EVE Search - [Issue] Stasis Webifiers Underpowered

All Channels

Assembly Hall

[Issue] Stasis Webifiers Underpowered

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
darkmancer	Posted - 2009.12.02 22:15:00 - [1] Edited by: darkmancer on 02/12/2009 22:20:11 Edited by: darkmancer on 02/12/2009 22:19:55 Webs used to kill speed with multiple webs pinning you to a spot, I order to stop this CCP reduced web strength from 90% down to 60% (tech2). I believe stasis web are now underpowered especially as scramblers can knock out MWDÆs which reduces the speed more than 2xwebs whilst only using a single mid slot. I would like to propose a boost to 66% (again tech 2 level), while a minor boost it will make webs more effective and crucially 2 webs will drop the target ship slightly below itÆs pre MWD speed, the targets continued cap drain and sig bloom compensating for no points and extra mid gained by just using a Scrambler. There will be more incentive to fit a web and thereÆs a serious reason now to use a Minmater recon, over the Gallente ones. --------------------------------- There's a simple solution to every problem. It is always invariably wrong
Maxsim Goratiev Gallente Imperial Tau Syndicate	Posted - 2010.01.31 20:26:00 - [2] You comparison is flawed. Scramblers and webs are not inter- replacable modules, they have completely different purposes. It's like comparing apples and oranges Please resize your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes.StevieSG
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2010.01.31 21:43:00 - [3] A module which reduces that stat of an enemy ship with 60% seems pretty good to me. And your comparison with scram is flawed. What is your scram going to do against ship with AB (yes they exist in pvp)? What are you going to do when a scram isnt enough to slow down your opponent, use a second scram?
Miss Xerox	Posted - 2010.01.31 22:14:00 - [4] 1090% agreed. The speed 'nerf' was utterly rendered moot when they also castrated webs. The end result... no change whatsoever, and an entire class of ships was rendered little better than dust collectors. A max skilled huginn/rapier needs 2 or 3 webs to slow down an interceptor, and even then they can easily get beyond web range before they're slowed down enough to catch. The old web strengths need to be returned.
darius mclever	Posted - 2010.01.31 22:31:00 - [5] the old webs were insta death for small ships. atm you got some chance to speed tank under web, unlike in the past. not supported.
Larkonis TrassIer Trolls From Outer Space	Posted - 2010.01.31 22:37:00 - [6] Originally by: darius mclever the old webs were insta death for small ships. atm you got some chance to speed tank under web, unlike in the past. not supported. This. If you want 90% webs then fly Serp shigs or Marauders.
Rastino	Posted - 2010.01.31 23:47:00 - [7] To be honest your comparison of webs and scrams are just insane. Scrams are used for pointing a target so he/she cant warp off. Try just webbing a target and he/she just warps of faster. I thing webs are balanced as they are. As just stated actually have a chance of speed tanking with webs as they are now. I you have problems catching them even when you web them you either need more webs or a faster ship. I can strongly recommend going minmatar for speed
Marcus Gideon Gallente Federal Defense Operations	Posted - 2010.02.01 00:41:00 - [8] First, what're we talking about here? - Afterburners (AB) boost speed by providing extra thrust. The ship stays relatively constant, but it gets pushed harder. (Personally, I'd like to see AB leave a trail or something, so you can tell when it's running) - Micro Warp Drives (MWD) boost speed by generating momentary warp bubbles. The ship goes into warp briefly, and then comes out, over and over. (Personally, I'd like to see the old shield bubble effect used for these. As the warp bubble forms and collapses repeatedly) - Warp Scramblers (Scram disrupt the guidance of the (micro) warp drive. They prevent the ship from resolving the destination properly. Standard warp drives resolve a destination several AU ahead, while MWD resolve a destination several meters ahead. If they can't resolve the destination, the safety protocols won't allow warp. - Stasis Webifiers (Web) reduce ship speed by ensnaring them in micro tractor beams. 1) According to all this, an Inty is the single worst ship to use as a tackler. Simply because, it's the smallest and lightest ship around. And attempting to "lasso" a Battleship with one, should only result in an Inty going along for the ride. 2) Webs also shouldn't have much of an effect on an MWD, because the ship is actually warping ahead of itself. So it should easily slip out of the tractor beams grasp with each pulse. The problem apparent here, is that some think the Scram and the Web are creating the same effect. Scram disables the module, while Web only gums up the works. One resolution would be to change the training necessary for Webs, to include the same kind of stuff as needed for tractor beams. Because there is no real EW involved in a Web. If you really want to get down to it, then the two boosters should have their own specific counters. MWD / Scram and AB / Web And they should have no effect on the other. You want to be the official tackler, then you have to fit both. One to slow them down, and one to keep them from running away.
steave435 Final Agony	Posted - 2010.02.01 03:24:00 - [9] Multiple webs on 1 target each increase the effect, multiple scrams don't. A webbed MWDing target may go faster then a scrammed target, but the webbed ship has a much larger sig and is easier to lock/hit. However, my ashimu would love to get 99% webs, so yes please
Harotak THE FINAL STAND Black Star Alliance	Posted - 2010.02.01 03:54:00 - [10] I would just raise the webs to something like 70-75%. The nerf was needed, but was too heavy-handed IMO. Alternatly they could make it falloff based where at point-blank you get -90% speed and at longer ranges the strength is reduced.
darius mclever	Posted - 2010.02.01 04:09:00 - [11] Originally by: steave435 Multiple webs on 1 target each increase the effect, multiple scrams don't. A webbed MWDing target may go faster then a scrammed target, but the webbed ship has a much larger sig and is easier to lock/hit. However, my ashimu would love to get 99% webs, so yes please your neut bonus is already a 99% "web" :p
IcarusNardella	Posted - 2010.02.01 05:27:00 - [12] I would like to see an increase to 66% seems reasonable.
The Djego Minmatar Hellequin Inc.	Posted - 2010.02.01 08:16:00 - [13] Originally by: Harotak I would just raise the webs to something like 70-75%. The nerf was needed, but was too heavy-handed IMO. Alternatly they could make it falloff based where at point-blank you get -90% speed and at longer ranges the strength is reduced. I agree here. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
Perrigrene	Posted - 2010.02.01 17:05:00 - [14] Just add more webs, noobs, PVP orientated people always complain about wanna be 'solo players' here you are asking to make a module stronger when the solution is to have more people using that module. Bring in nubs as your web/scram peeps and train them up, more people in 00/low wherever you are fighting.
chatgris Quantum Cats Syndicate	Posted - 2010.02.01 20:44:00 - [15] Edited by: chatgris on 01/02/2010 20:44:23 Originally by: darius mclever the old webs were insta death for small ships. atm you got some chance to speed tank under web, unlike in the past. not supported. This. Not Supported.
Dav Varan	Posted - 2010.02.02 02:16:00 - [16] No Thanks , old hugs/raps were far to op in gate camps even with reliable mwd. Now without reliable mwd any increase in ranged web power just takes us back to the bad old days.
Mioelnir Minmatar Cataclysm Enterprises Ev0ke	Posted - 2010.02.02 16:19:00 - [17] The real issue here is that warp scrams are once again powerful one slot 2 big boost modules like sensor boosters / damps / tracking computers etc used to be. Yet CCP introduced them without script. Therefor, not supported.
Allan Sheperd	Posted - 2010.02.02 23:00:00 - [18] I don't know how to fit a full tackle onto a ship because I'm a total noob, or how to get into the right range. I want my battleship to be a solopwnmobile in low sec and I need stasis webs jacked up again to do it. Please CSM make this idea pass. I can't imagine having to fit a scrambler onto my ship AND a webifier.
Kayakaue	Posted - 2010.02.05 10:47:00 - [19] Edited by: Kayakaue on 05/02/2010 10:47:20 I agree yes and no. To increase to much the power of the web is not the solution. The problem it's the same race (minmatar) have bonus on the speed tanking and web. If you include the new ammunition. They are some problems. CCP need to nerf something. Perhaps to make a new module like "web +" with extra range about 20 km but with web strength 30 %. Or to add some bonus and each racial interceptor on the range of the web.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2010.02.05 11:50:00 - [20] Webs are in near perfect balance with the overall ship performance. All we really need is an amplifier to broaden the fitting options .. the 'God-WebÖ' is dead and buried, thank Goddess. Low slot modules, fashioned after same principle as the Sig. Amp. used by ECM boats. Web amplifier: Increase web strength. Dampener Amplifier: Increase dampener strength. Warp Disruption amplifier: Increase scramble range. Make bonus (T1/T2) 5-7.5%/10-15% with similar fitting requirements as Sig. Amps. Gives ships something to fit other than buffer/speed while allowing for highly specialised setups. NB:Tracking disruption does not need more power so intentionally left out. Perhaps decrease bas mod stats and add amplifier.
