EVE Search - EW Nerfage - It's Sensor Dampers' Turn

All Channels

Ships and Modules

EW Nerfage - It's Sensor Dampers' Turn

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Tulisin Dragonflame	Posted - 2007.02.27 08:09:00 - [31] Edited by: Tulisin Dragonflame on 27/02/2007 08:05:58 Originally by: Ephemeron Sensor damps are strong, but I wouldn't mind it if there was an effective way to counter them. Sensor boosters are a weak counter, mostly due to the way positive and negative bonuses work. A negative bonus is at least twice as powerful as positive bonus. The fact that they're a decent amount better innately really should keep them pretty balanced out. http://www.eve-online.com/itemdatabase/shipequipment/electronicsandsensorupgrades/remotesensorboosters/1964.asp http://www.eve-online.com/itemdatabase/shipequipment/electronicwarfare/remotesensordampers/1969.asp
AKULA UrQuan Caldari STK Scientific INVICTUS.	Posted - 2007.02.27 08:42:00 - [32] It's pretty much "he who locks first wins in revelations".
Givemeyours	Posted - 2007.02.27 08:53:00 - [33] Originally by: FawKa If the gang has just one Gallente recon with them they can easy make some targets 100% jammed. Another thing is damping a carrier to 14km lockrange - that just doesnt work I support nerfing things where you in PVP will have to sit and wait to die - as its not pvp in my eyes tbh Yeah sure - Recons are strong. But hey get some cruisers in your gang and the recon pops very quick (when it is not too far away)... And please think about the point at what ranges pvp mostly "starts" This hole nerfing thing is stupid - nerf this and this and... What do you want to fit in a year? Caldari whine when they get damped, the others whine when they get tracking disrupted. All happy
Sokratesz Guardians of Hell's Gate Tactical Narcotics Team	Posted - 2007.02.27 08:59:00 - [34] Originally by: Pinky Denmark The major problem with sensor dampeners is that they can't reach those long-distance locking sniper ships that needs to be dampened, and they can easily dampen ships close range that in most cases don't bother much (except when a ship goes for a Gallente ship's drones when oponent damps and recalls drones) Solution: decrease their base strength from 35% to 25%, increase base range by 50% and keep the current ship bonuses that some cruisers and recons have (5% per level), perhaps add a 10% range per level bonus. This will make them more useful against those long-range snipers and less useful in close-range combat. Suicide is bad, hmkay? (clickety clickety)
Murehz	Posted - 2007.02.27 09:16:00 - [35] I think damps are fine as they are. You can counter them with sensor boosters, nifty bits of flying, or just use neuts on the target (its hard enough sometimes to support a rack of damps as it is). Also unlike ECM they couldn't lock down a whole 5 man gang, only 1 person. I do however think that EW should only be properally effective on EW ships so maybe increase the bonuses they get and decrease the effectivness of the module or just make it so that only EW ships can fit them.
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.27 09:32:00 - [36] Originally by: AKULA UrQuan It's pretty much "he who locks first wins in revelations". Wierd. I find it's "he who jumps an ubertank in first with no real offensive power and draws both the fire and the ew onto him while his mates kill all the hostiles" wins. Nerf tanks! sgb
Plague Black 4S Corporation	Posted - 2007.02.27 09:41:00 - [37] Originally by: Wrayeth Since Revelations, we've seen ECM jammers become basically useless on any ship that doesn't have a bonus to them. At the same time, we've begun to see just how powerful sensor dampers are; some of us have know about this for a while, others were pleasantly (or unpleasantly) surprised by it. Since that point, we've begun to see the exact same thing that was happening with ECM jammers happen with sensor dampers: everyone and their brother seems to be flying with one or two fitted, resulting in pretty much the exact same situation you'd get with ECM jammers pre-patch. As CCP has, by the very fact of the ECM nerf, stated that they don't want that to be happening, I say it's time to nerf sensor dampers. Yep, that's right - nerf damps. Put them in the same category as ECM jammers by making them largely useless on any ship that doesn't have a bonus to their use. The rest should be pretty much self-explanatory. Let me guess, you have a carrier that is owned by dampeners? No? Well dampenining is the only thing that can keep carriers at bay so nerfing dampeners would make almost MS from any carrier. Not signed. Dampeners are just fine.
