EVE Search - dampeners arent overpowered or are -- discussion

All Channels

Ships and Modules

dampeners arent overpowered or are -- discussion

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.05.27 13:16:00 - [1] Originally by: James Lyrus IMO dampeners are overpowered, because of the dual effect. Split 'em out, and they'll be ok. Agreed. The locking time increase give damp ships a too big safety net in case someone gets too close. Which makes their weakness no real weakness. Originally by: NightmareX Do i need to say more than that? A recon can disable a BS without countermeasures? News at 7! I would argue that is actually their whole point. Although I would agree that damps work too well at range.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.05.27 13:27:00 - [2] Originally by: NightmareX Yeah i can agree on that recon ships are ok with the damps, but the normal ships is not ok. Exept: - he was using 3-4 meds for damps, you were using not a single med for counter modules - he had max EW skills, you had only long range targeting 1 You might as well complain that someone is outtanking you because he had better skills and was using more modules.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.05.27 13:43:00 - [3] Originally by: NightmareX Wrong, it's at level 5 Now, perhaps. But not when you tested it. Raven has 75k base targetting range, with LRT 5 thats 93.75k. With LRT 1 thats 78.75k. You stated your base range as 78k.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.05.27 14:19:00 - [4] Ah, doh, I thought for some reason you were in a raven too.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.05.27 17:09:00 - [5] Originally by: James Lyrus Sensor booster II = 60% more range. RSD II = 50% range reduction. 100% x 1.6 x 0.5 = 80% range. One thing to note here, though, is that unless you snipe most ships have "spare" targeting range. You can reduce the targeting range of a raven to 33% and he'll still be able to lock stuff within 30k. Sensor boosters do not have to completely counter the effect of damps, just counter it enough to allow the ship to keep effective in combat.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.05.27 20:50:00 - [6] Originally by: General Coochie If you got 5 medium ECM drones each one of them have a 5% chance to successfully ECM a lachesis every 20 seconds. (22% global chance) If the lach pilot leaves them alive long enough for 2 cycles he utterly sucks though. EW drones die very fast.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.05.28 11:38:00 - [7] Damps are stacking nerfed. The only EW which isn't is ECM.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.05.28 13:46:00 - [8] Originally by: smallgreenblur I would say the solution to this isn't really to nerf the dampner module, just to make it so that no more than 2-3 dampners can affect one target at any one time. This is already the case, they have the stacking penality. A 4th mod on a target is usually a waste.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.05.28 13:53:00 - [9] Originally by: Phaedruss I can knock a Raven (without any sensor boosters) with long range targeting 4 (that's about 90km targeting range) down to about 14kms. Anyone care to do the math on what would happen if that Raven had one or two best named or T2 Sensor boosters fitted? How does it look in terms of scramble/web ranges on non-specialized ships? 2 t2 SBs give a 143.5% boost to scan resolution and targetting range. So 14k will get boosted to 34k. On a ship without a damperner bonus and max skills 3 damps will push a target to 11.9% of their old targetting range. This would give a raven with LRT5 and 2 SB2 a locking range of 27.2k. So in the max skill area they do not completely counter them, but almost. Due to that I would personally boost sensor boosters slightly to 70% (would give the raven 30.5k targetting range there) and change damps (and boosters) so they can only reduce (increase) range OR locking speed, not both at the same time.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.05.28 14:59:00 - [10] Originally by: Jinmie I guess you forgot to mention that in a dampening ship with very basic lvl 3 skills, RSD go to 70%+ dampening that adds up very nastily on your opponent. 62.5% actually. You need lvl 5 in the damp spac and lvl 5 in the ship skill to reach 70.75%.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.07.24 14:03:00 - [11] The problem IMO is that the inherit weaknesses of damps are not pronounced enough. In theory it should be counterable by under or outranging them, however both "counters" have problems atm. For underranging there is still the sig resolution penality which gives the damp ship a very generous timer to get out of range again or warp off. For outranging damps have a very high falloff which makes them still rather effective at sniping ranges - they are chancebased there, but the chance is still very compareable to ECM. And you only need 1 damp to get a target below sniping distance. So.. Changing damps so they can only reduce locking range OR sig resolution, but not both at once - which will make underanging them a valid counter. And nerfing their falloff big time so they are no valid longrange EW anymore. In addition you could change sensor boosters in a similar way, making them so they can only boost targeting range OR sig resolution and in exchange boost their bonus to 80 or 90% (no bonus boost for damps). Making them chancebased in general is a very bad idea, though. Damps need to reduce an inherit high locking range. On short - mid range one damp has vs a BS target no real effect, you need at least two, betetr 3 to get a real disabeling effect. If they would be chancebased you would need 2-3 winning rolls to get a disabeling effect. ECM needs only 1.