Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Shin Ra
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 15:06:00 -
[1]
Currently on tranquility these modules allow you to effectivly incapacitate a ship at long range and have a significant effect at medium range. They do not work so well at ultra long range or at close range but sometimes still are effective in these situations.
On test server two things have changed: 1) The +4 module stacking penalty comes into effect meaning that any more than 4 sensor dampners or tracking disruptors on a target are next to useless. For example, 10 scorptions with 80 remote sensor dampners have almost no difference to 1 scorp with 4 remote sensor dampners on a target. This in itself is not such a big deal, however when combined with problem 2 it causes a major nerf.
2) First I'm talking about remote sensor dampners. The calculation for dampning a ship with 0 sensor boosters is very similar to what it currently is on tranquility. However, as soon as you add sensor boosters this goes out the window. Example 1: 1 ship using 4x t2 dampners vs 1 raven with no sensor boosters. (assuming max skills). 4 t2 dampners bring an unbooster raven down to a locking range of 8,895m. Very similar to before.
Example 2: 1 ship using 4x t2 dampners vs1 raven with 2x t2 sensor boosters (assuming max sklls). 4 t2 dampners bring this raven down to a locking range of 108km! A 100km difference.
These tests were done within dampner optimal range, meaning that at say 120km, 4 dampners would not always be active, so you are talking an even bigger locking range for the target ship.
See table of stats here
If we take the case of an armageddon with 2x t2 sensor boosters. There is no way to dampen this ship below 93km. 20x t2 dampners active within optimal result in a locking range of 93km for this ship. This is because of the change in calculation AND the stacking nerf both apply.
Next: Tracking disruptors. An overpowered module some may say. Yet on test server, any ship with 2x tracking computer is 95% immune to the ffects of tracking disuptors. 4x tracking disruptors result in only a minute change in optimal and tracking for a ship with 2x tracking computers.
What does this mean?
It means that say a mega with 2x sensor boosters and 2x tracking computers is effectively immune from both remote sensor dampners and tracking disruptors. Add in 2 backup arrays, and your ship is 99% immune from all electronic warfare.
I'm well aware the the current methodolgy for countering Dampners and tracking disruptors is unbalanced, however this solution is equally unbalanced in the other direction.
So all those people that spent months training up electronics may be a little miffed at the idea that their modules are next to uselss in the majoirty of combat engagements. I ask the Devs to look into this and test it before it hits tranquility. There was no mention of this in any dev blog, so I'm not entirely sure if this was intended.
Shin Ra BURN EDEN
|
keepiru
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 15:34:00 -
[2]
Welcome to the new stacking penalty. This affects painters on an MWD'ing target in exactly the same way.
It is - imo - a functionality bug. I hope youve bugreported it. ------------- Where are the missile damage implants? ;)
|
Rexthor Hammerfists
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 15:37:00 -
[3]
i like that, as ecm have their eccm as counters, the dampeners and trackinf dises have their counters boosted now, too.
oerfectly in line imo.
now u rlly gotta decide if u take a electronic warafare mod, or a sensotbooster/tracking mod.
|
Morealis
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 15:41:00 -
[4]
So basicly your saying that it totaly ****s up your lame way of fighting with long range ravens setup with dampners/trackin disruptors and 5 warpcore stabilizers.
Signature removed -zhuge ([email protected]) |
Trey Azagthoth
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 15:43:00 -
[5]
Lol, the veritable clock is ticking on your tactics Shin, might be time to train up some other skills
|
keepiru
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 15:44:00 -
[6]
No, no, its a bug.
Positive and negative modules should go into separate stacks for penalising.
However, the new stacking mechanics useus a sorting algorythm and its always putting the negative modules at the end. This makes certain setups completely immune to negative effects, and thats wrong. Those setups should be counterable too.
With those numbers, a sniperthron/poc with 3/4 sensor/tracking modules is virtually immune to damping and disrupting, which is just as ghey as an 8-stab geddon, and much more broken. ------------- Where are the missile damage implants? ;)
|
Liu Kaskakka
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 15:45:00 -
[7]
|
Flourite
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 15:48:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Shin Ra OMGNO
Want some cheese with that?
|
Joshua Foiritain
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 15:48:00 -
[9]
Wow talk about making Gallente E-war ships worthless ------------------
[Coreli Corporation Mainframe] |
hired goon
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 15:54:00 -
[10]
All we need is for this stacking nerf to effect WCS too, and I'd say BE are pretty thukked. -omg-
|
|
Shin Ra
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 15:57:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Joshua Foiritain Wow talk about making Gallente E-war ships worthless
Good point josh. While the current stats completly destroy the BE setup (its been a long time coming), they also destroy both gallante and minmitar (they use tracking disruptors yes?) ew ships. Furthermore, this nullifies any ship that would previously use these mods (example fleet setup tempest with 2 dampners). Or any HAC/cruiser/frig with tracking disruptors. The list goes on.
