module dampening but I believe it would provide a more interesting contrast between Caldari and Gallente, and could result in some very interesting situations where you can target a ship with no problems but for example your web, after burner or even armor repairer is not working.
just an idea, let me know what everybody thinks
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2009.10.18 20:42:00 -
[2]
you are wrong. ECM does not turn of modules on a ship. it just breaks your lock. and weapons/remote repairs require a locked target to be activated.
and no, a sensor damp shouldnt just randomly disable modules.
if damps should be buffed is to be discussed, but your idea is too unbalanced.
and btw: the best combination is a ECM and sensor damp ship in combination. break lock with ECM and make relock time insanely huge with scan res damp.
just saying.
|
Realisation
|
Posted - 2009.10.18 21:03:00 -
[3]
Originally by: darius mclever you are wrong. ECM does not turn of modules on a ship. it just breaks your lock. and weapons/remote repairs require a locked target to be activated.
and no, a sensor damp shouldnt just randomly disable modules.
if damps should be buffed is to be discussed, but your idea is too unbalanced.
Firstly I realise ECM doesnt not turn off modules, that is why I said it "effectively" turns off the modules if successful, which is correct.
Secondly, WHY would this idea be unbalanced, you have given no argument to back up your statement.
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2009.10.18 21:13:00 -
[4]
randomly disabling modules? even unprojected modules?
"next target is the raven, please all unload your low-slot-disable script and load your mid-slot-disable script so we can kill the tank faster"
|
Realisation
|
Posted - 2009.10.18 21:21:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Realisation on 18/10/2009 21:21:57 Yeah, obviously so it is not too powerful, only allow that player to choose what group of modules they want to affect ie high, mid or low and then randomly choose a module or module in that rack to disable.
It would mean that Dampening could effect aspects of a ship that ECM cant, ie armor repair, webs etc differentiating it in a way that it never has been before from ECM.
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2009.10.18 22:27:00 -
[6]
Edited by: darius mclever on 18/10/2009 22:31:28 you underestaminate the power of gangs.
if you have 10 people in gang and all focus their scripts on a certain slot row. you can totally nullify those modules in that slot group.
disabling all shield tanked modules on a raven, all armor tanked modules on an armor tanker. or just lock up all weapons. what you suggest is *worse* than ECM and people complain that the total lock down of projected modules is already bad.
and how would you protect yourself against your module? current sensor damps have sensor boosters as counter. ECM got ECCM.
your idea is too overpowered and unbalanced. you could balance it with "only one module in total can be activated on a ship". that would defeat the "gangs just lock down whole slot lines". but then it would become kind of useless again. also it is again something that should work on random base. that sucks with ECM already.
so far i havent seen anything positive in your proposal.
(edit: fix typos)
|
Scaraith Baal
|
Posted - 2009.10.18 23:21:00 -
[7]
Ah the old "if ten people used it at once" objection.
yes I concede, in a ten on one encounter it would give a significant disadvantage to the ship being ganged up on, however this is also true for all the other forms of electronic warfare as well. Ten ships all fitting ECM or tracking disrupters would be just as bad if not worse and would be able to disable more than just one ship, so I dont see how you objection is relevant.
|
Reggie Stoneloader
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.10.18 23:34:00 -
[8]
I dunno, man. In my experience, a guy with some sensor damps on his ship and a clever setup can use them to great effect. I'd say 3 out of 10 times I've been solo ganked in 0.0 has been some dude in a cruiser-class ship damping my ratting machine to myopia and needling me from 23km away. Crusades: Security Status |
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2009.10.19 00:15:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Scaraith Baal Ah the old "if ten people used it at once" objection.
yes I concede, in a ten on one encounter it would give a significant disadvantage to the ship being ganged up on, however this is also true for all the other forms of electronic warfare as well. Ten ships all fitting ECM or tracking disrupters would be just as bad if not worse and would be able to disable more than just one ship, so I dont see how you objection is relevant.
10 ECM wouldnt offline his tank 10 tracking disruptor wouldnt offline his tank
he could still tank until reinforcement arrive. he could still tank while his drones kill the tackler. your module is a WORSE version of ECM.
|
Syberbolt8
Gallente Knights of Kador Freedom of Elbas
|
Posted - 2009.10.19 01:07:00 -
[10]
while I don't like the OP's idea, as it is very over powered, I do find it funny that the sensor damp goes to the race that has to dry hump its targets to deal any real dmg, negating the effects. Support the DEAD HORSE POS's |
|
Dammus
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.10.19 01:09:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Syberbolt8 I don't like the OP's idea
^ this
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |