EVE Search - Remote sensor dampners and what is wrong with them

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Remote sensor dampners and what is wrong with them

» 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 Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.05 16:56:00 - [1] Damp scorpion as anti-sniper EW ship Vs a sniper fleet which is at 150k it does not really matter if you jam a ship or dampen it below targeting range. Targeting range of sniper fitted ships varies between 188k (pest) and 273k (rokh). A single damp with spec at 4 is -58.4%, this reduces that to 78k - 113k which works for all intents and purposes just like ECM - it won't be able to attack the other fleet. With skills damps have 45k optimal and 90k falloff. With 3 EW range rigs this is 70k optimal and 90k falloff. This gives a damp an 58% chance to work at 150k. Basically, a scorp with that damp setup has an 58% per damp to "jam" a target in fleet combat. It costs 45 mil more than an ECM scorp, but this additional cost is offset by its higher survivability since it is able to use all his lows for an anti-burst dps tank so it is likely to be able to make a warpout when it is called primary. With racial jammers and all his lows filled with SDAs and max ship and EW spec skills it has a 53% chance to jam a target with the right sensortype. So, lets see: damp scorp: - less skill intensive - higher surviviability - higher chance to jam - not limited by racial EW - more expensive ECM scorp: - needs at the very least 1.3 mil more SP - has maybe half the effective HP as the damp scorp - lower chance to jam - limited by racial EW - cheaper Yes, sounds really balanced
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.05 21:09:00 - [2] Edited by: Aramendel on 05/08/2007 21:12:53 Originally by: Kulmid you do realize not all PvP takes place at 150km? I do realize that quite nicely. However for fights which DO happen at 150k damps are plain out too strong. Changing their falloff after skills from 90 to something like 45k would solve this problem quite nicely and wouldn't effect the efficiency of damps at closer ranges at all. Quote: ofc in a fight where range is very important something that limits range is going to be very effective. this is imo a crap arguement. a Raven would do just as good a job as a scorpion so that means nothing. The important point you miss is that an ECM specialized ship which is using all its bonuses for ECM is BETTER off using damps at range than its own EW. To compare that, it would be if a megathron would be more effective with tachyon lasers at range than with rails. That is hardly a "crap argument" but a very real balance problem. Oh, and "then boost ECM" is also no solution. ECM is, while weaker than damps still stronger than TDs and (haha) TPs. ECM is right now at the happy middle. Damps need to be brought down to that and TDs up to that. The only real solution for TPs would be to replace them with a new "real" EW.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.05 23:13:00 - [3] Originally by: Dr Fighter what you may or may not know is that if you hav 3-4 damps on your ship and say 10 other guys hav the same setup, on one target the 4th damp does very little EVEN if the 4th damp or more is not on the same ship. Exept that in the vaste majority of all situations a damps over the 4th are not needed. On a damp specced ship (without rigs) this is a reducition to 5% of the old targeting range. There are no realistic setups which have that targeting range - unless they fit additional SB2 over the initial 1-2 which are used under certain situations to counter specificalyl damps. And then you might want to compare what ECCM does vs ECM.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.06 07:44:00 - [4] Originally by: Hannobaal Apples and oranges. Sensor dampeners excell at suppressing snipers set for extreme ranges. ECM does not. What ECM can do is take away a ship's ability to fight at any range. Utterly, completely wrong. Damps are fare more efficient at short-medium ranges than ECM to disable enemy ships. Damps excell there. And can be made to be as effective as ECM at extreme ranges. Quote: Following your logic, a Celestis, as long as it's used against pure turret ships and at range, is more effective using tracking disruptors than sensor dampeners. So we need to "nerf" tracking disruptors. Exept it isn't. Try to use TDs and see how "effective" you are.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.06 08:24:00 - [5] Edited by: Aramendel on 06/08/2007 08:25:35 Even without that unspecced ships have no real problem to damp BSs below 20k, damp specced ships to damp BSs below 10k. And if you manage to get close the dampening ships has plenty of time to get range again or warp out since you will take 30sec+ to lock it. They are not that good at really close ranges, but that is no real argument - any EW is. ECM ships have no tank, getting into webrange (or even scramrange) is like a suicidewish for them. TDs do not really work well there either. The point is that damps are plain out unbalanced comapred to the other EW, it has nothing to do with "nerfing all EW". I have 3 mil in electronics (with lvl 4 spec in all real EW systems), 1.3 in missiles and 750k in gunenry, the last thing I want is EW becoming useless. I want it to become balanced. Right now the question "which EW should I use" is a no-brainer for EW ships. On my short-medrange curse which gets a TD bonus I use damps. On a fleet anti-sniper scorp you are currently more effective with damps than ECM.