Getting one over on BE is always a great thing. Is nerfing these mods in this manner a step too far?
Several.
|
Shin Ra
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 15:58:00 -
[12]
Originally by: hired goon All we need is for this stacking nerf to effect WCS too, and I'd say BE are pretty thukked.
The stabs aren't the key to a BE raven, its the dampners. Without them there is no setup.
|
keepiru
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 15:59:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Joshua Foiritain Wow talk about making Gallente E-war ships worthless
It makes all e-war apart from target jamming worthless.
And if this bunch of little children would stop and think about for a second and quit doing the playground "point and laugh" routine, they'd realise how serious a bug this is. ------------- Where are the missile damage implants? ;)
|
hired goon
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 16:20:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Shin Ra
Originally by: hired goon All we need is for this stacking nerf to effect WCS too, and I'd say BE are pretty thukked.
The stabs aren't the key to a BE raven, its the dampners. Without them there is no setup.
But the stabs are the key to the controversial K/D ratio, and essentially, the success.
But, yes if your readings are correct I hope it is a bug and is fixed ASAP... running out of time on patch deployment though -omg-
|
AlphA13
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 16:34:00 -
[15]
this should be a bug for sure, otherwise it¦s again all about the numbers of ships u bring with u.
it¦s not only a point of balance, but a point of logik, that 2 sensor booster shouldn¦t be able to completly counter 4 dampner/ tracking disruptor that is effecting the ship. (2 tracking enhancer counter 2 tracking disruptor = fair)
for the so called "BE raven" u sacrify ur tank u need to ew in a way, a normal setup mostly consists of 1-2 sensor booster anyway.. with the ability to tank or gank. Yeah yeah u can say paper rock scissor... but if u think for 2 seconds about it u¦ll see the difference.
take other ships into that aswell.. I¦m pretty sure everyone uses 1-2 of these mods in any fleet to surprise and stuff.. now u have nothing.. if eve starts to get to predictable, then u won¦t have much fun playing it.. atleast imo. In two days tomorrow will be yesterday |
Blackest Sheep
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 16:54:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Shin Ra ...minmitar (they use tracking disruptors yes?) ew ships.
Actually, Amarr use tracking disruptors, Minmatar have the great target painter.
We tested this, too, and were quite surprised. I hope that CCP does not intend it to be this way. Either calculate certain effect separately (i.e. all negative in one stack, all positive in one stack) or at least alternate them (positive, negative, positive, etc). Otherwise a ship with 2 sensor boosters and 2 tracking computer will be all but immune to those sorts of EW, while having the added bonuses of those systems.
It is not like ECCM, where the modules only protect and do not provide any benefit if ECM is not used. Because sensor boosters and tracking computers already have a very beneficial impact on combat, even if no EW modules are used against the ship in question.
|
Tharbad
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 17:07:00 -
[17]
So, what your saying is that because both positive and negative mods affect the same stat, they're under the same stacking penalty, and thus two of any mod gives you opponent a max of two counter-mods before they become worthless...? Ooooh dear thats not good. There needs to be separate stacks, or you will be unable to actually EW a snipership - its guaranteed to have tracking comps and sensor boosters,and with 3-4 lows freed by not stacking moe than 4 damage mods, there's room for backups too. This is pretty unbalancing for EW specced players, and renders the Lachesis/Arazu useless - and its not that chummy for Rook/Falcon and Curse/Pilgrim either.
|
dalman
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 17:38:00 -
[18]
As you can see here, I've already raised these concerns. However, I didn't test it, so I initially though it would be the other way
Drink up, shoot in. Let the beating begin. Distributor of pain. Your loss becomes my gain...
|
Naughty Boy
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 18:17:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Naughty Boy on 14/12/2005 18:27:12 It's suprizing that they decided to sort the effects in the first place, as dalman first raised the concern the sorting necessarily will have such a "binary" effect, with either 2 "offensive" modules (as it could have been), either 2 "defensive" modules (as it is now) largely determining the final effect of all mods affecting the same attribute.
I really doubt that it is an effect they wanted to achieve with the stacking penalty. Edit: the graphs in this post (in paticular the last, showing what is described above) were made with the formula, and show the "binary" effect with sensor boosters/dampeners as it could have been with another criteria for sorting effects, and as it is now (as was tested).
Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- Spreadsheet - Damage @ range. Check for updates/known issues and report bugs/problems/questions/other feedback. |
Dave Tehsulei
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 18:21:00 -
[20]
had to test it before i would believe it
i really hope his is unintentional and i REALLY hope its changed before rmr goes live
|
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 18:40:00 -
[21]
"No, no, its a bug.
Positive and negative modules should go into separate stacks for penalising."
Pretty much the important bit of thread.
Something to bug report, and make a thread about in the Ship&Modules section, maybe? o.O;
|
Shin Ra
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 18:51:00 -
[22]
Originally by: j0sephine "No, no, its a bug.
Positive and negative modules should go into separate stacks for penalising."
Pretty much the important bit of thread.
Something to bug report, and make a thread about in the Ship&Modules section, maybe? o.O;
U want to do it? I can fee the flames already if I do it.
|
Dianabolic
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 18:58:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Shin Ra
Originally by: j0sephine "No, no, its a bug.
Positive and negative modules should go into separate stacks for penalising."
Pretty much the important bit of thread.
Something to bug report, and make a thread about in the Ship&Modules section, maybe? o.O;
U want to do it? I can fee the flames already if I do it.
At least you can guarentee it will be seen ;)
Originally by: Thomas Jefferson A society that will trade a little liberty for a little security will lose both and deserve neither.
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 19:06:00 -
[24]
"At least you can guarentee it will be seen ;)"
Aye; i would do it Shin, but i think it'll get much more publicity and faster reaction of you do that ^^
|
keepiru
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 19:21:00 -
[25]
Tbh, im seriously worried that this will go live as is now.
It doesent really affect me much, as these days I'm just a humble mission-w***e, but the pvp implications are quite staggering just for its effect of ew in normal setups, without even touching how much it shafts 3/4 of ew specialists, and 3/4 of the ew ships...
But with what, 42 miniutes to go... ------------- Where are the missile damage implants? ;)
|
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2005.12.14 21:45:00 -
[26]
Totally agreed with Shin Ra. This bug needs to go, and well right now.
Most of combat revisited and the desired effects it brings depends on combat becoming more diverse then tank v gank mathematics. Electronic warfare is THE key tool to force people to think harder about their setups then in the past.
Now, as long as you have 4 medslots, you are effectively immune to all non-ecm EW. Combined with two backups in your lows, this heralds in a nw age of cookie-cutter setups:
high: guns and nos. med: tracking comp, sensor booster low: tank+damage control+ damage mod+ backups.
Now, seeing that that is the most logical setup we end up with for fleet and grup combat given that EW has little to no effect on it, what do we end up with:
Slower gankage.
That is all.
Secondly, what use are tech2 electronic warfare oriented cruisers when electronic warfare is of so little use against anything the size of a cruiser or larger ?
Nope, definately broken to hell. Electronic warfare as it was was not broken, altho some modules leave a bit little to counter them with in small numbered combat, they were quite balanced for larger number combat at least. And most importantly, combined with the RmR changes they would have resulted in far more varied fleet makeups, different shiptypes used, and new tactical opportunities.
This bug singlehandedly nukes that prospect. _______________________________________________
Power to the players !
|
Alex Harumichi
|
Posted - 2005.12.15 10:04:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Joshua Foiritain Wow talk about making Gallente E-war ships worthless
Yup. The Gallente EW ones become total Ares-level trash fodder, and most of the Amarr ones do too.
The Curse remains ok, since with the drones and nosfe bonus it's strong even without tracking disrupters. But it *will* hurt the Curse, too.
Half the EW in the game made useless. Whopee. This has to be an unintended side effect, not something deliberate.
With the new Gallente EW cruisers already looking like the weakest of the bunch (bonuses on Lachesis are very disappointing), this is the final nail in the coffin.
|
Alex Harumichi
|
Posted - 2005.12.15 10:10:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Alex Harumichi on 15/12/2005 10:10:32 In addition, to the people who didn't realize it yet: this will make fitting a sensor booster and tracking booster on ships a no-brainer from now on, since they both provide huge "normal" benefits *and* effectively make you immune to half the EW in the game. Do we really want more cookie-cutter setups?
Oh, and seems this same bug makes target painters useless vs. MWD:ing ships. Whopee. A third form of EW nerfed.
What's left? ECM, preferably on Caldari ships. We'll be back with only BB and Scorp doing EW, everyone else in gank/tank mode. Not good for the game.
|
Theron Gyrow
|
Posted - 2005.12.15 10:17:00 -
[29]
Obvious fix for this: beneficial effects get their stacking penalties, negative effects get theirs, after which they are multiplied together.
That still would nerf the cumulative EW pretty badly, but it was probably a bit overpowered before.
-- Gradient's forum |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |