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.

---

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?

---

Originally by: Proxay

---

What drugs are you on, honestly.

RSD on close range ships should always be used in conjunction with an ECM burst

---

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

---

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.

---

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.

---

Originally by: Tao Han

---

But if the other pilot also brings a friend?

---

Originally by: Aakron

---

lol another damp thread, seriously why couldnt you post in one of the other 9 threads?

---

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.

---

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.

---

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

---

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.

---

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.

---

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.

---

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

---

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.

---

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.

---

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.

---

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?

---

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.

---

Originally by: Aramendel

---

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

---

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.

---

Quote:

---

It is already the case for ECM. If i put 3/4 ECCM on my battleship, i'am quite immune to ECM.

---

Quote:

---

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.

---

Originally by: Hannobaal

---

There's countering a module and there's rendering it completely ineffective. Those are completely different things.

If a ship like the Arazu/Lachesis with expensive equipment and high skill could not even manage to bring a single battleship out of sniping range (not shutting it down but just bringing it out of sniping range) and you had a choice between flying that ship and flying a battleship in a fleet battle - what possible reasons would you have to pick the Ewar ship over the battleship to fly in a fleet battle? None whatsoever.

---

Originally by: Kulmid

---

you do realize not all PvP takes place at 150km?

---

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.

---

Originally by: Zubakis

---

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." says it all.

No offence m8 but if you're thick enough to try and fly any of those things solo you deserve to die (might explain why you're so miffed too) and in a gang a dedicated damp ship will be more effective hands down, oh wait thats what you're trying to stop

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.

---

Originally by: achoura

---

"I dont care about your hype and what it can do." says it all.

No offence m8 but if you're thick enough to try and fly any of those things solo you deserve to die (might explain why you're so miffed too) and in a gang a dedicated damp ship will be more effective hands down, oh wait thats what you're trying to stop

---

Originally by: Aramendel

---

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.

---

Originally by: Aakron

---

lol another damp thread, seriously why couldnt you post in one of the other 9 threads?

---

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.

---

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.

---

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.

---

Originally by: Pain Bear

---

My only gripe with RSD is the best standard named is WAY better fitting and same effect as the tech2.

Pb

---

Originally by: General Apocalypse

---

Idiots need a serious nerf
Say NO to the NOS nerf

---

Originally by: Jim McGregor

---

I felt the disturbance... it was like a million voices suddenly stopped whining for a second. Unfortunantly it then continued.

---

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.

---

Originally by: Ivyg

---

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.

---

Agree completely. This is the only module in the game which cannot be countered. People that are saying they are fine are the ones that rely on them for their preferred combat style. Just like the Nos nerf was due, damps will follow suit. Any module which has no downside or counter is overpowered. Any module which eliminates the possibility of someone fighting back at all is overpowered.

---

Originally by: Aramendel

---

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.

---

Originally by: Dr Fighter

---

there are counters, they are called sensor boosters. The issue is that damps always work so all you can do is reduce the effect of them.

you say ECM as a counter and its ECCM, but you can still get jammed. Well thats the same with damps, the counter works but isnt always 100% effective.

EW is more ballanced now than its ever been, not so long ago a few sensor boosters would hav made 3-4 damps usless, people whined and the sensor boosters stacking was reduced, yet more whining saying the oposite way.

damps work? great. Try to involve a few more modules like mwds to escape or get into range with sensor boosters. cant get round being jammed so easy and the one modules just doubles your chances.

im gunna stop defending them because theres too many idiots who dont know what the are talking about because they dont know how to help themselfs so they ask the eve gods for a nerf.

---

Originally by: Benn Helmsman

---

They would be balanced, if only working decent on dedicated ships like ECM.

---

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.

---

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.

---

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.

---

Quote:

---

You might as well argue that guns are overpowered cause its one of the major killers in pvp.

---

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.

---

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...

---

Quote:

---

Also the huge range... well jammers got longer range on a recon...

---

Originally by: Luke Lamarr

---

Let's take a look at some facts. Here's some data I just extracted from the Item DB:

RSD II: -48% targeting range, -48% scan res
SBII: +60% range, +60% res

Note: before flaming me on the data, please consider the following
1) Data comes from the Item DB, which may be outdated
2) Item stats are specified in a weird way, so I might be misinterpreting them. Please correct me if I am wrong (cuz I believe I am)
3) Item stats do not take into account any bonuses coming from ships or skills, and I did not look into them, so a module class could benefit more from skills than the other class

Looking at this data quickly, you have the impression that a single SB can efficiently counter a single RSD, which is not the case. I took a quick look at Ryysa's guide, and figured that using an RSD II on a ship with a SB II running actually cripples your locking range and scan res by (1-(1.6*0.52))=16,8%

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)

From what I have read in this thread, ppl seem to be whining about the fact that their 1-2 SB cannot defeat the multiple RSD put on them by specialised ships... I would expect any ship to have a hard time with a specced RSD ship, plz stop whining cuz you cannot lock it and down it in 30 secs...

And please don't compare the efficiency of an RSD between a fully-rigged unspecialised ship and an unrigged specialised ship

Plz let the dampeners be and stop nerfing all the modules in game. Buff the pilots instead

---

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)

---

Originally by: Luke Lamarr

---

Looking at this data quickly, you have the impression that a single SB can efficiently counter a single RSD, which is not the case. I took a quick look at Ryysa's guide, and figured that using an RSD II on a ship with a SB II running actually cripples your locking range and scan res by (1-(1.6*0.52))=16,8%

---

Quote:

---

And please don't compare the efficiency of an RSD between a fully-rigged unspecialised ship and an unrigged specialised ship

---

Originally by: Aramendel

---

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.

---

Originally by: Aramendel

---

Yes, because comparing 2 modules without spec & shipskills is hugely intelligent.

His arguments are rather dumb, too...

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.

---

Originally by: Aramendel

---

1) Cap use..I mean..SERIOUSLY?

---

Originally by: General Apocalypse

---

Idiots need a serious nerf
Say NO to the NOS nerf

---

Originally by: Luke Lamarr

---

Originally by: Aramendel

---

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.

---

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)

---

Originally by: General Apocalypse

---

Idiots need a serious nerf
Say NO to the NOS nerf

---

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

---

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)

---

Quote:

---

So put yourself at work, do some maths and prove your point

---

Originally by: Hannobaal

---

Except it is on turret ships. Why don't you try it?

---

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?

---

Quote:

---

READ THIS NEXT PART CAREFULLY AS IT IS VERY IMPORTANT AND POSTING A REPLY WITHOUT READING IT MAY RESULT IN YOU LOOKING STUPID.

---

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).

---

Originally by: Kunming

---

..while the counter to RSD is to get close and blow the ship up...

---

Originally by: Aramendel

---

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: Aramendel

---

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.

---

Quote:

---

READ THIS NEXT PART CAREFULLY AS IT IS VERY IMPORTANT AND POSTING A REPLY WITHOUT READING IT MAY RESULT IN YOU LOOKING STUPID.

---

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.

---

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.

---

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.

---

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,

---

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

---

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.

---

Originally by: Zubakis

---

When i fit 4 ECCM modules on a battleship, it will make your ECM completely ineffective. When i fit 4 sensor boosters, you are still very effective with your RSD's.

---

Originally by: Etho Demerzel

---

That is completely false. A Rook, with rigs and bonuses can get to 20 ECM str per ECM module.

---

Originally by: Aramendel

---

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.

---

Originally by: Etho Demerzel

---

I assume you are talking about multispectral.

---

Originally by: Luke Lamarr

---

From what I have read in this thread, ppl seem to be whining about the fact that their 1-2 SB cannot defeat the multiple RSD put on them by specialised ships...

---

Originally by: Aramendel

---

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.

---

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.

---

Originally by: Aramendel

---

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:

---

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.

---

Originally by: Aramendel

---

The range performance of damps is a problem.

---

Originally by: General Apocalypse

---

Idiots need a serious nerf
Say NO to the NOS nerf

---

Originally by: Lady Caeser

---

if every member of your gang fits 1 RSD and your opponent doesnt, you'll win the fight - its the new ECM.

---

Originally by: General Apocalypse

---

Idiots need a serious nerf
Say NO to the NOS nerf

---

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.

---

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?

---