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 [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Zubakis Bambooule TALIONIS ALLIANCE	Posted - 2007.08.05 13:22:00 - [1] Hello everybody, here i want to show you why sensor dampners are overpowered and why we need some balance there. 1. Remote sensor dampner I think i dont need to explain how it works. Remote sensor dampner (RSD) reduce your lock range and increase your lock time. 2. Counter: sensor booster It was proven in numerous posts that one sensor booster dont really help you against remote sensor dampners. It is silly when you fit 3 sensor booster on a battleship and still has a lock range of 20km. The people who thinks that's enough must be thinking we all fly blasterthrons where 20km operating range is enough. An armageddon can shoot up to 45km with pulse lasers, a raven can spam missiles up to 100+km. Forcing people to close range combat even when they fit 3 counter modules is silly. 3. The abuse Here i want to show you how you can abuse RSD's in its current form. 3.1 EW rigs With the introduction of EW rigs, CCP made a horrible mistake. You can only fit two T1 rigs on a ship, but it gives you so much bonus like having the dedicated cruiser skill on level 4. And the drawback is -10% shield per rig, with skills even less. This is completely wrong, if i fit for EW i dont care about my shield anyway. 3.2 Damp Hyperion "Damperion", maxed skills Ship: Hyperion Highs: 4x Ions T2, 4x Electrons T2 Mids: MWD, Cap Booster, 3x RSD (phased muons) Lows: 2x LAR2, DMC2, 2xEANM2, 1600mm RT Rigs: 2x RSD rigs Drones: 4x Ogre II Result: 839 DPS, monster tank, EW effectivness of a Celestis People claiming that dampening dont help you in close range dont have a clue. They forget the fact that RSD's reduce your scan resolution thus increasing your lock time. You need 1 successfull jam cycle from a blackbird and your opponent is disabled for the next 1-2 minutes. ECM + Damp = WIN. 3.3 Damp Raven Maxed skills Ship: Raven Highs: 6x Siege Missile Launcher II Mids: feel free to fit them, you have enough room here Lows: 2x 1600mm RT, DMC2, 2x EANM2 Rigs: 2x RSD rigs Drones: 5x Hammerhead II Result: 589 DPS, optimal 100+km, passive armor tank, EW effectivness of a Celestis If you have someone who can repair you, you will get an awesome EW ship with an operating range of 100km. 3.4 What's wrong with this? It's imbalanced. These setups combine DPS, Tank and EW in one ship. There is a purpose why CCP made EW ships so weak in regard of tank and DPS. And creating setups which can overcome the weaknesses of EW ships screw up this balance. 4. Solution I won't give you a solution to this, i will just make some suggestions. a) Make sensor boosters more effective against RSD's b) Remove/reduce the scan resolution penalty on RSD's c) Fix EW rigs Finally it's how CCP thinks about it. If they dont see a problem here then it was probably a useless post . -- Zuba
Wod Gallente	Posted - 2007.08.05 13:26:00 - [2] it's not overpowered, it's a effective way to combat your foes. I think most people missunderstand PVP. I think most people abuse the term PVP. Player versus Player. Get it?
Avataris The first genesis Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2007.08.05 13:28:00 - [3] Celestis: Special Ability: 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret Damage and Remote Sensor Dampener effectiveness per skill level. Care to show us where those other ships get their damp bonus from? They are not as effective as a celestis.
Astro Teller Milf Riders	Posted - 2007.08.05 13:28:00 - [4] Edited by: Astro Teller on 05/08/2007 13:28:54 QQ (your tears are so good to drink) Astro Teller
Zubakis Bambooule TALIONIS ALLIANCE	Posted - 2007.08.05 13:29:00 - [5] Originally by: Avataris Celestis: Special Ability: 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret Damage and Remote Sensor Dampener effectiveness per skill level. Care to show us where those other ships get their damp bonus from? They are not as effective as a celestis. Dude read the post, especially the part about the EW rigs. -- Zuba
Grytok German Kings OPUS Alliance	Posted - 2007.08.05 13:33:00 - [6] Why all you people complain about EW-Warfare? EvE is an MMO and therefore not ment to fly around solo all the time. If you'd fly in a gang of 5, then you'd not have a problem, because you cannot disable more than one target at a time with Damps. See how overpowered they are? Solo-PvP in EvE is unbalanced for a reason, because there should'nt be. .
n0thing omen.	Posted - 2007.08.05 13:53:00 - [7] Big, funny post. Hyperion with no sensor booster, means anything having sensor booster and is close range, will lock him faster, get into range, and his RSD`s is just a waste of 3 mid slots. And your also dead from any 2 ranged ships due to no web. You ever flew what you propose or just made it up in Quickfit? ---
Zubakis Bambooule TALIONIS ALLIANCE	Posted - 2007.08.05 13:59:00 - [8] Edited by: Zubakis on 05/08/2007 14:02:58 Originally by: n0thing Big, funny post. Hyperion with no sensor booster, means anything having sensor booster and is close range, will lock him faster, get into range, and his RSD`s is just a waste of 3 mid slots. And your also dead from any 2 ranged ships due to no web. You ever flew what you propose or just made it up in Quickfit? You probably cant read. RSD's are effective in close range too. You just need a jammer in your gang. Do yor ever played in gangs? You dont have to fit web/scram on each ship. Just have a buddy who can do it for you. I would take a Damperion instead of a Celestis if i have the choice. It has DPS+Tank+EW. EDIT: Another viable fitting for a Damperion. Highs: 7x350mm Railguns T2, 1 Assault Missile Launcher II Mids: Cap Booster, Sensor Booster, 3x RSD Lows,Rigs,Drones: same as in the first post -- Zuba
Proxay Gallente Fallen Angel's Blade.	Posted - 2007.08.05 14:12:00 - [9] What drugs are you on, honestly. RSD on close range ships should always be used in conjunction with an ECM burst Fallen Angel's Recruitment
Zubakis Bambooule TALIONIS ALLIANCE	Posted - 2007.08.05 14:18:00 - [10] Originally by: Proxay What drugs are you on, honestly. RSD on close range ships should always be used in conjunction with an ECM burst Or simply have a Blackbird in your gang. -- Zuba

Haniblecter Teg F.R.E.E. Explorer EVE Animal Control	Posted - 2007.08.05 14:37:00 - [11] Having 3 slots for ANY EW is going to be super effective. Put on 3 tracking destabilizers and you've hamstringed ANY turret ship, even a frickin frigate, put three ECM and you'd be surprised the chance of screwing a ship. But try pulling that crap against 2 players, and you're ****. The gist is, you cant balance for solo AND group pvp in EVE...in fact, you cant do it in alot of games. So what you do is pick one and run with it. CCP chose group pvp. ---------------------------------------- Friends Forever**
n0thing omen.	Posted - 2007.08.05 14:47:00 - [12] Originally by: Zubakis Edited by: Zubakis on 05/08/2007 14:02:58 Originally by: n0thing Big, funny post. Hyperion with no sensor booster, means anything having sensor booster and is close range, will lock him faster, get into range, and his RSD`s is just a waste of 3 mid slots. And your also dead from any 2 ranged ships due to no web. You ever flew what you propose or just made it up in Quickfit? You probably cant read. RSD's are effective in close range too. You just need a jammer in your gang. Do yor ever played in gangs? You dont have to fit web/scram on each ship. Just have a buddy who can do it for you. I would take a Damperion instead of a Celestis if i have the choice. It has DPS+Tank+EW. EDIT: Another viable fitting for a Damperion. Highs: 7x350mm Railguns T2, 1 Assault Missile Launcher II Mids: Cap Booster, Sensor Booster, 3x RSD Lows,Rigs,Drones: same as in the first post Second setup will die to any long range ship with speed above 1-2km/sec. Oh and btw, gang setups also feature tackling equipment since the more points/webs you got the more target you can lock at once. And, RSD`s are having no use at close range, after you lock him, he can damp all he wants. You can kill a lanchesis easily once yr 4-5k within him. ---
Zubakis Bambooule TALIONIS ALLIANCE	Posted - 2007.08.05 14:58:00 - [13] Originally by: n0thing Second setup will die to any long range ship with speed above 1-2km/sec. Oh and btw, gang setups also feature tackling equipment since the more points/webs you got the more target you can lock at once. And, RSD`s are having no use at close range, after you lock him, he can damp all he wants. You can kill a lanchesis easily once yr 4-5k within him. Oh hell, how hard is it to understand? Damp + ECM = WIN Scenario: You locked me, i'm dampening you. You still lock me. And now here comes my Blackbird and jam you just 1 time. I'm still dampening you. You are waiting the time for the jam cycle (20 seconds) + the time to lock me again (1 minute). And look here you were disabled for more than a minute. Rinse and repeat. So tell me please again about ineffectivness of damps in close range. -- Zuba
Tao Han Synthetic Frontiers	Posted - 2007.08.05 15:08:00 - [14] Originally by: Zubakis Originally by: n0thing Second setup will die to any long range ship with speed above 1-2km/sec. Oh and btw, gang setups also feature tackling equipment since the more points/webs you got the more target you can lock at once. And, RSD`s are having no use at close range, after you lock him, he can damp all he wants. You can kill a lanchesis easily once yr 4-5k within him. Oh hell, how hard is it to understand? Damp + ECM = WIN Scenario: You locked me, i'm dampening you. You still lock me. And now here comes my Blackbird and jam you just 1 time. I'm still dampening you. You are waiting the time for the jam cycle (20 seconds) + the time to lock me again (1 minute). And look here you were disabled for more than a minute. Rinse and repeat. So tell me please again about ineffectivness of damps in close range. But if the other pilot also brings a friend? ------ Turret: -a small tower extending above a building gun enclosure: a self-contained weapons -platform housing guns and capable of rotation Turret people, not turrent!!
