| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
The Gurlstas Associates
   |
Posted - 2007.10.11 22:13:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: Tarminic
...but I'm more interested in knowing your opinion on how this will affect Gallente Recons (assuming you fly them).
I fly them quite a bit. The nerf is going to hit them rather negatively. It hits them both offensively and defensively.
The primary form of damage for a Arazu/Lachesis is the drones. Primary form of defense is speed and the range decrease from damps. Since one must chose between one or the other, defense is going to win as the Recon is made of tissue paper. But without the increased locktime, drones are very vulnerable to being destroyed. It's possible that the dronebay may be increased, but it would need to be rather significant.
Also without the increased locktime, the Recon has very little chance to escape from fast tacklers. And as already mentioned the Recon is made of tissue paper, so even a frig tackler can put a pretty decent dent in it.
I think the hit for Gallente is going to be a bit more brutal than the nos nerf for the Amarr. The Amarr still had access to Neuts which are extremely effective, and their offensive potential with drones is inherently better. So the change is not a very good thing. But on the plus side, Arazus and Phased Muons should probably drop in price. On the downside, they will also be rather useless. I'd categorize this nerf along the lines of the ECM nerf hitting the Rook/Falcon. Makes me sad Vlad. 
Taxman III: Attack of the Blob
|
Tsanse Kinske
WeMeanYouKnowHarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.11 22:30:00 -
[32]
Frankly, the RSD bit concerns me a lot less than Sensor Boosters and (presumably) Tracking Computers. RSDs are not currently tuned well IMO, but in the big scheme of EVE balance, the latter two modules are several orders of magnitude more important. It's very easy to imagine them being made too weak or too powerful, with far reaching consequences.
* * *
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
-Douglas Adams, writing about EVE |
Solid Wilko
Finis Lumen
|
Posted - 2007.10.11 22:53:00 -
[33]
After just engaging a TCF Ishtar that had 2 damps fitted I support and all such nerfs
|
Aramendel
Amarr
North Face Force
|
Posted - 2007.10.11 23:16:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Aramendel on 11/10/2007 23:16:31
Originally by: Vladimir Norkoff
The primary form of damage for a Arazu/Lachesis is the drones.
Arazu - sorta, but not much more than 3 200mms.
Lachesis - definately not.
Quote:
Also without the increased locktime, the Recon has very little chance to escape from fast tacklers. And as already mentioned the Recon is made of tissue paper, so even a frig tackler can put a pretty decent dent in it.
Its drones will kill a would-be-tackler before this. No, the tackler cannot speedtank those if it has a 2-3k lockrange.
Quote:
I think the hit for Gallente is going to be a bit more brutal than the nos nerf for the Amarr. The Amarr still had access to Neuts which are extremely effective, and their offensive potential with drones is inherently better.
Actually the curse does a good deal less dps than the lachesis and the pilgrim does about the same dps as the arazu.
And neuts are no simple nos alternative - they need cap. Quite a bit of cap actually. In order to sustain them you need an injector and/or cap recharge modules. Basically, you need more modules to do the same job.
Likewise a gal recon can use 1-2 damp on range reduction and 1-2 damps on sig resolution reduction. Same principle in the end.
|
Ajja 17
Ars ex Discordia
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.10.11 23:20:00 -
[35]
Well hell, you can't make damps useless! They gotta do something... Next whine is gonna be "JAMMERS MAKE ME LOSE LOCK WTF THATS OVERPOWERED!"
|
Tarminic
Black Flame Industries
|
Posted - 2007.10.11 23:24:00 -
[36]
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 |
PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik
Gallente
Rampage Eternal
Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2007.10.11 23:30:00 -
[37]
Edited by: PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik on 11/10/2007 23:33:03
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).
I fly them quite a bit. The nerf is going to hit them rather negatively. It hits them both offensively and defensively.
The primary form of damage for a Arazu/Lachesis is the drones. Primary form of defense is speed and the range decrease from damps. Since one must chose between one or the other, defense is going to win as the Recon is made of tissue paper. But without the increased locktime, drones are very vulnerable to being destroyed. It's possible that the dronebay may be increased, but it would need to be rather significant.
Also without the increased locktime, the Recon has very little chance to escape from fast tacklers. And as already mentioned the Recon is made of tissue paper, so even a frig tackler can put a pretty decent dent in it.
I think the hit for Gallente is going to be a bit more brutal than the nos nerf for the Amarr. The Amarr still had access to Neuts which are extremely effective, and their offensive potential with drones is inherently better. So the change is not a very good thing. But on the plus side, Arazus and Phased Muons should probably drop in price. On the downside, they will also be rather useless. I'd categorize this nerf along the lines of the ECM nerf hitting the Rook/Falcon. Makes me sad Vlad.
Some valid points.
I am about to start flying the Arazu myself and this nerf comes at a really crappy time for me having just spent over 250mil setting this bad boy up. As you have stated for a 250mil ship it is paper thin and its main tactic is to sit a range damping and trying to use drones offensively. One other factor that you didnt mention is that the recon primarily is not a solo hunter, that it works best when combined with other recons and or Hacs in fast roaming gangs.
lets make up a scenario where a small recon/hac force has engaged a target. For the Arazu to be effective now he must either co-ordinate with the gang to sit at range and damp down a hostile's ability to target OR they can all fit for close range and try to out damage the hostile before he can lock them. This means that an Arazu/deimios team would be very limited in how they will be able to work.
I thought nerfs were meant for "balance" and by association, variability in play styles. This appears to be caving into pressure from people in the forums tbfh.