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.09 08:59:00 - [6] Edited by: Aramendel on 09/08/2007 09:01:19 Originally by: Max Hardcase The RSD @ 150km arguement is silly. One TD hit on a sniper out there would cripple it in the just the same way as a succesfull RSD hit would. Exept they don't. Or, better: they do, but the chance that they do is far far smaller. Look at the stats, do the math, THEN speak. With skills 1 TD has a 50% chance to work at 96k and a 6% chance to work at 132k. Even if you use 3 EW rigs you have only a hitchance of 19% at 150k. To compare: damps have one of 58% at 150k with them. If damps would behave at range similat like TDs there would be no problem at all.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.09 12:42:00 - [7] Originally by: Max Hardcase So you want a 50% nerf to falloff on RSD's ? But I thought everyone was whining about RSD str when it does affect you. The problem is not RSDs strengths, its their weaknesses. Or the lack of those. Every EW systems has a "counter" module. However this is not what balances them in the end. How "well" a counter module works vs a to ostrong EW we've seen with ECM, boosting ECCM had no real effect on the common useage of multispecs of doom. What balances them are their weaknesses, the little loopholes where they are ineffective and which can be exploited. TDs are most obvious, no use against missiles, nos/neuts, scrams, webs and all EW. ECM can fail randomly and you have to sacrifice your tank to be effective, which makes them unwise to use at warp scrambling ranges. Damps are very powerful at short-med ranges, but can be under & outranged. In theory. Outranging does not really works due to their huge falloff. And underranging will still give you an ECM like effect which gives a damp spec ship plenty of time to warp out or get range again before it gets locked. Quote: I'd rather see TD get a little falloff love instead, its not that much used. Atleast I can buy Balmers for a decent price. Even though TDs need some buffs, that is not the problem. The range performance of damps is plain out too strong. For ECM you need a specialised ship, use your lowslots for SDAs AND a range shipbonus to be effective at sniper ranges. For damps you need NONE of that and in exchange EW range rigs. This isn't exactly a balanced situation. Even if you compare it only for sniper performance. Add to that that damps are superior for short-med ranges and the imbalance gets even worse. Quote: You might as well argue that guns are overpowered cause its one of the major killers in pvp. Wrong comparsion. Damps are only one out of 3 (technically 4) EW systems. As said, you can setup a scorpion to be at range more effective with damps than with ECM. A ship which has an ECM strength and rangebonus. That is like if a rokh or megathron would be more effective at sniping with tachyons than with rails. Quote: Would an ECCM module that has a flat chance to negate any EW affecting you satisfiy the Anti EW crowd ? Atleast that combined with RSB is a nice way to hedge your bets. I have 3 million SP in electronics and lvl 4 in the TD, RSD and ECM spec. 1.3 mil sp in missiles. 750k sp in guns. The last thing I want is EW nerfed in general. I want it balanced. And right now it has serious balance problems. ECM is right now pretty well balanced. Damps are too storng right now. Their high strength in their specialized area is ok, but it is not balanced by real weaknesses. TDs are too weak, mainly due to their limitation to turrets and the fact that they module vs module are not really more effective in countering turret ships than damps & ECM is vs everything. TPs need to be replaced with some kind of useful EW. Thats not saying that TPs cannot be useful in certain situations, just that its a pointless "EW" for a recon ship. Its about as much an electronic warfare as a remote tracking enhancer.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.09 14:33:00 - [8] Originally by: Xerpex Also, you gotta think you gotta stack several damps on one ship to make them work. i.e. with a rook you can lock as many targets as you have jammers, put one on each and if you're lucky jam all or more than 1-2... With a damp ship you will get at least 1-2 ship, but no chance of more... 2 damps are on a damp ship a reduction to 15% of the old target range and sig resolution which pretty much equals to disabeling it. 2 racial ECM have around the same effect, however the ecm ship has no room for any tank, no other useful bonus and less dps. And most importantly can fail, reliability is a very important advantage. That does not make damps overpowered, but the problem is that they do not have real weaknesses compared ot other EW to make up for this advantage. Like.. Quote: Also the huge range... well jammers got longer range on a recon... The point is that damps can ALSO achieve these ranges. And they do not even need recons (or any shipskill) for that.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.09 16:01:00 - [9] Yes, because comparing 2 modules without spec & shipskills is hugely intelligent. His arguments are rather dumb, too... Quote: As it may seem unbalanced, I still believe it is, and that this system should be left untouched. Here's why: 1) RSD II consumes 3.6 cap/sec, while SB II only consumes 0.5 2) Unlike using an ECCM for countering an ECM, using an SB isn't a waste of a slot when you are not 'attacked' by an RSD (what I mean is that a SB is useful for locking faster and farther, not just for protecting against RSD) 3) Unlike a successful ECM, an RSD does not prevent locking. It just delays it (if you are still in locking range) 1) Cap use..I mean..SERIOUSLY? 