Chi Prime Eternity INC. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.02.27 10:21:00 - [38] I get the distinct impression that the people who like to go all out damage, and thus only find themselves on the receiving end of any EW will not be happy until all EW is nerfed to uselessness. If ECM is the best of the bunch, nerf it. Oh, the damps are now used more than ECM? Nerf it. Tracking disruptors? Nerf it. Painters? Nerf it! Oh, ECM is back to being best? Nerf it more! Damps? Nerf it more! ad infinitum. - Ares, Raptor and Malediction needs fixing
Laboratus Gallente BGG	Posted - 2007.02.27 10:34:00 - [39] From my perspective nerfing EW has been a mistake in the past and continuing on this road to perdition is folly. I will present my view, or vision of eve combat philosophy as I see it. In most situations, the pilot most able to adapt to any given situation through pre planning, preparation and appropriate action will win through exploiting the situation to gain a decicive tactical advantage (DTA). Every ship has an optimal range of operation, where it has a distinct advantage over other ships. Module slots can be used to alter the situation to gain a DTA. Now, the reason why ECM modules were generally so hated was the ability of the multispec modules to work on any ship on any range and the inability of most to factor in ECM as a factor in combat (not fitting ECM, ECCM, FOFs, drones etc). This ofcourse presented problems and led to the nerf of ECM systems. The problem was not in all ECM systems, just the multispecs, and that is where the attention should have gone, but once the nerf bat is out, none shall be spared. Oh, well. Mid slots offer the most powerful tools to changing the tactical situation to ones favour. You can either try to gain the advantage through superioir speed (MWD/AB), sustainability (Injectors/cap modules), EW superiority(ECM/RSD/TD/TP), weapons upgrades (TCs), Support modules, sensor improvements. However, you only can effectively fit one or in specific cases two of these. If you fit for EW and sustainability, your opponent will dictate range, and thus there is a risk that he will gain the DTA faster than you would like. If you fit for speed and weapons support, you will be able to gain the DTA and have fire superiority, but will not be able to sustain it for long, so you might be just speeding to your demise etc. Now to see how RSDs work. Remote sensor dampeners decrease the targetting range on an enemy ship, changing the tactical enviroment. They are effective at around 30-70km, unless you really use all your options on them and get them to be effective on non boni ships to around 20+km. This however reduces your ability to sustain your setup, as determined above. And prevents you from changing range or otherwise trying to gain a DTA, leaving you in a very simple situation. Either do or die. If you have a DTA, good for you, if not... Well... Very Gallantean approach really Anyways. RSDs force the other party to either move in or outside their effective range or disengage. They would propably be ideal for amarrian ships, since the optimal range is around the same as large pulse lasers, making it possible to use the RSDs as an EW "shield" while pounding the opponent from an optimal position. For use in gallantean ships, forcing opponents into your own optimal range, where you have an advantage is not quite as effective, but usefull non the less. At the moment with high skills boni ships are just and just able to be effective enough to funktion in this role, T1 ships and modules just cannot perform up to spec due to problems with stacking penalties. Any more nerfage of the module/ships would push them from "challenging to use" to "completely useless". And since EW support is the primary role for newer players, taking even that away from them is more than cruel... ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats
Tulisin Dragonflame	Posted - 2007.02.27 10:42:00 - [40] I haven't seen too many solo setups with random medslots having damps in them, damps are only extremely scary and effective on damp-specialty ship, as they should be. The solution is if you know, or even think you might be going up against a damp-specialty ship, bring your own boost-specialty ship, negating the opposition's advantage (at a cheaper ISK/fit/run cost, I might add).
Joseph Valiant Gallente Ascendant Strategies Inc. The Volition Cult	Posted - 2007.02.27 11:00:00 - [41] The way i see it is, if your up against a big ship with a long range for example if their using rails then they are going to keep pretty much out of your dampener range, however if your against for example a blasterthron sensor dampeners are really not going to be much use because the ships got to get close anyway... I think the only way this module is unfair is if your in something like a fast cruiser or battlecruiser and manage to close the distance on a long range ship because you can out fly it and then dampen, because then and only then will that ship be completely vunerable... unfortunately this game IS ALL about chance, what will you meet and fight, will you run into a gate camp, will that pirate spank you so hard your momma feels your pain etc... Damps dont need nerfing, you need to learn the lesson hard and choose your ships for pvp wisely it's that simply.... [Prepare for Sarcasm]OOOORRRR you just ALL sensor damp and battles end up being all at around 5k range with blasters.. that would certainly make the game fun aye chaps
ITTigerClawIK Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.02.27 11:15:00 - [42] Can you guys PLEASE stop trying to nerf everything that you cant be asked putting something on to defend against it ..... no wounder CCP nerfed ECM so bad its couse of everyone whineing about them i bet they were wick and tired of people going on and on about the same thing going " when i get hit by an ECM i cant do anything" what people seem to not get was that there was a thing called a ECCM in the game that counters that... also there are abckup arrays as well.. what people coudlnt be btoherd doing was useing a slot in there setup to defend against it witch makes the one who complains one hell of a stupid and lazy ass guy... and dont even BOTHER nerfing sensor damps.. i mena what is the point now.... the other guy can still fire back if he gets close enough cant heit doesnt do anythign to turret tracking speed all it does is increase lock time for the enemy and decrease sensor lock range.... can you people be happy that you can now always fire back now? Sig (partially) nerfed. Only one image allowed, and that one image has to be under 400x120, and below 24,000 bytes. -Conuion Meow ([email protected])
Tulisin Dragonflame	Posted - 2007.02.27 11:28:00 - [43] Originally by: ITTigerClawIK and dont even BOTHER nerfing sensor damps.. i mena what is the point now.... the other guy can still fire back if he gets close enough cant heit doesnt do anythign to turret tracking speed all it does is increase lock time for the enemy and decrease sensor lock range.... can you people be happy that you can now always fire back now? I wouldn't say damps are too powerful, but I do think you're downplaying their effectivness. The increase in lock time can wreak a lot of havoc on ships that already have bad lock time, especially considering all that time spent trying to lock can be erased by simply moving outside of range for a second and making them restart. It isn't as simple as "okay, I'll move a little closer, and then shoot 'em up".
dalman Finite Horizon	Posted - 2007.02.27 11:36:00 - [44] I'll stick to what I've been saying for 3.5 years already: dampeners should be split into two modules, one for range and one for resolution. Am I forced to have any regret? I've become the lie, beautiful and free In my righteous own mind I adore and preach the insanity you gave to me
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.27 11:44:00 - [45] Originally by: ITTigerClawIK no wounder CCP nerfed ECM so bad its couse of everyone whineing about them i bet they were wick and tired of people going on and on about the same thing going " when i get hit by an ECM i cant do anything" what people seem to not get was that there was a thing called a ECCM in the game that counters that... also there are abckup arrays as well.. what people coudlnt be btoherd doing was useing a slot in there setup to defend against it witch makes the one who complains one hell of a stupid and lazy ass guy... Gosh it's a good thing you read all those threads on ew before posting else you'd look like an idiot now The reason ECM were nerfed, which is the reason the OP is saying RSD should be nerfed, was the ability to fit one multispec or one racial jammer on your ship, and thus in nearly every situation win the battle. I used this tatic to great effectiveness on a nosphoon over a year ago before getting bored with it. Now to RSD. Personally, I believe that they are maybe a tiny tiny bit overpowered compared to other mid slot items, as not only do they reduce your range but they also increase your lock time, making large ships considerably less effective for very little module wastage. However, they are also fairly useless at what they seem to be designed for; an anti-sniper module. Therfore I think they should be given both a boost and a nerf - a boost to optimal range and falloff, a significant nerf to cap use (the whole 1 friggy making a bs pointless thing again, see ECM threads for details), and a slight nerf to effectiveness (making them still useful in close combat, but slightly less so. sgb
Vathar Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.02.27 11:49:00 - [46] Well, I mentionned this in a thread some months ago, fearing that people who can't fit anything else than tackle, dmg, tank would eventually complain ... Guess it will come eventually I used to fit ECCM and it was a blessing to kill all the buggers who relied upon a couple of multispecs ... was fine for me. Dampeners are mostly fine, only thing is that a Celestis can disable a carrier and it's damn annoying. however, this would get quickly solved if they found a way to allow remote repping without a lock first to make support a viable option in pvp (ie. carriers could delegate fighters and remote rep without a lock, who cares if your lock range is 14km as long as you have gangmates to assign fighters to, if you're soloing in your carrier, you deserve to die anyway) My main grief about dampeners AND ecm is that most of the time, they end up with a pilot completely disabled, and that's not exactly fun. The first step of combat in Eve is being able to LOCK your opponent, if you can't get a lock, you're pretty much screwed in most cases. I wonder why ccp introduced modules that affect such an early step in the combat process. Originally by: Radeberger If you plan to make your alliance combat based, recruit pvpers with mining alts rather than miners with pvp alts
Miklas Laces A.N.A.R.C.H.I.C.A	Posted - 2007.02.27 11:58:00 - [47] Originally by: Wrayeth Since that point, we've begun to see the exact same thing that was happening with ECM jammers happen with sensor dampers No
madaluap Gallente Mercenary Forces Exquisite Malevolence	Posted - 2007.02.27 12:39:00 - [48] Edited by: madaluap on 27/02/2007 12:37:06 Originally by: Miklas Laces Originally by: Wrayeth Since that point, we've begun to see the exact same thing that was happening with ECM jammers happen with sensor dampers No so true. I have only been damped by celestis and special damp ships. NONE of the myrmidoms i encountered had damps. NONE of the mallers,absolutions had damps. atm sensor damps are a bit stronger than ECM. But well to be honest hanging in a battle being 23/7 jammed by 1 multispec is just ghey. Getting damped means you get in range, keep on locking and you can counter it by fitting a sensorbooster. Its fun, tactical. While ECM is just the ghey i-win button. For the next 2 years i dont want to see a ECM module ever. Only on highly decicated characters that focus all on there EW capability. To be honest, ECM is still strong only you now need to use racial a bit more instead of multispecs. Thats all. What you get back for it is pwnage @ all ranges. Yes racial jammer+bb+T2 dis amps rock pants off. _________________________________________________ Breetime A killmail!11!1 omgrawr: BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Celedris Tabula Rasa Systems The Star Fraction	Posted - 2007.02.27 12:50:00 - [49] Originally by: smallgreenblur a significant nerf to cap use (the whole 1 friggy making a bs pointless thing again, see ECM threads for details), and a slight nerf to effectiveness (making them still useful in close combat, but slightly less so. 1) T2 RSD eat up 2.7 cap per second with Sensor Linking trained to V. A single frigate is not going to disable a battleship unless it's a Maulus. The typical cap regen on a cruiser-class ship is going to be about 10-12 cap/sec, and fitting four T2 damps on a Celestis-class ship is already going to eat up all of your cap and leave nothing left for a tank or propulsion unless you fit cap mods. A significant increase to their cap usage will make them battleship-only modules. 2) Damps already have enough range against typical 150km-range snipers if you train up your EW skills. Long-range Jamming V & Frequency Modulation V will give you 45km optimal + 90km falloff. A pair of particle rigs on a fleet-rigged ship will give you 65km optimal + 90km falloff, which will hit over 50% of the time at 150km. It only takes a single damp hit to drop a target at that range. RSD can be powerful against a target under the right circumstances if you have enough of them. Why sholdn't they be? Realistically you need to fit at least three RSD to be worth it on a non-damp ship to have them reliably work under 25km. Even then, a sensor booster or two will still allow the target to get locks after 20 or 30 seconds and hold the locks afterwards (unlike ECM). Yes, it sucks getting damped when you are at mid-range and you neglected to fit a sensor booster or two on your ship. It sucks even harder if you don't have any friends to help kill off the damping ship. Why shouldn't it suck? Getting shot by tachyon beams sucks. Getting cap-drained by heavy nos sucks. Getting nearly insta-killed in a support ship by assigned fighters really sucks (to the guy complaining about damping a carrier).
Ragnor Dayton Amarr Paxton Industries	Posted - 2007.02.27 13:24:00 - [50] One of the main differences between RSD and ECM is in the counter modules. With ECM, the counter module was a waste of a slot if you didn't come up against an ECM using opponent. At least Sensor Boosters have a secondary use other than as a counter to RSD, i.e. improved lock times and range. The same applies to tracking disrupters - tracking enhancers / computers have a use outside of being a counter module. ------------------------------------------------ Just because your not paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you!
hafhal Gallente Reykjavik University Corpus Maximus	Posted - 2007.02.27 13:59:00 - [51] I would say that the module with skills applied is not overpowered. However with the addition og rigs + gang support skills even i will agree that they are reaching the overpowered mark. i am maxed out in damper skills and with rigs + a maxed out gang "woman who sells sexual favours for monatary gain" they effectiveness of these modules rise above the 80% mark , 4 of these on a lacheises is ubsurd.
Veryez	Posted - 2007.02.27 14:07:00 - [52] I think they need to have their strength halved, and add a low slot module that brings them back to their original strength is you use 4 of them. Increase their cap use a bit. Lastly they should be like ECM - racial sensor damps - so you have to guess what ship your opponent is flying. Oh but we should buff the damp ships slightly, so lets give them an extra 5% per level. That is certainly fair. Then lets see if they ever get used again!
Tulisin Dragonflame	Posted - 2007.02.27 15:12:00 - [53] Originally by: Veryez Edited by: Veryez on 27/02/2007 14:04:17 I think they need to have their strength halved, and add a low slot module that brings them back to their original strength if you use 4 of them. Increase their cap use a bit. Lastly they should be like ECM - racial sensor damps - so you have to guess what ship your opponent will be flying. Oh but we should buff the damp ships slightly, so lets give them an extra 5% per level. That is certainly fair. Then lets see if they ever get used again! They already cost more cap than their countermodule, and quite a significant amount when compared to the cap of their specialized ships, not sure why you want to up that even more.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.27 15:18:00 - [54] Don't bother there, that was just a troll post.
FawKa Gallente x13 Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.27 16:00:00 - [55] Originally by: Tulisin Dragonflame Originally by: FawKa If the gang has just one Gallente recon with them they can easy make some targets 100% jammed. Another thing is damping a carrier to 14km lockrange - that just doesnt work I support nerfing things where you in PVP will have to sit and wait to die - as its not pvp in my eyes tbh Okay, so we've established that they're an effective module, but we've also established that they have several counter-modules. You could bring your own sensor-booster to counter the Gallente recon. Damps shouldn't be nerfed just because people lack the foresight to have countermeasures ready. I would have to fit 5 sensor boosters on a carrier to counter it tbh as you need range - For the other reply to my post: I agree nerfing shouldnt be done just over and over again. But this is my opinion. I just dont like the EW of this game that gets another player in the position where he can do nother you know. Its just like sitting in the middle of a 5000 m/s orbitting typhoon waiting to get pop'd. Nano'es will get nerfed just because they place a player in this situation so I cant see why there arent any focus on damps as you can lock like 4km away and your scan resolution is below 10
Christopher Dalran	Posted - 2007.02.27 16:16:00 - [56] Sensor dampers are perfectly fine, one of the main reasons for nerfing ecm was that ECCM was a wasted module and did nothing for you unless you were being hit with ECM so NOBODY ever bothered to even fit them. Strictly speaking i dont feel ECM should ever have been nerfed, rather ECCM should have been give a boost. Dampers have already taken a round of nerfing before and they ended up perfectly where they need to be. Damper use is limited but extremely effective when used properly, sounds to me like the posted found himself in a long range fight with a large ship and that large ship had a little frigate buddy up close scramming using the damper lock time increase to keep from getting destroyed forcing the poster in a losing battle. I could be wrong. Also the counter for sensor dampers, the sensor booster, is extremely usefull in and of itself even if you arent being damped. Dampers are also realy the only missile defense system out there, Tracking disruptors can kill a gunship but if Dampers get hit from the nerfbat again there will nolonger be a missile coutner. Oh and if you want to lock a BS down it takes atleast 4 dampers on a ship that actually has DPS to kill a Battleship. The celestis can do it for less but its never going to have a snowballs chance in hell of killing a battleship.
Christopher Dalran	Posted - 2007.02.27 16:33:00 - [57] I just want to come out and say that if you lose a carrier because of dampers your a friggin MORON. You should not be using a fleet support ship with a HORRID lock time for solo work, your intended to pass your fighter off ot other gang members with GOOD lock times that can get them to attack targets quickly.
Jas Dor Minmatar	Posted - 2007.02.27 16:39:00 - [58] Originally by: Gort Originally by: Mr Peanut You need 3-4 sensor damps to solo against a BS. With pre-nerf ECM, you could be effective with half that number of modules. Sensor damps are fine. Concurring here.... Gort Does that hold true for blaster boats as well? I got a BS down to I think 16km locking range with 3 good damps on it, which is I think first falloff for large blasters. Names, Dates, Times, Engagements, Losses, Op-Tempo or STFU!
FawKa Gallente x13 Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.27 16:46:00 - [59] Edited by: FawKa on 27/02/2007 16:44:17 Originally by: Christopher Dalran I just want to come out and say that if you lose a carrier because of dampers your a friggin MORON. You should not be using a fleet support ship with a HORRID lock time for solo work, your intended to pass your fighter off ot other gang members with GOOD lock times that can get them to attack targets quickly. If that was for me, its a no . I just use the carrier as example really as that is the way to kill it really. We all know that. Nos 'n' damps.
HatePeace LoveWar Amarr FATAL REVELATIONS FATAL Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.27 17:17:00 - [60] Originally by: DiuxDium WTF? PALADINS SUCK. Eve vs WoW

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: 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.