The Djego Minmatar Hellequin Inc.	Posted - 2010.02.05 20:34:00 - [21] Originally by: Hirana Yoshida Webs are in near perfect balance with the overall ship performance. All we really need is an amplifier to broaden the fitting options .. the 'God-WebÖ' is dead and buried, thank Goddess. Low slot modules, fashioned after same principle as the Sig. Amp. used by ECM boats. Web amplifier: Increase web strength. Dampener Amplifier: Increase dampener strength. Warp Disruption amplifier: Increase scramble range. Make bonus (T1/T2) 5-7.5%/10-15% with similar fitting requirements as Sig. Amps. Gives ships something to fit other than buffer/speed while allowing for highly specialised setups. NB:Tracking disruption does not need more power so intentionally left out. Perhaps decrease bas mod stats and add amplifier. Except on the Huggin\Rapier this would be complete useless to the ships that actual would need stronger webs. Even on the Huggin\Rapier it would reduce the options for Nano or TEs to get some useful range. The only thing this will bring are more effective cheap thrown away T1 tackling frigs, for gangs that already have zero issues to throw more than just 1-2 on the target... Also lol at 'God-WebÖ', most nano fits where still kicking around 400-600m/s after a single web and I have not seen anybody that fitted a tank instead of nano complain about web range back in the days. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2010.02.06 09:03:00 - [22] Edited by: Hirana Yoshida on 06/02/2010 09:03:07 Originally by: The Djego Except on the Huggin\Rapier this would be complete useless to the ships that actual would need stronger webs. Even on the Huggin\Rapier it would reduce the options for Nano or TEs to get some useful range. How does adding options become a reduction? Current Dual-web is about equal to old single-web, by increasing strength using low-slots (or rigs for that matter) you open the door to much more varied fittings. The problem Rapier/Hugginn pilots is struggling with is of their own making. They insist on having buffer, damage, range, tracking, stopping power etc. all at once and scream when they realise they have to forego one or two. Originally by: The Djego The only thing this will bring are more effective cheap thrown away T1 tackling frigs, for gangs that already have zero issues to throw more than just 1-2 on the target... Frigates (and cruisers to some extent) have sod all low-slots to spare. It will always be much better to use twin-webs and tank/speed the lows. Originally by: The Djego Also lol at 'God-WebÖ', most nano fits where still kicking around 400-600m/s after a single web and I have not seen anybody that fitted a tank instead of nano complain about web range back in the days. Screw nano's, webs were never a counter to them, at least not on their own (needed neuts, drones et al. on top). I was referring to the effect of 90% speed reduction allowing ships to kill anything they wanted of smaller size. Can still do so but it actually requires skill and presence to do as you wiggle around to minimize transversal and what not.