2) For the first 1-2, yes, above that however they are not really useful. Using 3+ SB2s to counter damps is compareable to using 1+ ECCM to counter ECM. 3) A sucessful ECM also only "delays" the lock. For 20 secs. And if damps would only "delay" locks they would actually be underpowered. The problem is that you will be outside your locking range if the dampener halfway knows what he is doing.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.09 17:57:00 - [10] Edited by: Aramendel on 09/08/2007 17:57:18 Originally by: Luke Lamarr 2) I understand you are referring to stacking penalties, and you are right bout these... But what does 'Using 3+ SB2s to counter damps is compareable to using 1+ ECCM to counter ECM.' means? explain plz Using 1-2 SB2 is common for the bonuses. However you cannot really justify the use of 3+ SB2s just for the bonuses. Basically, all SB2 beyond the first 2 are in the end only there for the sole porpuse of countering damps. You do not fit them because the bonus because that became too small to justify their use instead of other med slot modules. So, basically, using 3 SB2, 2 for the bonus and 1 to counter damps partially is for all intents and purposes about the same as using 2 whatever and 1 ECCM. In both cases you are using 1 item for the sole purpose of countering something. Quote: 3) Wrong. ECM does not only delay the lock, it breaks it. Successful ECM at any range = breaking lock. Successful damp at close range = not breaking a lock, just delaying it (if target does not already have a lock) IF the target has targeted you and IF you are still within his new targeting range. These are two pretty big IFs, especially considering most ships will have below 10k targeting range after 3 damps from a damp specced ship. Even with 3 SB2 most ships will still have targeting ranges below 20k. And in not being good in these ranges is by far no unique weakness of damp ships. ECM ships can work there, but due to not having any tank and being chancebased it is not realyl healthy for them to be there. Same with TDs, good luck avoiding even TDed ships fire when they web you. Quote: So put yourself at work, do some maths and prove your point Been there, done that.

Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.09 18:07:00 - [11] Overlooked this reply. Originally by: Hannobaal Except it is on turret ships. Why don't you try it? I DID! I have spec lvl 4 in all EW systems exept TPs and used all. To repeat my question, have YOU tried it? Try TDing a brutix with blasters and see how he is still hitting you just fine and rips you apart once he manages to get close and counter your transversal. Quote: How much does a tech 2 sensor booster increase locking range? How much does a tech 2 tracking computer or tracking enhancer increase optimal range on turrets? Comapring the counter ignores how effective the EW system is in the first place. A 10% boost against something which is only partly disabeling you can be a lot stronger than a 50% boost against something with is totally disabeling you. And if you REALLY want to go this path, compare what ECCM does vs ECM and SBs do vs RSDs.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.09 18:11:00 - [12] Edited by: Aramendel on 09/08/2007 18:14:00 Originally by: Kunming Damps are fine really. RSDs are gallente EW against caldari long range (just like ECM is most effective vs the weak ECCM strengths of gallente). The "weak" sensor strength of gallente is the 2nd highest in the game. Also, you can setup a scorp with damps to be MORE EFFECTIVE with damps at 150k and having a 4 slot tank than it would be with racial ECM, 4 SDAs in the lows and max skills. The range performance of damps is a problem. Originally by: Kunming ..while the counter to RSD is to get close and blow the ship up... In theory. In practise its go close, have a 30 sec+ lock time, watch the damp ship warp out.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.09 19:18:00 - [13] Edited by: Aramendel on 09/08/2007 19:19:22 Originally by: Kunming I didnt say sensor strenght, I said ECCM strength, gallente have the lowest number of mids after amarr so not space ECCM, while minmatar and caldari are easier with it. Right. Because that totally determines what their usual jamming strength is. Quote: Last I checked a gallente racial jammer has a 75% chance to jam a deimos on an ECM ship, 50% on a non ECM ship. Your point? A amarr racial jams a zealot with a higher probability, as does a minmatar jammer jam an muninn. All have the same number of meds, too, btw. Quote: I dont get this arguement about the scorp, can the scorp disable the same ammount of targets with damps as it can with ECM? Maybe nerf the scorp Seriously though another non-arguement from the nerfophils, RSD ships can only disable 1 ship while they are vulnerable to the rest of the gang, they need the range to do their thing at least for a while or RSD wont be used beyond the purpose of abusing 1on1s. Thats the same reason why TDs and TPs should get more range, especially TPs. TPs actually have the identical range stats as damps. They have a bigegr effective range as TDs. And regarding the scorp you utterly do not understand it. Try reading it actually. At