That 250mil recon just became a hell of alot more vulnerable. The only way this "nerf" can be considered "balanced" is if the bonuses for damp ships is increased to somehow compensate for specialised craft (or they possibly can still use damps 'pre-nerf' style). 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
Peace WithinSo if the theory of relativity is true, shouldn't i arrive at my destination before i warped in the first place?
Neon GhostYou do, but this is compensated for by lag |
Sharies
Gallente
Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium
|
Posted - 2007.10.11 23:31:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Sharies on 11/10/2007 23:34:26
So Sensor boosters should be nerfed to either boost range or boost resolution.
Never mind looks like it's going to a lot of other modules too.
|
Tarminic
Black Flame Industries
|
Posted - 2007.10.11 23:44:00 -
[39]
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 |
Aramendel
Amarr
North Face Force
|
Posted - 2007.10.11 23:46:00 -
[40]
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.
No need to "configure" the nerf that way, this is already how stacking penalities work.
If you put 2 (both negative or both positive) effects on a stat from 2 different modules (for example a tracking comp and enchancer) you will get the first stacking penality for the weaker module.
Likewise, if you put 1 effect on stat A and one effect on stat B from 2 modules of the same type, but where each useing different operation moduses you will get no stacking penalities.
The source does not matter. Only how many effects are on a stat.
|
murder one
Gallente
Blood Corsair's
|
Posted - 2007.10.12 02:54:00 -
[41]
OP:
The reason that this would be a significant nerf (and it is) is due to things like drone aggro.
Currently an Arazu (as an example) uses it's drones for a very large part of it's DPS (even with 3x 250mm t2 rails loaded with faction antimatter and 2-3 magstab IIs, it's DPS is very low).
With damps the way they are now, an Arazu pilot can very skillfully cycle his drones on/off the target in order to keep them from being locked by the target and destroyed, and additionally can use this advantage to kill the opposing drones as well while they're still at extended range before they aggro the Arazu and kill it.
Most Arazu pilots fly either with zero tank, or very little tank, in preference to maximum dps/cap regen in order to simply keep the ship going. The Arazu doesn't even come close to the DPS of something like the Pilgrim. The same issues present themselves with the Lachesis, although to a smaller degree in the DPS department, but it actually has even less of an opportunity to tank with it's one less low slot.
Combat is not a good time to juggle module options on the fly. To think that this is a reasonable thing to ask of pilots to do is ridiculous with the amount of lag and other issues that make up current PVP.
Damps should simply have smaller base stats, and damp ships should get a correspondingly larger bonus to their ships in order to reduce damp effectiveness for non-damp ships. The actual mechanics of damps is just fine. You need 2-3 damps minumum from a specialized damp ship in order to shut down a single target. That is a LOT of mids to dedicate to one target. As soon as you're in a multi-target environment, the damp ships die in short order as they can't keep every target from attacking them.
ECM ships (Rook, Scorp, Falcon etc) are much better in multi-target environments, and damps are better in solo engagements. There isn't anything 'wrong' or 'unfair' about this. Different tools for different jobs. I fly all four races, and I pick and choose specific ships out of the lineup of each to fly, as not all ships in every race are effective or what I'm interested in flying.
Point being, the nerf will still happen, it will drastically change the effectiveness of damps. Damps will still be as effective as ever for things like nano damp Curses, and less effective for ships like the Arazu/Lachesis/Celestis.
I think that a change is needed to remove damps as a general purpose module for all ships, but this upcoming change isn't it.
[07:13:55] doctorstupid2 > what do i train now?
[07:14:05] Trista Rotnor > little boys to 2
Fleet Combat Ships |
Tral Kul
|
Posted - 2007.10.12 03:26:00 -
[42]
I have to say I like this change as it's going to make people think and while I'm sure that will hurt some people over all it makes the game much more tactical.
That said we don't know how hard/easy it will be to choose which attribute to damp or boost that said you can still pack multiple dampereners and get the same effect.
To be honest all the things being effected seem to be things that give multiple advantages which to me seems to suggest that while things might specifically being nerfed overall the net effect shouldn't have too much effect on balance.
|
Aramendel
Amarr
North Face Force
|
Posted - 2007.10.12 10:46:00 -
[43]
Originally by: murder one
The Arazu doesn't even come close to the DPS of something like the Pilgrim.
Pilgrim max dps with 2 ogre2, 2 hammer2 and 1 hobgoblin: 315 dps
No spares, of cource, and after the drone bandwidth changes it will be very likely onlybe able to use 5 hammer2 which are 238 dps.
Arazu
3 hammer2, 2 hob2: 135 dps
3 200mm rails, 2 damage mods, fed navy AM: 165 dps
total: 300 dps.
Come again?
|
Gaven Blands
|
Posted - 2007.10.12 11:04:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Aramendel
Arazu
3 hammer2, 2 hob2: 135 dps
3 200mm rails, 2 damage mods, fed navy AM: 165 dps
total: 300 dps.
Come again?
And for how long can the Arazu keep those guns firing, presuming you need to use your damps and 24km scram?
--
Any views or opinions expressed are only the ones I want to ram down your throat. |
Aramendel
Amarr
North Face Force
|
Posted - 2007.10.12 12:30:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Gaven Blands
And for how long can the Arazu keep those guns firing, presuming you need to use your damps and 24km scram?
5 cap/sec for the guns.
5.4 cap/sec for 3 muon damps.
3.75 cap/sec for a t2 WD
14.15 cap/sec total.
Peak recharge of an arazu with a named large cap battery and a named MWD (which fits with the guns): 15.64 cap/sec.
Also, as a sidenote, it does not really need a t2 WD. A cheap domination scrambler has a range of 22k on it, 2 points and needs only 0.9 cap/sec, which brings its cap consumption to 11.3 cap/sec.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |