| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Toshiro Khan
   |
Posted - 2006.01.12 14:23:00 -
[151]
The main problem with the damps and tracking disrupters is the ships that have bonuses directly related to these mods are more or less useless because of the stacking penalties.
So why not, fix it so these ships have a stealth bonus that negates the stacking penalty in some way and leave the changes as they are for the rest of the ships in eve.. These mods was overpowered to start with and the damp raven was basically an "I WIN" button and would require fleets that rely on dampeners and tracking disrupters as a for or protection to have ships that are geared towards these mods flying with them.
|
Gronsak
|
Posted - 2006.01.12 14:35:00 -
[152]
 Originally by: Toshiro Khan
The main problem with the damps and tracking disrupters is the ships that have bonuses directly related to these mods are more or less useless because of the stacking penalties.
So why not, fix it so these ships have a stealth bonus that negates the stacking penalty in some way and leave the changes as they are for the rest of the ships in eve.. These mods was overpowered to start with and the damp raven was basically an "I WIN" button and would require fleets that rely on dampeners and tracking disrupters as a for or protection to have ships that are geared towards these mods flying with them.
or use the ships with those bonous to hit ships that dont use tracking comps/sensor boosters
as an example: hit ur tracking desrupters on a harpy
an anotehr example hit ur damps on a raven, on hacs, on cruseirs, on frigs, on af
its not a useless mod, rahter a VERY powerfull mod vs half the ships in game
|
Ithildin
|
Posted - 2006.01.12 14:41:00 -
[153]
Gronsak, you just can't get it, do you? You want to dampen the ships that tend to HAVE sensor boosters. You don't want to waste valuable EW on support ships that are so fragile that a good shell up their arse does the job better.
Nyx is Erebos' wife. Together they have two children, Thanatos and Charon. Why is Charon Caldari?! |
Gabriel Karade
|
Posted - 2006.01.12 14:50:00 -
[154]
Originally by: Masta Killa
What's with all the dramaqueens saying damps are useless?
If you wanna put 4 damps on someone who's got 2-4 sensorboosters then you won't get much results, kinda like if you put 4x multis on someone who's got 2-4 backup arrays (I think 2 is more than enough) you get no results.
Wipe those tears and find another overpowered thing to abuse plz.
Try reading the whole thread before making as ass of yourself.
two Sensor booster I completely negate the effect of four Remote sensor Damper II's on a Celestis. Not any Celestis, I'm talking Cruiser V, Signal Supression IV, i.e. four -68.8% damps vs. two +50% booster.
If you don't understand that STFU.
(\_/)
(O.o)
(> <) "That's no ordinary rabbit!...that's the most foul, cruel and bad-tempered rodent you ever set eyes on" |
Chith
|
Posted - 2006.01.12 14:54:00 -
[155]
For a long, long time damps and td's were horribly overpowered. Like just about any other system in eve, when things get "balanced" it's rarely a perfect balance but is usually much closer to an even system. I think that the present state of damps and tds reflects this. The way things are currently reflects an imperfect system with flaws, but none so great as those we had before the changes. |
Masta Killa
|
Posted - 2006.01.12 19:33:00 -
[156]
I'm an avid user of the damp raven and yet I'm not whining.
Why you ask?
I (and Evolution  ) adapt instead of breaking down, crying and then trolling the forums about this huge "injustice" done upon you.
Ps. Dear whatever your name is, a scorp with 8 of the right racials can and will jam almost anything, even if just with a 45% success rate like with carriers. I fail to see your point tbh; anyone with 4x sensor boosters doesn't really have much defenses but you complain because you can't damp them to 10 km locking range anymore?
--------------------------------------
|
Gabriel Karade
|
Posted - 2006.01.12 19:45:00 -
[157]
Edited by: Gabriel Karade on 12/01/2006 19:52:55
Masta Killa, you are the one who is trolling here.
Answer me this: Should two TECH1 modules, completely negate four TECH2 modules on a dedicated EW boat?