range damps work pretty much like ECM. Vs a sniping ship it makes no different if you reduce it's locking range to 100k or jam it. I will loose lock and not be able to do dps while it is effected. Quote: This discussion started with a whine about how effective damps are, then, when that didnt work out, changed to complain about the lack of effective counters and finally moaning about the range of damps... geez if they are so effective fit them on your ships, All my PvP EW ships use damps since 7 months. Quote: I dont have a single damp setup sitting in any of my hangars but I would hate to see RSDs getting nerfed as they are a nice flavour and vital tactical element in gang pvp . And I would like to see flavour by making them balanced with the other EW systems so we see all EW in about equal measures. Quote: LOL, you guys are talking as if you had 1-on-1 duels all the time, FYI any EW ship will either disable you or warp out in 1vs1. Your target can also warp out if fitted with a WCS (WCS + Sensor Booster) or ECM burst, u know, costs even less slots. How can a TD fitted ship warp out when you scramble it? And it is also a lot easier to scramble an ECM ship when it has bad luck with its rolls. A damp ship does not even necessarily need to warp out, it can just web you and gain distance again. If it would not reduce your sig resolution AND targeting range at once it would be actually possible to jam it before it can warp out, just with all the other EW.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.09 23:57:00 - [14] Edited by: Aramendel on 09/08/2007 23:57:54 Originally by: Etho Demerzel That is completely false. A Rook, with rigs and bonuses can get to 20 ECM str per ECM module. No, not really. A rook can have, assuming you have maxxed skills and use 2 SDA2 and 2 ECM strength rigs 13.8. This is the absolute maximum.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.10 00:16:00 - [15] Edited by: Aramendel on 10/08/2007 00:18:02 Originally by: Etho Demerzel I assume you are talking about multispectral. Nope. Racials. Whatever you are doing you are doing it wrong. I would have guessed you are ignoring stacking penalities, but you do not get that high even if you do that. Also, while you are right that people usually do not put 4 ECCM on their ships they neither use 4 correct racial ECM on one. Or 4 SB2. 1-2 SB2 do not do much against any decent damp specced ship.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.10 00:51:00 - [16] Originally by: Etho Demerzel And 4 right ECMs are much more likele to appear than 4 ECCMs. In fleets I don`t see why I wouldn't have a couple of rooks specifically fit to scramble the most damage capable targets (gallente) or the tanks (amarr) while dealing wth the rest. I would fit 4 magnetometric ECCMs anytime. And that still leaves space for 2 multspecs in a dedicated rook. Or 2 of any other race. No, you wouldn't. You seem to have no fleetexperience at all. - no fleetship has room for 4 ECCM - you wouldn't use a rook in fleets sicne it will get instapopped - multipspecs will not be used in fleets because their range is too low.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.10 09:31:00 - [17] Originally by: Hannobaal In other words, same as he would if you were dampening him, only he would be tracking better then. In either case you blow up if you can't dictate range. Only with ECM do you not have to worry about range. The same as I would dampen him but ONLY WITH TURRETS! This is a pretty huge limitation. Its not only not effective against missiles, it is also does nothing against webs or scrams or nosses or neuts or all EW. It has module-for module about the same efficiency as damps or ECM, exept it is only vs one item group. While you have time to warp off with damps if something gets to oclose with TDs you'll be scrambled and possible webbed and efficiently already dead. Also, TD have the lowest effective range of all EW. Less than 50% hitchance at 100k. Less than 5% at 140k. If you would remove the scan resolution with damps and nerf thei falloff they would have similar weaknesses as TDs (higher vulnerability if something gets in range, low max range) and would STILL be stronger since they effect a wider range of modules. Also, you have to worry with ECM about range since you cannot fit a tank and have low speed & agility on these ships. Combine this with a chancebased EW going into short range with that is a russian roulette at all times since if you are unlucky you are most likely dead. Due to this you have to stay at longer ranges with ECM ships. Quote: How can you ignore the modules on the enemy ship that increase the stat you're trying to decrease when you talking about how effective you will be in combat? I am not ignoring it. I am just not looking at it as sole effect. With the same argumentation I could argue that SB2s are way to weak with 60% since ECCM gives a 96% bonus. The problem is the basic efficiency of a module. Turrets do not "barely" hit you under normal conditions, they have plenty of "extra" range and tracking. And falloff is not reduced by TDs at all and gives many turrets a relatively high minimum range. Meaning you do not need to boost your turrets much to be able to counter a TD ship. When you only have to boost a stat for 20% gain enough efficiency to be able to counter something a 15% counter is strong than a 60% is when you have to boost a stat by 200% to counter something.

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.