EVE Search - DAMPS need the NERF-BAT

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

DAMPS need the NERF-BAT

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Salient Soldier Minmatar Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.10.23 22:03:00 - [1] Nothing makes this game less fun to play than not being able to shoot back. If someone spends the time to train 10m sps in gunnery.. he/she should not be able to have that all canceled out by a n00b caracal with damps on it. Do to it the same thing you did to ecm, only make it viable on certain ships (arazu) and chars that have spent a long time training to make said ships viable. It should be a border line waste of a slot for everything else. Bad enough your putting in frigate sized damp ships that will put BSs out of business. OR put in a module that can effectively counter them. Even with 2 sensor boosters on, its still not enough to defend against them most of the time.
Jerai Timelsin State War Academy	Posted - 2007.10.23 22:34:00 - [2] There is some truth to this; I love my damps and have trained heavily in them, but the sensor booster does not seem to be a good enough counter; it's just not strong enough against a single damp
Yamichi Wiggin Caldari Rising Knights SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2007.10.23 22:41:00 - [3] Make them chance-based like ECM. Or make my ECM percentage based like your damps Fear my Rook. hehehehe ------ Pain is weakness leaving the body. There is no love in fear
OzDeaDMeaT	Posted - 2007.10.24 00:16:00 - [4] I agree for the most part. But if you have all these big ships being better at said task then smaller ships there will be no point in having people in smaller ships. You shouldnt be soloing in a battleship anyway. And if u are flying around in a small group maybe its worth while having some anti-frig ships like assault frigates to neutrilize these targets for you.
Salient Soldier Minmatar Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.10.24 00:49:00 - [5] Edited by: Salient Soldier on 24/10/2007 00:49:28 except it doesnt matter what you have in your group if you are met by a group of equal or greater numbers all using damps. By the time all your small ships start bumping the dampers to try and get a lock, fire has been concentrated on them and they have been destroyed. Leaving the rest of the fleet sitting around waiting to die as well. So as it stands right now, a mixture of ships is just as useless as a groups of BS. Soloing has little to do with this.
OzDeaDMeaT	Posted - 2007.10.24 02:10:00 - [6] well smaller ships target faster and therefore will get damps on faster than a big ship. So depending on the amount of small ships you have well deem weather you get damps on ur target before they get damps on you. I agree though, it should be chance based to give bigger ships the chance to fight.
Neu Bastian	Posted - 2007.10.24 03:39:00 - [7] Edited by: Neu Bastian on 24/10/2007 03:40:44 ECCM do take up very valuable slot space. maybe makes those reduce the effectiveness of damps aside from the boost they give? so to make them about the same boost if you're using them to snipe,etc; but a little more useful when being damped...
Futher Bezluden Minmatar ORIGIN SYSTEMS Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2007.10.24 17:04:00 - [8] You mean having a non-Gallente ship fitted with damp II's with -58% is overpowered? That a cyclone armor tanking in a gang with 4 RSD II's all at -58% is too uber? Really? The whole idea of "Dual Mode" Damps and Tracking Disruptors is idiocy. Big ships will be scan res damped, smaller ships range damped. BS class turret ships will be tracking distrupted for close range engagements and optimal disrupted in range... then tracking affected one enemy closes range. Damps are the flavor of the era since the ECM nerf relegated ECM modules all but useless on anything other than Caldari Ewar ships which was the right direction. They use enormous cap and have craptastic str unless on a Caldari EWAR ship and it's good. Damps and Tracking Disruptors need to be for the Ewar specific ships. If that means ECM level cap usage and poor strength unless fit to ewar specific ship of that race, then do it. CCP failed miserably during the ECM balance by not realizing that Damps would be the newest Foff button in EVE and taking action then. Damps and Tracking Disruptors with 10/10 strength unless fit to racially specific ewar ships for up to 55/55 strength and more with rigs would prevent them from being used in just about every engagement. Without Tracking Disruptors being included, EVE will be flooded with roaming ganks fit with them, running from missile spammers and completely owning anything with turrets. THUKKER -Be Paranoid Skeet* Skeet L33t
Menellaix Angel of War Rule of Three	Posted - 2007.10.24 17:39:00 - [9] Edited by: Menellaix on 24/10/2007 17:39:10 Don't nerf damps! Make Remote Sensor Boosters more powerful!!!
Rashmika Sky	Posted - 2007.10.24 17:39:00 - [10] Originally by: Futher Bezluden CCP failed miserably during the ECM balance by not realizing that Damps would be the newest F*off button in EVE and taking action then. Damps and Tracking Disruptors with 10/10 strength unless fit to racially specific ewar ships for up to 55/55 strength and more with rigs would prevent them from being used in just about every engagement. Without Tracking Disruptors being included, EVE will be flooded with roaming ganks fit with them, running from missile spammers and completely owning anything with turrets. I'll agree tracking disruptors could become more popular, and maybe even target painters - though I suspect every other ewar will need to be nerfed to oblivion before target painters become commonly accepted as a useful module... However, there is an important difference between those two types of ewar and ECM/Damps. Simply, ECM/Damps can both prevent their target from using their own ewar, while turret disruptors and target painters do not. What we would see, then, is your hypothetical turret disruption fleet of pwnage running into a fleet with specialized ecm or damp ships, and finding that they should have fit ECCM or Sensor Boosters in their mids instead. Even if this counter isn't enough, most races have some degree of flexibility in their ships' highs or otherwise have a good sized drone bay. Minmatar, for example, with their horrible split highs, might find that an advantage if the environment you suggest came to pass, and Caldari as well with their focus on missiles. Gallente could be hurt with their heavy dependence upon turrets, but they tend to have decent amounts of drones available, and bandwidth will probably boost that as well. Amarr might get the worse of it in this scenario, but at least they have the best ships at turret disruption... I guess that's something. ;) To summarize, I don't think tracking disruptors or target painters are very similar to ECM/Damps, and they would be much more easily countered by many ships anyway. It could even be a good thing for balance if turret disruptors became popular, as it could help ships with more varied weapon systems, that have traditionally been scorned because they don't get the most out of damage modules or ship bonuses, to become more valued. -Rash
Laboratus Gallente BGG League of Abnormal Gentlemen	Posted - 2007.10.24 17:48:00 - [11] Damps don't need nerfing, Forum whines need nerfing. Damps are determenistic. You can comletely avoid them by either outranging them, or coming inside their range of effectiveness. They are easy to counter, it only takes skill. And maybe a sensor booster. Or dare I say, fof missiles, or drones. Or perhaps any other of the counters? ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats
Reggie Stoneloader Teikoku Trade Conglomerate Visions of Warfare	Posted - 2007.10.24 18:10:00 - [12] What it takes to counter damps is a close-range ship with a MWD and a webber, and some drones for support (Gallente blasterboats, mainly). Interestingly, that flavor of ship is far and away the most popular setup for PvP in EvE. That might by a convenient coincidence, or it might be a symptom of the problem. I agree that the base stats should be reduced, and the ship bonuses for them should be increased, as was done with ECM. >=====My Current Crusades=====< Security Status
Salient Soldier Minmatar Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.10.24 19:26:00 - [13] Originally by: Laboratus Damps don't need nerfing, Forum whines need nerfing. Damps are determenistic. You can comletely avoid them by either outranging them, or coming inside their range of effectiveness. They are easy to counter, it only takes skill. And maybe a sensor booster. Or dare I say, fof missiles, or drones. Or perhaps any other of the counters? When facing a large number of damping ships, drones and fofs are not a viable defense. Drones just jump to multiple targets, or fofs (which by the way... are only good on caldari, which aren't so good for pvp in the first place) pretty much do the same less you get lucky. AND my point was gunnery skills being utterly negated by module that you dont even have to train up to max skills to be effective with. And in the end, your fofs may kill one caracal.. while the other 12 pop your CNR.