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.07.24 16:33:00 - [12] Originally by: Mallick As for "oh, you can counter dampers by being fast", have you ever considered the fact that most damper dedicated ships are NOT alone, and they usually tend to sitt about 80 km away in their ships stacked with nanos and MWD? Did you also take into account that dampers NEVER fail and that are most likely scrambled and webbed, and can't do jack **** about it except for smacking in local? I guess not... So you are complaining that multiple people can kill you?
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.07.24 19:06:00 - [13] Originally by: Mallick No not really, if you would read and not be a smartass you would understand that when you are dampened you can not do **, then the numbers around does not really matter. Even if it is 10 or 1, you are unable to attack back. The point is that you need 2-3 damps to disable a single target. This means that a damp ship can remove maybe 2 of the enemy gang (which isn't really diferent to what a specialized ECM ship can do) and which leaves it wide open to fire from the rest of the gang. Quote:** My Arazu can scramble and dampen you from 30 km range, what are you suppose to do, MWD in my direction? So what, I can MWD aswell, and I am faster, you will waste cap and your tank dies. If you are flying gallente recons you should know that they have a very weak cap. They cannot sustain damps and MWD.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.07.25 01:07:00 - [14] Originally by: Benn Helmsman Cap booster ftw.... Work for both sides....
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.07.25 09:37:00 - [15] Originally by: Damned Force Caldari should be the long range race, with slowest ships, dampened, with less turrets than other race ships and with damage bonus on some ships which is useless(Kinetic) Lets give to the mega just +5% thermal/lvl Hello, Mr. I-don't-understand-game-mechanics. All races have a preferred damage type. All but amarr can vary that damage type with certain ships. Minmatar with different ammo, gallente with drones, caldari with missiles. However in ALL of these cases there is as penality reduced DPS. Projectile ammo with nonracial damage does less damage than laser & hybrid ammo of the same range. Kinetic drones deal 90% of the dps of thermals ones, explosive deal 80%, EM deal 70%. And missiles get on all caldari missileships but the raven a kinetic missile damage bonus which they loose with nonracial missiles.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.07.25 11:44:00 - [16] Originally by: Ashaz add 2 more and see the curves pass eachother. damps get the stacking penalty. boosters get the stacking bonus. Both items get the stacking penality. What you are referring to isn't it. And damps have a spec skill which improves their performance, with lvl 4 in it a t2 damp is -58.4%. With that it's 1 SB2 vs 1 t2 damp = 67% of old range 2 SB2 vs 2 t2 damps = 50% of old range 3 SB2 vs 3 t2 damps = 45% of old range It gets worse, not better.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.07.25 14:08:00 - [17] Edited by: Aramendel on 25/07/2007 14:09:06 Originally by: Ashaz no. cause they have a STACKING PENALTY! Why is it everyone misses that? Also since the second booster is applied to the already boosted range, the sensorbooster achtually gets a stacking bonus. that is why it will negate them. I am afraid you do not understand AT ALL how that works. Sensor boosters do never negate damps. Read my last post. As for the mechanics in question: it is everything about the PERCENTUAL changes. Do the freaking math for once - something what you blindingly obvious not did. A simple example. Lets have a base value of 100, I increase that by 50% so we get 150. An increase of 50. Now again a rise of 50% and we get 225, am increase of 75. Now the same thing with 50% reductions - first we get from 100 to 50, a decrease of 50. And then from 50 to 25, a decrease of 25. Ashaz: "But thats exactly how I said it is" NO. WRONG. Because the percentual decrease is still identical. And if you combine boosts and reductions you get this with two +50% boosts and 2 -50% reductions: 100 * 1.5 -> 150 (+50) * 1.5 -> 225 (+75) * 0.5 -> 112.5 (-112.5) * 0.5 -> 56.25 (-56.25) Notice something? The first reduction step does not remove 50 but over twice as much because it is not applied on the base value. The damps get as much of a "stacking bonus" (as you call it) as the boosters. Also, what you are talking about ARE NOT STACKING PENALITIES. The stacking penalities are efficiency reductions of the PERCETUAL values of the mods. The first works with 100% efficiency, the 2nd with 87% effeciency, the 3rd with 57% efficiency and so on. This means that 3 sensorboosters are not 1.60 * 1.6 * 1.6 but 1.6 * 1.522 * 1.342 (since 60% * 0.87 -> 52.2% and 60% * 0.57 -> 34.2%) for a total boost to 3.268 of the original value. Likewise 3 damps with the spec at 4 are (1 - 0.584) * (1 - (0.584 * 0.87)) * (1 - (0.584 * 0.57)) or 0.416 * 0.492 * 0.667 for a total reduction of 0.1365 of the original value.