Red Crown Kudzu Collective	Posted - 2007.08.05 15:11:00 - [15] the problem with RSDs is not that they are very good, its the Falloff. When an unbonused ship (Damp Pilgrim) can sucessfully and fully damp you from 107KM you have a problem.
Zubakis Bambooule TALIONIS ALLIANCE	Posted - 2007.08.05 15:12:00 - [16] Originally by: Tao Han But if the other pilot also brings a friend? Doesnt change anything, he is still disabled for a minute. You can see this scenario as a part of large combat. -- Zuba
Aakron Infinitus Odium The Church.	Posted - 2007.08.05 15:14:00 - [17] lol another damp thread, seriously why couldnt you post in one of the other 9 threads? ---
Zubakis Bambooule TALIONIS ALLIANCE	Posted - 2007.08.05 15:16:00 - [18] Originally by: Aakron lol another damp thread, seriously why couldnt you post in one of the other 9 threads? This thread is for discussion, the others are for trolling. -- Zuba
madaluap Gallente Mercenary Forces Exquisite Malevolence	Posted - 2007.08.05 15:38:00 - [19] Quote: 2. Counter: sensor booster It was proven in numerous posts that one sensor booster dont really help you against remote sensor dampners. It is silly when you fit 3 sensor booster on a battleship and still has a lock range of 20km. The people who thinks that's enough must be thinking we all fly blasterthrons where 20km operating range is enough. An armageddon can shoot up to 45km with pulse lasers, a raven can spam missiles up to 100+km. Forcing people to close range combat even when they fit 3 counter modules is silly. Yes it does. Fit 3* sensorbooster and someone puts one damp on you, you still keep 60-70ish km range. Only carriers really, really suffer from damps. Well if you use 3* sensorboost and the other guy uses 3* damp, what is the problem? Yes you end up with 20 km range or (hopefully) less. Quote: 3.1 EW rigs With the introduction of EW rigs, CCP made a horrible mistake. You can only fit two T1 rigs on a ship, but it gives you so much bonus like having the dedicated cruiser skill on level 4. And the drawback is -10% shield per rig, with skills even less. This is completely wrong, if i fit for EW i dont care about my shield anyway. Not aware of this. Never encountered any problems with it. Quote: 3.2 Damp Hyperion "Damperion", maxed skills Ship: Hyperion Highs: 4x Ions T2, 4x Electrons T2 Mids: MWD, Cap Booster, 3x RSD (phased muons) Lows: 2x LAR2, DMC2, 2xEANM2, 1600mm RT Rigs: 2x RSD rigs Drones: 4x Ogre II Result: 839 DPS, monster tank, EW effectivness of a Celestis My hyp has: more dps, a lot more tank and can actually lock targets intime. That plate is the gheyest thing in town. Your explosive resist is very low and you only use 2 damagetypes. Also you do realise you spend 36 mil on damps and 30 mil on rigs? Thats a 66 mil investment for only those 3 meds. Celestis + setup = 8-10 mil. Quote: People claiming that dampening dont help you in close range dont have a clue. They forget the fact that RSD's reduce your scan resolution thus increasing your lock time. You need 1 successfull jam cycle from a blackbird and your opponent is disabled for the next 1-2 minutes. ECM + Damp = WIN. This is what i (and i think other people aswell) play eve for... tactics. You just outsmarted your opponent, because you dedicated 2 gangmembers for pure EW role, no damage, no tank. Just the EW. Quote: 3.3 Damp Raven Maxed skills Ship: Raven Highs: 6x Siege Missile Launcher II Mids: feel free to fit them, you have enough room here Lows: 2x 1600mm RT, DMC2, 2x EANM2 Rigs: 2x RSD rigs Drones: 5x Hammerhead II Result: 589 DPS, optimal 100+km, passive armor tank, EW effectivness of a Celestis If you have someone who can repair you, you will get an awesome EW ship with an operating range of 100km. Burn eden has been doing that for ages. Now its suddenly overpowered? No i dont care about the EW effectivness