The Djego Minmatar Hellequin Inc.	Posted - 2010.02.06 13:36:00 - [23] Originally by: Hirana Yoshida How does adding options become a reduction? Current Dual-web is about equal to old single-web, by increasing strength using low-slots (or rigs for that matter) you open the door to much more varied fittings. The problem Rapier/Hugginn pilots is struggling with is of their own making. They insist on having buffer, damage, range, tracking, stopping power etc. all at once and scream when they realise they have to forego one or two. Amarr can reduce incoming damage by TDs and neut down ships that need cap to attack/tank. Falcon can shut down 100% of the damage a ship can do. Arazu/Lach can prevent getting locked at range(yes it is poor atm since damps are crapy). Hugginn/Rapier can't do this, they have to relay on range and speed plus some buffer to "tank". It does fail pretty quickly against ranged DPS like missiles, lasers and aks in most of the cases already. There is not a reason to diminishing this any more. Originally by: Hirana Yoshida Frigates (and cruisers to some extent) have sod all low-slots to spare. It will always be much better to use twin-webs and tank/speed the lows. This is the reason why I stated it would be useless, at least for small gang/solo where the better web would be required. Originally by: Hirana Yoshida Screw nano's, webs were never a counter to them, at least not on their own (needed neuts, drones et al. on top). It was good, true, but you had to commit to a fight, if you chose fighting in web range. If you engaged at this range you had to accept that the fight will end there in one or the other way. The ability to avoid this was in my opinion the most powerful ability the nano fits offered and made them this popular. Originally by: Hirana Yoshida I was referring to the effect of 90% speed reduction allowing ships to kill anything they wanted of smaller size. Can still do so but it actually requires skill and presence to do as you wiggle around to minimize transversal and what not. It was actually around one ship size down(no, you didn't hit frigs in close orbit with bs turrets), plus the unnerfed drones and pre nerf nos. You got 2 options, neuts and drones to work with at point blank atm, minimize transversal or chose range is a odd statement since a MWD ship without MWD moves nowhere and you have not the option to control range/transversal. If you kill somebody with turrets only he screwed up or you managed to kill him at range. In general I only miss the powerful web only on a few ships so giving a role bonus to them for it would be fine to me. Something like 37.5%(60% webs turning into 75% webs) + a proper tracking boost would fix most of the damage QR did to blaster PVP. Hugginn/Rapier also need something like this, to add a proper force to her niche role(plus something that helps TPs or make them more useful as EW). ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
darius mclever	Posted - 2010.02.06 16:15:00 - [24] djego sorry but most of the problems of the huggin/rapier apply to other races too: amarr - missiles/drones can still drive them off even when the turrets dont hit anymore. falcons - fofs/drones and of course the same works also against gallente recons. so it isnt just a problem for matari recons.
The Djego Minmatar Hellequin Inc.	Posted - 2010.02.07 00:38:00 - [25] Originally by: darius mclever djego sorry but most of the problems of the huggin/rapier apply to other races too: amarr - missiles/drones can still drive them off even when the turrets dont hit anymore. falcons - fofs/drones and of course the same works also against gallente recons. so it isnt just a problem for matari recons. I disagree, since drones/FOF will allays work while other recons still hold the advantage to prevent other ships from killing them. Also the point was mostly directed at "you can spare this slots easy, since you already have all things you need." what is simply not the case on Huginn or Rapier.
darius mclever	Posted - 2010.02.07 00:41:00 - [26] you can still dictate range with a rapier. iirc you can get up to 60k web range. that is not enough to negate dmg or GTFO?
The Djego Minmatar Hellequin Inc.	Posted - 2010.02.07 01:02:00 - [27] Originally by: darius mclever you can still dictate range with a rapier. iirc you can get up to 60k web range. that is not enough to negate dmg or GTFO? 60km with a faction web. Also most of the time you will be within point range of your target(if not, you give it a free instawarp out of it). ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
Gigiarc	Posted - 2010.02.07 03:07:00 - [28] Not supported. Current web strength is fine.
Garr Anders Thukk U	Posted - 2010.02.16 14:54:00 - [29] What about scripts for webs? Leave unscripted webs as they are now, but add script so you can: increase range but at a lower speed reduction lower range but increase speed reduction In general the current web is a bit "under powered" but due the ability to stack multiple on one target boosting the effect of one would be IMHO to much. Scripting though would allow a higher variety in engagement distance and fuzzing the "simple" avoid 7.5 for scrams, avoid 10k for webs, avoid 20 for disruptor engagements. Supported as a discussion could be health with scripting as option. ----- Garr Anders "The only winning move is not to play" is about the best damn advice anyone can get regarding arguing over the internet. - referring to the Movie WarGames 1983
Liol Wongsta The Arrow Project Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2010.02.16 15:15:00 - [30] Originally by: Garr Anders What about scripts for webs? Leave unscripted webs as they are now, but add script so you can: increase range but at a lower speed reduction lower range but increase speed reduction In general the current web is a bit "under powered" but due the ability to stack multiple on one target boosting the effect of one would be IMHO to much. Scripting though would allow a higher variety in engagement distance and fuzzing the "simple" avoid 7.5 for scrams, avoid 10k for webs, avoid 20 for disruptor engagements. Supported as a discussion could be health with scripting as option. Scripted webs i like :-p My 100/120km range fleet boosted rapier's especially would love them!

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.