Why not take this further?
 Lets say tanking modules vs. damage modules start stacking against each other. Great, I fit 3 energised adaptive nanos and any damage mods past your first stop working. Woot!
Or better still, lets stack WCS and disrupters, Oh noes! someone has fitted 3 WCS and is now immune to an entire fleet of tacklers!
Groovy huh?
(\_/)
(O.o)
(> <) "That's no ordinary rabbit!...that's the most foul, cruel and bad-tempered rodent you ever set eyes on" |
Derran
|
Posted - 2006.01.12 20:00:00 -
[158]
Originally by: Blind Fear
EW being effective is not bad.
EW being uncounterable is bad.
Until RMR, dampeners were not counterable.
Now they are. Are they underpowered? Not IMO. Just as going up against someone with 3 ECCM means your ECM isnt useful, going up against someone with 3 SBs means that your dampeners arent useful.
You took advantage of the broken nature of dampeners for a very long time. Now they are fixed. You dont hear me crying about how my signal dispursion SP is now a total waste because my target can counter my EW now.
They aren't fixed. Sensor boosters countered them. Since when were damps uncounterable? Sensor Boosters were also nice to have even without thinking you'd face sensor dampeners.
What I have actually experienced in combat and know about dampeners as they work now is this. We had 5 bombers going against a Megathron. I had 2 dampeners fitted and the others had 1 dampener for each other ship. End result: The megathron locked my ship in a few seconds and sniped my ship from 50k with all those dampeners active on him. How is that balanced? He could only fit, at max, 4 sensor boosters but chances are he had a tracking comp in there.
I'm also concerned about ECM in general too. It looks like they gave the med slot ECCM module a boost, reducing the overall chances to jam. So now if you are worried about EW, you only have to fit one ECCM module since it covers all forms of target jamming and dampeners & tracking disruptors are not really as useful to use anymore so why worry about those? Since the ECCM module no doubt stacks and EW modules don't, those ECCM modules weaken EW alot would they not?
|
Joerd Toastius
|
Posted - 2006.01.13 01:04:00 -
[159]
The bottom line is that the stacking equation clearly needs adjusting for various reasons, and I don't see why CCP would want to put in a special exception for SBs and/or TCs to keep them working the way they are now. A fix will arrive soon enough.
|
Masta Killa
|
Posted - 2006.01.13 08:35:00 -
[160]
Am I trolling because I didn't jump on the bandwagon to demand our overpowered EW is brought back?
No I'm simply protesting your demands for them to be overpowered again. Since this is obviously nothing but a debate thread I'm allowed to disagree kplz.
And afaik we're not talking about stabs here, it's damps and the fact that they can't pwn anything down to a 10km max lock range anymore.
--------------------------------------
|
Blind Fear
|
Posted - 2006.01.13 08:52:00 -
[161]
Edited by: Blind Fear on 13/01/2006 08:55:59
Originally by: Derran
They aren't fixed. Sensor boosters countered them. Since when were damps uncounterable? Sensor Boosters were also nice to have even without thinking you'd face sensor dampeners.
What I have actually experienced in combat and know about dampeners as they work now is this. We had 5 bombers going against a Megathron. I had 2 dampeners fitted and the others had 1 dampener for each other ship. End result: The megathron locked my ship in a few seconds and sniped my ship from 50k with all those dampeners active on him. How is that balanced? He could only fit, at max, 4 sensor boosters but chances are he had a tracking comp in there.
I'm also concerned about ECM in general too. It looks like they gave the med slot ECCM module a boost, reducing the overall chances to jam. So now if you are worried about EW, you only have to fit one ECCM module since it covers all forms of target jamming and dampeners & tracking disruptors are not really as useful to use anymore so why worry about those? Since the ECCM module no doubt stacks and EW modules don't, those ECCM modules weaken EW alot would they not?
Sensor Boosters were a counter to pre-RMR dampeners? That must be why pre-RMR 3 dampeners + 3 boosters = 25% of your base lock range/resolution. And that was with the same number of modules going each way.
If you relied on EW to the exclusion of everything else, RMR was not good for you. EW became counterable when before the patch it was not.
If you used EW as a situational tool, a supporting weapons system for certain types of fights, then this patch has changed very little.
The I-Win button is gone. Deal with it. Originally by: Gabriel Karade
Edited by: Gabriel Karade on 12/01/2006 19:52:55
Masta Killa, you are the one who is trolling here.
Answer me this: Should two TECH1 modules, completely negate four TECH2 modules on a dedicated EW boat?
Why not take this further?
Lets say tanking modules vs. damage modules start stacking against each other. Great, I fit 3 energised adaptive nanos and any damage mods past your first stop working. Woot!
Or better still, lets stack WCS and disrupters, Oh noes! someone has fitted 3 WCS and is now immune to an entire fleet of tacklers!
Groovy huh?
Should 4 tech2 EW modules counter my 8 tech2 turrets on a dedicated turret boat?
Oh right, its a totally irrelevant comparison.
Modules and setups have counters. Deal with it.
------------------------------------------------
Derailing threads with logic since 1992 |
franny
|
Posted - 2006.01.13 10:00:00 -
[162]
can we get a DEV to say what the INTENDED results were supposed to be?
so we can get the 'Boosters are now the counter to the previously overpowered Damps' posters to stop
they said it was being looked at, now can they say what it was SUPPOSED TO BE?????
|
Ithildin
|
Posted - 2006.01.13 10:06:00 -
[163]
Originally by: franny
can we get a DEV to say what the INTENDED results were supposed to be?
so we can get the 'Boosters are now the counter to the previously overpowered Damps' posters to stop
they said it was being looked at, now can they say what it was SUPPOSED TO BE?????
Yes, they can say that. Also, if they say it's intended that the Boosters are to be counter modules (ASWELL!?), all it'll make is for new batch of Damper threds asking the devs to change their mind.
If they give the pro-dampener camp right, however, I expect the anti-damper threds to die down rather quickly, since their only solid argument is that it's actually in game or that it *might* be intended. All other arguments can easily be thwarted with actual reasoning and numbers.
Nyx is Erebos' wife. Together they have two children, Thanatos and Charon. Why is Charon Caldari?! |
Gabriel Karade
|
Posted - 2006.01.13 14:09:00 -
[164]
Originally by: Masta Killa
Am I trolling because I didn't jump on the bandwagon to demand our overpowered EW is brought back?
No I'm simply protesting your demands for them to be overpowered again. Since this is obviously nothing but a debate thread I'm allowed to disagree kplz.
And afaik we're not talking about stabs here, it's damps and the fact that they can't pwn anything down to a 10km max lock range anymore.
I'm only posting here because people like you don't seem to be able to see the problem (fortunately the Developers already have acknowledged there is a problem)
You didn't answer the question so I'll ask it again:
Do you REALLY think two TECH1 modules should completely nullify the effect of four TECH2 modules on a ship specifically designed(i.e. ship bonus) to use those modules?
Because that is what it boils down to. The Gallente EW boat and its tech2 counterpart are useless as things stand.
(\_/)
(O.o)
(> <) "That's no ordinary rabbit!...that's the most foul, cruel and bad-tempered rodent you ever set eyes on" |
hired goon
|
Posted - 2006.01.13 14:50:00 -
[165]
Just to make Masta Killa cry, I think dampers should be taken back to the way they were before the original EW nerf, when they had infinite range and fixed damping amount.
Then just as he is going to commit seppuku, we can bring it back to how it was just before RMR. That way everyone is happy.
-omg-
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2006.01.13 15:03:00 -
[166]
Edited by: j0sephine on 13/01/2006 15:05:05
"Modules and setups have counters. Deal with it."
How do i counter the effect of sensor boosters in RMR, again? (without relying on the 'one module to beat them all, the ECM')
How do i counter the effect of tracking computers in RMR? (without relying on the 'one module to beat them all, the ECM')
Oh right, i don't. Just like i couldn't really counter the effect of dampeners and disruptors pre-RMR.
One was supposedly broken, the other is apparently balanced. Go figure.
|
keepiru
|
Posted - 2006.01.13 15:24:00 -
[167]
Originally by: j0sephine
both these cases are broken, simple as that :/
-------------
Please fix the EW stacking bug, it's a disgrace!
|
Gabriel Karade
|
Posted - 2006.01.13 16:13:00 -
[168]
Originally by: Blind Fear
Edited by: Blind Fear on 13/01/2006 08:55:59
Originally by: Derran
They aren't fixed. Sensor boosters countered them. Since when were damps uncounterable? Sensor Boosters were also nice to have even without thinking you'd face sensor dampeners.
What I have actually experienced in combat and know about dampeners as they work now is this. We had 5 bombers going against a Megathron. I had 2 dampeners fitted and the others had 1 dampener for each other ship. End result: The megathron locked my ship in a few seconds and sniped my ship from 50k with all those dampeners active on him. How is that balanced? He could only fit, at max, 4 sensor boosters but chances are he had a tracking comp in there.
I'm also concerned about ECM in general too. It looks like they gave the med slot ECCM module a boost, reducing the overall chances to jam. So now if you are worried about EW, you only have to fit one ECCM module since it covers all forms of target jamming and dampeners & tracking disruptors are not really as useful to use anymore so why worry about those? Since the ECCM module no doubt stacks and EW modules don't, those ECCM modules weaken EW alot would they not?
Sensor Boosters were a counter to pre-RMR dampeners? That must be why pre-RMR 3 dampeners + 3 boosters = 25% of your base lock range/resolution. And that was with the same number of modules going each way.
If you relied on EW to the exclusion of everything else, RMR was not good for you. EW became counterable when before the patch it was not.
If you used EW as a situational tool, a supporting weapons system for certain types of fights, then this patch has changed very little.
The I-Win button is gone. Deal with it. Originally by: Gabriel Karade
Edited by: Gabriel Karade on 12/01/2006 19:52:55
Masta Killa, you are the one who is trolling here.
Answer me this: Should two TECH1 modules, completely negate four TECH2 modules on a dedicated EW boat?
Why not take this further?
Lets say tanking modules vs. damage modules start stacking against each other. Great, I fit 3 energised adaptive nanos and any damage mods past your first stop working. Woot!
Or better still, lets stack WCS and disrupters, Oh noes! someone has fitted 3 WCS and is now immune to an entire fleet of tacklers!
Groovy huh?
Should 4 tech2 EW modules counter my 8 tech2 turrets on a dedicated turret boat?
Oh right, its a totally irrelevant comparison.
Modules and setups have counters. Deal with it.
Are you for real?
He gave you an example of a 5 v 1 and how broken things are at the moment. Six Distributed dampers should shut down a megathron and prevent it from shooting at 50km. Flying solely megathrons myself I know that two Boosters gives me an ~190km lock range, and you're suggesting there's nothing wrong with 5 pilots being unable to knock that below 50km....
As to my example you just don't get it. Nothing else has positive and negative modules stacking together. They are supposed to stack seperatly then be applied. So I'll ask you the same question as masta killa:
Do you really believe a Celestis, a dedicated damping boat, with nigh on maxed EW skills, should be rendered useless by two TECH1 Sensor boosters?
(\_/)
(O.o)
(> <) "That's no ordinary rabbit!...that's the most foul, cruel and bad-tempered rodent you ever set eyes on" |
Ithildin
|
Posted - 2006.01.13 18:28:00 -
[169]
To put it on an edge. 2 Basic Sensor Enhancers (low slot module, 1PG, 10CPU, req Electronics 2) completely negates any number of, from any kind of ship, 'Executive' Remote Sensor Dampener I (these are the strongest RSD in the game code, stronger then T2. Consider them as faction gear.)