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.07.25 18:38:00 - [18] Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf On the Rook, racials have an optimal range of 162km well beyond dampener range, even multi's work at 108km at which range damps have negligible performance unable to cancel the lock on even an unboosted Rook. Not. Really. At 108k a t2 damp has with skills a success chance of 71% per damp to work. On a lachesis a SINGLE damp is enough to dampen an unboosted rook to 55k. It would need TWO SB2 to reachthe lachesis. At 162k you have an 31% chance for a damp to succeed. The rook has (with 2 SDA2) a 42% chance to jam it with the right racials and a 14% chance to jam it with the wrong ones. With 4 damps vs 1 of each raical jammer it's 77% (damps) vs 63% (ECM). Damps are reather effective longrange vs snipers. A good deal too effective IMO. Especially since you do not even need to use them on specced ships, a raven will damp a target with 250k locking range below 100k with a single damp just fine.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.07.26 11:56:00 - [19] Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf I stand corrected. I was under the impression dampener effectiveness was reduced as you shift into fall-off. That said 77% vs 63% sounds about right to me, ECM is universally effective dampening is not effective at close range. A jammed target cannot defend itself against those in tackling range whereas a dampened target usually can, also a dampened target has the option of closing range in many cases eliminating the effect of the damps. EW in alloff does not get an efficiency reduction, it simply gets a random chance to fail/miss. However damps have a VERY big falloff (90k after skills) so they are still very effective at high ranges. And their range strength is not balanced. You miss that damps are in the 20-100k range far far FAR more effective than ECM since it either never fails or has a success chance far above ECM. It doesn't make much sense that it gets an equal efficiency at sniper ranges. The "get close to it" is in theory a nice counter against damps, but does in reality not really happen due to the sig resolution decrease. Yes, you can get close to them. And then wait 30 sec or more till you can lock which gives a dampener ship plenty of time to get out of range again or simply warp off. Also, to get their strength the ECM ships need to fil ltheir lows with SDAs. Damp ships do not. Quote: However you did pick a slightly poor example, the Lachesis has an exceptional sensor strength as do all force recons, in general long range combat the Lachesis still suffers the reduced effectiveness, especially considering the number of SB fielded in fleet and sniper setups, while the Rook has a much higher chance of success versus the typically much lower sensor strengths. Also while the Lachesis has a chance of dampening one target, the Rook has a good chance of jamming of up to 3 targets (with 6 racials) and can use jammers that would have been used on a now jammed target to attempt jamming someone else. Recons have an high sensor strength AND an high locking range, both a damperner and ECM ship have problems vs each other. The rook has without a sensorbooster almost 190k targeting range, with a sensorbooster it has more targeting range than ANY fleet BS setup (300k). And a lach can still damp it below 100k with a single damp. Vs fleet BS you do not even need a gallente recon, that is the funny thing. Fleet fitted BS with 2 SB2 have between 188 (pest) and 273 (rokh) targeting range with max skills. A t2 damp with lvl 4 in the spec is a reduction to 41.6% of the old targeting range which reduces a fleet fitted BS to something between 80 and 115k targeting range. You cannot even counter it by fitting more SB2 (and gimping your setup) for most fleet BS - only ships with a targeting range of more than 75k before skills (or more than 80k vs a damp with the spec at 5) can reach 150k if they fit FOUR SB2. Thats the rokh, abaddon and scorp. Or the rokh and scorp at max damp skills. It gets even better. If you using 3 t1 EW range rigs damps have an optimal of 70k and a falloff of 90k after skills. That gives you a chance of 58% per damp to work at 150k. To compare, a scorp with ship skill and spec skill at lvl 5 and having filled all 4 lows with SDA2s has vs your average BS of 20 sensorstrength a 56% chance to jam it with the right racial. So a scorp is BETTER OFF using damps for fleet support. It has an higher chance for them to work, it does not need to pick the right racial, it needs a smaller skill investment and it gets on top of that 4 free lows for some tank. Damps are far far too strong at long range, it's no argument really. If they had instead of a 90k falloff only a 30k one it would be like you said, them not really being very efficient past 100k. And if they could only reduce locking range OR locking speed at the same time getting close would be a real counter to them and not something where a damp ship pilot has to warp off after a coffee break.

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.