of a celestis...1-2 sensorboosters and whats left is the wreck of a LOW-DPS raven that popped in 1 minute or the wreck of a medium dps raven that popped in seconds. Quote: 3.4 What's wrong with this? It's imbalanced. These setups combine DPS, Tank and EW in one ship. There is a purpose why CCP made EW ships so weak in regard of tank and DPS. And creating setups which can overcome the weaknesses of EW ships screw up this balance. Its a low-dps crap bs. Yes you can use your uberawesome 3-4 damps setup, but it just another tactic, its not overpowered. Quote: 4. Solution I won't give you a solution to this, i will just make some suggestions. a) Make sensor boosters more effective against RSD's b) Remove/reduce the scan resolution penalty on RSD's c) Fix EW rigs a, b and c all nerf dedicated EW ships. Sensorboosters more effective, doesnt solve anything. Reduce RSD power makes damps crap on dedicated ships aswell. 'Fixing' ew rigs is just another nerf for dedicated ships. There simply is no need for a nerf. _________________________________________________ Breetime A killmail!11!1 omgrawr: BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Zubakis Bambooule TALIONIS ALLIANCE	Posted - 2007.08.05 16:02:00 - [20] Originally by: madaluap My hyp has: more dps, a lot more tank and can actually lock targets intime. That plate is the gheyest thing in town. Your explosive resist is very low and you only use 2 damagetypes. Also you do realise you spend 36 mil on damps and 30 mil on rigs? Thats a 66 mil investment for only those 3 meds. Celestis + setup = 8-10 mil. This is what i (and i think other people aswell) play eve for... tactics. You just outsmarted your opponent, because you dedicated 2 gangmembers for pure EW role, no damage, no tank. Just the EW. Its a low-dps crap bs. Yes you can use your uberawesome 3-4 damps setup, but it just another tactic, its not overpowered. I dont care about your hype and what it can do. You can switch the plate to explosive hardner if you prefer it, where is the problem? You can switch to berserkers and deal 3 damagetypes, where is the problem? People who want to win dont care about isk And now compare my Damperion with your Celestis: My Damperion deals 839 DPS. What deals your Celestis? 100? My Damperion can tank. What can you tank with your Celestis? 1 missile of a Raven? I can sit in the middle of a battle and fight, you will have to run or die, if someone attacks you. 839 DPS is low? Show me another EW ship, which can do more. -- Zuba

n0thing omen.	Posted - 2007.08.05 16:09:00 - [21] Tbh, increasing Sensor Boosters power will only lead to less solo as more camps will feature not only bubbles but also sensor boosted inties. Also, ofc ECM + Damps win, but if your Hyperion and BB gets jumped by 2 damage ships that has idea what they are doing, BB will be dead before first cycle goes thru. Then its your turn and with low resistances and no sensor booster/web or MWD, your dead. ---
Zubakis Bambooule TALIONIS ALLIANCE	Posted - 2007.08.05 16:16:00 - [22] Originally by: n0thing Tbh, increasing Sensor Boosters power will only lead to less solo as more camps will feature not only bubbles but also sensor boosted inties. I think it's possible to work on stacking formula and how they stack with RSD's. You wont probably need to change the stats of a sensor booster. But i could be wrong. -- Zuba
Stelteck Minmatar Section XIII Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2007.08.05 16:20:00 - [23] The problem is not really the sensor dampeners, the problem is that you cannot counter it even if you put as many sensor booster T2 possible in all your med slots. I did the test. Arazu VS tempest with 4 SB T2. Tempest config snipe lock range : 21km ^^ Like ECCM for ECM, we need a way to counter the damp. Make ECCM works for both (ECM and damper) as example. Stelteck.
Hannobaal Gallente Dragonfire Intergalactic Crusaders of Krom Dark Matter Coalition	Posted - 2007.08.05 16:38:00 - [24] Edited by: Hannobaal on 05/08/2007 16:38:58 Originally by: Stelteck The problem is not really the sensor dampeners, the problem is that you cannot counter it even if you put as many sensor booster T2 possible in all your med slots. I did the test. Arazu VS tempest with 4 SB T2. Tempest config snipe lock range : 21km ^^ Like ECCM for ECM, we need a way to counter the damp. Make ECCM works for both (ECM and damper) as example. Stelteck. Do I understand correctly? You want there to be a way to fit a battleship so that even with a full row of sensor dampeners from an expensive deicated tech 2 Ewar ship on it, it can still lock out to sniping ranges? Why don't you just be more honest and go ahead and ask for sensor dampeners to be removed from the game alltogether then since that seems to be what you want? ------------------
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.05 16:56:00 - [25] 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
General Coochie New Justice Molotov Coalition	Posted - 2007.08.05 17:06:00 - [26] Intresting I enver though of it like that. Naturally the damperion si alot more expensive then a celestis. And you could always put rigs on the celestis aswell to make it even more effective then the hyperion. On the other hand I rather rig a BS then a T1 cruiser. Valid point IMO and clearly deserves an own thread. Could be fixed / tuned by; * Nerfing damps a bit, but boosting dampships bonuses. O * By boosting sensor boosters effect against dampners alot, I dont mean you should make sensor boosters more effective generally ONLY vs dampners.. * Reduce Dampners fall off range, and amybe optimal aswell, make them a better choice for medium ranged encounters. Damps shouldnt outpeform multi ECM in sniper ranges IMO. Might add bonus to dampning ships falloff and range to dampners to compensate so these ships would still be viable in fleet combat. Signature removed - please reduce your signature graphic height to less than 120 pixels - Jacques([email protected])
Stelteck Minmatar Section XIII Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2007.08.05 18:09:00 - [27] Originally by: Hannobaal Do I understand correctly? You want there to be a way to fit a battleship so that even with a full row of sensor dampeners from an expensive deicated tech 2 Ewar ship on it, it can still lock out to sniping ranges? Why don't you just be more honest and go ahead and ask for sensor dampeners to be removed from the game alltogether then since that seems to be what you want? Yes, i want a way to be near immune to damper if i decide to use enough med slot to counter the damp effect. It is already the case for ECM. If i put 3/4 ECCM on my battleship, i'am quite immune to ECM. Of course, i have a lot of mid slots used and it create fitting problems for the others purposes of the battleship.(Such as fighting). it is not a surprising request. Does ECCM kill ECM ? No, because many people do not use them in order to fit others tools. It will be the same for anti-Damp ECCM. In fact, it is the fact that you are against that that is a surprise for me. you want a module without any possible counter ? Stelteck.
Zubakis Bambooule TALIONIS ALLIANCE	Posted - 2007.08.05 18:34:00 - [28] Originally by: Stelteck Yes, i want a way to be near immune to damper if i decide to use enough med slot to counter the damp effect. It is already the case for ECM. If i put 3/4 ECCM on my battleship, i'am quite immune to ECM. Of course, i have a lot of mid slots used and it create fitting problems for the others purposes of the battleship.(Such as fighting). it is not a surprising request. Does ECCM kill ECM ? No, because many people do not use them in order to fit others tools. It will be the same for anti-Damp ECCM. In fact, it is the fact that you are against that that is a surprise for me. you want a module without any possible counter ? Stelteck. Yes, so true. By fitting more ECCM my protection against ECM becomes more and more better. Fitting more sensor boosters doesnt really help you at all. -- Zuba
Marcus Druallis Quantum Industries Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.08.05 18:40:00 - [29] lol the new nos? -- Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes - Devil ([email protected])
Laboratus Gallente BGG League of Abnormal Gentlemen	Posted - 2007.08.05 18:42:00 - [30] The whole point of RSDs is to force ppl to either outside damp range or inside the damped range (generally <20 possibly < 15 to the best range of blasters). The reason behind the current bit of a problem, where only rokhs can effectively fight outside rds range was the very poorly done T2 long range ammo nerf. It did not take into concideration that moving ships from ~200km to ~100km they fall under all types of EW. The solution here would be to boost T2 ammo back to it's intended ranges and just stop this unbelievable BS about gimping all forms of EW one by one. ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: 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.