Nyx is Erebos' wife. Together they have two children, Thanatos and Charon. Why is Charon Caldari?! |
Derran
|
Posted - 2006.01.13 19:15:00 -
[170]
Originally by: Blind Fear
Sensor Boosters were a counter to pre-RMR dampeners? That must be why pre-RMR 3 dampeners + 3 boosters = 25% of your base lock range/resolution. And that was with the same number of modules going each way.
If you relied on EW to the exclusion of everything else, RMR was not good for you. EW became counterable when before the patch it was not.
If you used EW as a situational tool, a supporting weapons system for certain types of fights, then this patch has changed very little.
The I-Win button is gone.
So it is fair for 6 sensor dampeners spread amongst 5 ships to be countered by 2 sensor boosters on one ship? Well that makes sense. I have seen the light. You've convinced me.
Not.
Don't forget those counters are modules people commonly use anyway. They aren't designed specifically to counter the EW.
And speaking of that, I've also gone from from having a 52% chance of jamming a Typhoon to a 21% chance when it is using the one of the changed projected ECCM and this is when I am using a Scorpion or even a Falcon. And Typhoons have one of the lowest sensor strengths in the game. So fit 2 projected ECCM and 2 sensor boosters and use missiles instead of turrets on your phoon and you are essentially immune to all forms of EW. Or better yet, fly a Raven. It has a higher sensor strength. 18% chance of jamming that with one. Probably less than 9% with 2 projected ECCM. True I sacrfied some med slots for it but I have actually armor tanked my Raven before and strangely it worked reasonably well. Hell, why worry about sensor damps at all with a missile ship. Use FoFs. No locking required.
I'm scared to think of what is going to happen with battleships with tech 2 resists. Throw your EW out the window if it is a tech 2 Raven because its shields won't need as much tanking. Be afraid if it is a tech 2 scorp. You want to see an I-Win button? Watch out when they make a tech 2 caldari BS and give it the tech 2 resists like a HAC and don't fix the things they admit are a little screwy right now before those kind of ships come out.
|
Shindalin
|
Posted - 2006.01.13 21:15:00 -
[171]
I was so happy that u could specialize in EW in this game instead of the usual "gank mentality setups)that was a verry good thing with this game. U even had several EW methods to choose from, now that seem to be only 1 left.
This makes me rather sad couse it looks like Eve are on the path of joining all other ("dumb" not need to think games outthere). Versitality is needed and hopfully apreciated to make a game intressting and vital for years to come.
I think that there shouldnt be "godlike ships" or moduls for that matter, but a role for everyone to furfill in the universe of Eve. My hope lies in that CCP takes this seriously and brings back that vibe to the game.
Shindalin.
|
SATAN
|
Posted - 2006.01.13 21:49:00 -
[172]
There are no I win buttons in eve, never has been. There was only I win pilots who knew/know a good ship setup and how to pilot it. And every one of these setups could always be countered by a better pilot or a better setup.
Ignorant people like Masta killa(which he is anything but) have been smacking Udie setups since day 1. But the funiest thing is he copied it and used a very similar setup(or at least he thinks it was anyways). We ran accross him and his gang of smack talkers with copies of our setups at which point they proceded to loose most of their ships while outnumbering us.
So like I said it has nothing to do with damps being over powered cause they were not, unless they were in the hands of pilots that knew how to use them.
|
Uuve Savisaalo
|
Posted - 2006.01.15 08:02:00 -
[173]
Originally by: Shindalin
Versitality is needed and hopfully apreciated to make a game intressting and vital for years to come. My hope lies in that CCP takes this seriously and brings back that vibe to the game.
It has been stated that the changes to damps and disruptors, or at the very least the profound nature of the effect they have had was 'not intended' and will likely be corrected in the near future.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |