| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tarminic
Black Flame Industries
   |
Posted - 2007.10.11 17:33:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Tarminic on 11/10/2007 17:35:26
Edited by: Tarminic on 11/10/2007 17:33:34
We've all heard people talk about an upcoming nerf/balancing for sensor dampeners, that they would only affect one attribute instead of two (locking time/locking range). "Noooo!" Cry those operating outside their opponents locking range! "Garrgh!" Cry the frigate pilots and the drone users, wishing to keep their ships from being locked in any reasonable time!
But look at this interesting little tidbit of information from a recent article:
 Quote:
Attribute Reassignment Modifier (ARM) scripts to modify bonus attributes of sensor boosters, dampeners and tracking modules
What does this mean for Sensor Dampeners? That we'll be choosing between reducing the enemy's lock range and increasing their lock time. But how bad is this, you ask? Let me put forth this scenario:
1. You're flying an e-war frigate loaded down with (post-"nerf")dampeners in order to keep larger targets from having a chance to lock you down. Currently they only increase lock time.
2. You engage a larger ship and turn the damps on, and the go to work befuddling your enemy capsuleer's computers.
3.Curses! They've (finally) got a lock, and they're shooting big nasty things at you. But wait, you've got a plan!
4. You switch the mode of your sensor dampeners, changing their effect from lock time to lock range, and casually sail out of danger. You're now outside their lock range and safe.
5. In order to dive back into the action and continue to chip away at your opponents tank, you dive back in, switching from lock range reduction back to lock time reduction. Your enemy can now lock you again, but they'll be dead before their computers ever finish that cup of coffee your dampeners have described to it (in great detail).
TL; DR Summary:
This nerf doesn't seem like much of a nerf at all since you can switch abilities - locking time doesn't matter if you're out of range and sensor range doesn't matter if their locking time is extremely slow. It introduces a bit more thinking in their use (which is fine by me) and allows you to use them basically the same way, with only a minor delay (right click->change effect).
Opinions?
----------------
Tarminic - 29 Million SP in Forum Warfare |
Tarminic
Black Flame Industries
|
Posted - 2007.10.11 17:38:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Indigo Johnson
Edited by: Indigo Johnson on 11/10/2007 17:36:29
Cheese served here on after with your choice of wine.
I don't follow your newfangled sarcasm.
----------------
Tarminic - 29 Million SP in Forum Warfare |
Tarminic
Black Flame Industries
|
Posted - 2007.10.11 17:41:00 -
[3]
Originally by: F90OEX
wtb curse 20mil  for most it will involve to much micro managing between NOS/neuts and now damps.
Curse seems like an obvious choice - just orbit outside their sensor range. 3T2 damps put someone at about 20% of their normal locking range, so without at least two sensor boosters they'd be unable to lock and the Curse could just orbit at max NOS/Neutralizer range. Then again I don't have a whole lot of experience flying either so i'm just armchairing it here.
----------------
Tarminic - 29 Million SP in Forum Warfare |
Tarminic
Black Flame Industries
|
Posted - 2007.10.11 18:00:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
What is a TL;DR?
Too Long; Didn't Read
----------------
Tarminic - 29 Million SP in Forum Warfare |
Tarminic
Black Flame Industries
|
Posted - 2007.10.11 18:49:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Stellar Vix
The stats are getting tweaked for the nerf as well from what i understand. Sensor boosters and remote sensor boosters are getting nerfed as well to one or the other mode.
Oh really? This might just be a stealth boost to small-ship warfare since it'll make it harder for battleships to target frigates and such...
----------------
Tarminic - 29 Million SP in Forum Warfare |
Tarminic
Black Flame Industries
|
Posted - 2007.10.11 19:13:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Vladimir Norkoff
My opinion is that you do not fly Gallente Recons much.
That would be a correct opinion, but I'm more interested in knowing your opinion on how this will affect Gallente Recons (assuming you fly them).
----------------
Tarminic - 29 Million SP in Forum Warfare |
Tarminic
Black Flame Industries
|
Posted - 2007.10.11 19:24:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Krazy Bitsch
Originally by: Tarminic
Originally by: Vladimir Norkoff
My opinion is that you do not fly Gallente Recons much.
That would be a correct opinion, but I'm more interested in knowing your opinion on how this will affect Gallente Recons (assuming you fly them).
Any sensor damp nerf would be the equivelant of the nos nerf for amarr recons....get it now? stop reccomending that crap gets nerfed because you cant find the room in ur fitting for a sensor booster or 2. Stop crying about "nerf this" and "nerf that" its horrible.
1. I wasn't personally endorsing the nerf (I'm an e-war specialist myself), but I thought that with some thinking you could fairly easily overcome the new limitations being imposed, that is all.
2. You still didn't explain exactly how this nerf will affect Gallente recons - what they will and won't be able to do after this change is made, and how this compares with how they'll be used and how they were used.
----------------
Tarminic - 29 Million SP in Forum Warfare |
Tarminic
Black Flame Industries
|
Posted - 2007.10.11 19:48:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Tsanse Kinske
I wouldn't assume that the stats are staying exactly the same, nor that it's as simple as switching from one effect to the other any time you like.
The stats probably aren't going to be exactly the same, no (though it would be nice...) but I think that it really will be as simple as switching from one to the other, though perhaps it'll take one activation period for the effect to kick in.
Quote:
PS. Tarminic, please stop nerfing everything.
NEVAR  
----------------
Tarminic - 29 Million SP in Forum Warfare |
Tarminic
Black Flame Industries
|
Posted - 2007.10.11 23:24:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Vladimir Norkoff
Originally by: Tarminic
...but I'm more interested in knowing your opinion on how this will affect Gallente Recons (assuming you fly them).
stuff
Thanks for the input Vladmir, that's what I'm looking for. So what you're saying is that gallente recons will be hit hard by the inability to reduce lock range and time because:
1. Given their poor tank they need to reduce lock range to keep themselves safe
2. Their reliance on drones means that in order to keep the drones safe the need the increased locking time dampeners provide.
CCP may actually be thinking along your line of reasoning regarding drones/drone bandwidth for the Gallente recons, hopefully. We'll see I suppose.
----------------
Tarminic - 29 Million SP in Forum Warfare |
Tarminic
Black Flame Industries
|
Posted - 2007.10.11 23:44:00 -
[10]
Originally by: PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik
Another option could/would be to configure the nerf so that the stacking penalties dont effect dampeners set on different settings.
eg Damp 1 and damp 2 are set to range modification= minimal stacking penalty
Damp 3 and 4 are set to lock time= minimal penalty
As opposed to damps 1,2,3,4 all having their stacking penalties combined as it is now.
I think that would be fair, but still not welcomed
That should be the case actually - stacking nerfs apply to modules that are actively affecting an attribute, so Damp 1 and 2 should not have a stacking penalty with damps 3 and 4.
Originally by: Sharies
Edited by: Sharies on 11/10/2007 23:34:26
So Sensor boosters should be nerfed to either boost range or boost resolution.
This is exactly what is going to happen actually.
----------------
Tarminic - 29 Million SP in Forum Warfare |
| |
|