|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
   |
Posted - 2007.09.10 02:27:00 -
[1]
 Originally by: Bellum Eternus
If damps were seperated into two modules: range and lock time, would be fine, but only if the stats for each specialty module were better than the existing combined modules stats.
Why? 3 phased muon damps will take a target from 200km lock to like 10km lock. On a lach/arazu it gets worse.
|
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.09.10 04:48:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Hotshothotshot1
Edited by: Hotshothotshot1 on 10/09/2007 04:00:48
All attacking weapons should be highslots including EW, Scram& web. That way there wouldnt be a solopwn ship witch damps you too hell and still loads of firepower to kill you, or web you to hell. So if you want to Damp someone to hell you will have to exchange dps for it. On top of that if you want to scram and web someone too then you either go all EW and no dps or suck at both.
Things wont have to get nerfed then, more gang instead of solo? make attacking mods highslot mods
Nos/neuts are highslots, guns, missiles, lasers all highs. These mods "ATTACK" the targets, so why arent webs, scram, tracking disruptors, damps and ECM highslots.
Unless you were a drone ship, which get tons of new mods to put in the high slots that you arenty perfectly abusing with nos anymore.
Mids for ew is fine
|
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.09.10 07:49:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Goumindong on 10/09/2007 07:50:03
Actualy 3 phased muons on a rigged arazu/arazu/lachesis will take a 250km lock range Rokh down to 12.34km.
That is a final lock range reduction of 95.04%
On a non-specialized ship its about 21km for a final lock range reduction of 91.4%
That being said, yes it was an exaggeration. Whop de do, the extra 8km arent going to help you hit anything, not to mention the effect on frigates and cruisers.
ed: I only point out exaggerations if it affects the meat of the arguement.
|
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.09.10 08:21:00 -
[4]
In which case the % reductions are higher. At 95.49% and 92.1% respectivly
EFT used to give me total uncaped lock range. Now it doesnt.
|
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.09.11 11:37:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Laboratus
Originally by: Aramendel
They have problems there too. Depending what you state as "long range", that is.
Balmer/t2 TDs have after skills an optimal of 72k a and a falloff of 36k.
This means they have an 100% chance to work at 72k, a 50% chance to work at 108k and a 6% chance to work at 144k.
If long range is for you 30-80k, then yes, they are decent there.
At 100k - sniper distance for cruisers with a 50% range bonus - they are already far less effective than damps and at 150k - common minimum sniper range for BS - they are a waste of a med slot with success chances of less than 5% (damps have a 38% success chance at 150k, btw).
Ok, sorry, med range.
Anyways, the point is they work well against amarr, but not so well against the other 75% of pod pilots...
Yes they do. As you close the ability to lock fast means you start doing damage faster.
The difference between an undamped ship and a damped ship closing and locking a target is probably between 30 seconds to 1 minute of DPS. Even for a ship with low DPS this is thousands of DPS.
Here is an example. On the test server, i was in a 3.5km/s Zealot and decided to try my luck against a lachesis for the heck of it.
I was damped and unable to orbit, so i closed in very close. By the time i got into locking range i was taking serious damage. Then i was webbed, and i got close. Eventually i locked him and started doing DPS. But by then it was too late, because i was behind on his DPS by a good 30 seconds, which equates to about 6-9000 damage.
|
|
|
| |
|