Laboratus Gallente BGG League of Abnormal Gentlemen	Posted - 2007.10.24 20:08:00 - [14] Originally by: Salient Soldier ... And in the end, your fofs may kill one caracal.. while the other 12 pop your CNR. 12 to one you are going down in any case... In gang/fleets... EW is meant to be effective. The fact that is newbie friendly is only a positive thing for the game as a whole. It means players under 6months old can actually contribute something to the fleet instead of being only effective as liabilities... The effect of focused fire is so great, that the fact that we have modules that reduce the dps dealing capabilities of of an opposing fleet is only a good thing. It means that group combat does not treat numbers as hit points that go down one by volley. It means that directing EW and finding best targets is actually meaningful. It means that skill of command and pilots actually matters more than plain numbers... It makes this a better game than without them as they are now. ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats
Salient Soldier Minmatar Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.10.24 20:27:00 - [15] Originally by: Laboratus 12 to one you are going down in any case... (Yeah but id kill half of em) In gang/fleets... EW is meant to be effective. The fact that is newbie friendly is only a positive thing for the game as a whole. It means players under 6months old can actually contribute something... They can contribute by tackling.. and shooting rockets. Not by disabling my 28m SP character. Why continue skilling up points if i can be countered so easily by a noob? What then do noobs have to look forward to when they become vets? being jamed up by noobs? Something this powerful should not be so easy to use. AND it should be limited to t2 ships, where the risk is equivalent to the reward. Even then, still should be nerfed. A rook with a full eack of multi freqs generally can only keep one target perma jamed without getting lucky. An Arazu with a full rack of damps can keep 3 ships out of the fight. Damps need to go!
Laboratus Gallente BGG League of Abnormal Gentlemen	Posted - 2007.10.24 20:42:00 - [16] Originally by: Salient Soldier They can contribute by tackling.. and shooting rockets. Not by disabling my 28m SP character. Why continue skilling up points if i can be countered so easily by a noob? What then do noobs have to look forward to when they become vets? being jamed up by noobs? Something this powerful should not be so easy to use. AND it should be limited to t2 ships, where the risk is equivalent to the reward. Even then, still should be nerfed. A rook with a full eack of multi freqs generally can only keep one target perma jamed without getting lucky. An Arazu with a full rack of damps can keep 3 ships out of the fight. Damps need to go! New players unfortunately can't get enough speed to match older players cruisers in their frigates. To be effective they really need ceptors and propably a few mill of sp in navigation skills... It's about roles that ppl can fill. The role of primary damage dealer requires a lot of skill points, as do roles of capital pilots etc. "later game content"... If all roles required millions of sp there would be nothing that newer players would be able to do in their first months. At the moment they do. Why would anyone stay in a game where they are impotent and unable to do anything for months? Damps are nothing like ECM used to be. You can effectively go around it by simply warping on top of them and blowing them up there, inside your new targeting range or sniping them from distance where they can't target you yet, since they don't have the sp and t2 modules to make reach you... ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats
Salient Soldier Minmatar Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.10.24 22:07:00 - [17] "New players unfortunately can't get enough speed to match older players cruisers in their frigates." -Not everyone flys a nanoship with snake implants (though nano cruisers need a nerf'n too but thats a nother story) "To be effective they really need ceptors and propably a few mill of sp in navigation skills..." -Which most noobs should stay in highsec for a month or 2 anyway just to learn how to play. "It's about roles that ppl can fill." -And not about a win all button. "If all roles required millions of sp there would be nothing that newer players would be able to do in their first months." -How many SPs does it take to use ECM effectively? Far more than damps. "Why would anyone stay in a game where they are impotent and unable to do anything for months?" -Why do people play wow? "Damps are nothing like ECM used to be. You can effectively go around it by simply warping on top of them and blowing them up there, inside your new targeting range or sniping them from distance where they can't target you yet, since they don't have the sp and t2 modules to make reach you..." - Now how often does this happen? More often than not you dont have the ability to do this. Yeah you might kill one or 2 this way, but in the end even in an even fight you end up losing a lot more ISK than they do.. since they put very little on the line.
La KeepS	Posted - 2007.10.24 22:57:00 - [18] STOP WITH THE NERFS . jesus CCP are killing the game enuff How far do you want to push the game until you have the upper hand coz thats what ur askin for.. ur askin that a damping ship should not be allowed to get you killed.. stop with the whine. sick & tired of the nerfs lately .. nos / carrier / nano / damps speed / its a joke bring back the good old days of 2006
Salient Soldier Minmatar Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.10.24 23:00:00 - [19] No, what i want is a balanced and fair play environment. At this point, i might as well just be flying a damp cyclone and let my all my other ships that ive skilled for gather dust.
Ryan Scouse'UK Gallente	Posted - 2007.10.24 23:01:00 - [20] Edited by: Ryan Scouse''UK on 24/10/2007 23:01:58 Edited by: Ryan Scouse''UK on 24/10/2007 23:01:43 Originally by: Salient Soldier No, what i want is a balanced and fair play environment. At this point, i might as well just be flying a damp cyclone and let my all my other ships that ive skilled for gather dust. -- not everyone flys in a damping recon you know.
Salient Soldier Minmatar Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.10.24 23:20:00 - [21] No, but a lot of people fly with damps on ships that arent recons. AND now theres going to be a new frig sized damping ship. Eve is suppose to be about pew pew, not damp or be damped.
SirMoric	Posted - 2007.10.25 00:09:00 - [22] You can still "pew-pew" if you're damped. Did someone, a newer char, escape your long range guns? You could fit with damps yourself, then you more or less negate his dampeners. rgds
Kittamaru Gallente Ceptacemia Fallout Project	Posted - 2007.10.25 06:27:00 - [23] Originally by: SirMoric You can still "pew-pew" if you're damped. Did someone, a newer char, escape your long range guns? You could fit with damps yourself, then you more or less negate his dampeners. rgds Uhm, no you don't... damps = no lock... With my DOMINIX I can damp you down to a 2km lock range... good LUCK getting that close before my drones mince you. With my Arazu, I can damp you from 200 km (avg sniper mega setup) to under 1km. Yeah... no way to counter THAT buddyboy! I think damps need a serious overall reduction, and damp ships need a serious boost... eg, 70% on both sides?
Reggie Stoneloader Teikoku Trade Conglomerate Visions of Warfare	Posted - 2007.10.25 07:17:00 - [24] I'm not sure about a specific number, but that seems like the best idea. Instead of nerfing their power, though, how about nerfing their range? Leave the strength alone, but give them a 5km optimal and a 10km falloff. Then add role bonuses to Damper ships to bring them up to current range. That way, tacklers can still use them to mess up big targets that they're blobbing, but the victim can always at least reach the tacklers, so they could, theoretically, kill off the dampener ships and regain their targeting abilities, and then engage the other ones. Assuming they aren't dead yet. That way there's always hope. Even in the heyday of ECM, there was a tiny chance that they'd miss a cycle and you could beat on them for twenty seconds, or at least get your drones assigned. Dampers are relentless. >=====My Current Crusades=====< Security Status
Kakita Jalaan Viriette Commerce and Holding	Posted - 2007.10.25 08:40:00 - [25] The main problem with damps is, they can't be countered, period. A single damper on a Maulus or Celestis gives you something like -70%. So try boosting your 30% remaining strength back up to a hundred... good luck, before running into the stacking penalty wall. Even if you do it, the damper pilot yawns and activates a second module on you. Game over. By the way, if I read the coming changes correctly, they won't change the situation: so you're damped only one way (as someone above said, in close range you'll be resolution damped, long range you'll be range damped). Try boosting your strength back up, game over as before - unless (remote) sensor boosters are boosted to something like 100%, which is probably very undesirable for all situations not involving damping. If sensor boosters were boosted to compensate dampers, both boosters and dampers become even more mandatory than they are now, escalating the problem to higher values doesn't solve anything. What about actually really nerfing sensor dampers on all but specialized ships? Same for tracking disruptors, because otherwise they'll just be the next flavor of the month. And while we're at it, target painters start to look powerful when combined with torp ravens (ok, admittedly they're not quite as universally useful as the other racial EW types)... EW is so powerful, because it's not size restricted: a frigate can use EW against a BS or capital ship just as well as against something of the same size. Since that's the way Eve works, and it would probably be way too much of a hassle to change all mechanics to be size sensitive, EW should be de facto restricted to EW ships. The way ECMs are now is a good example, apart from ECM drones, which are still too strong on any ship. While we're at it, capacitor warfare (neuts, nos) can be regarded as a sort of EW in the same vein... if those were de facto restricted to Amarr recons/attack ships in order to do anything really useful, we would start seeing more specialized ship loadouts. All races still have plenty of straight damage dealers that can easily be varied in loadout, but all EW and capacitor warfare should be delegated to specialized ships (that are weak in other areas!), because they just encourage borderline grief tactics if they're just as strong on any other ship. Just look at the history of it: up until the recent nerfs, Nosferatus were mandatory. Before that, ECM was a very good choice on any ship with a spare slot. Now sensor dampers are good as a replacement. Tracking disruptors might well be next. Please just get it done in one lump, so that we can go back to actually fighting in fights, and not sitting damped/jammed/nossed to hell and back and watch our ship die from any arbitrary ship that decided to fit the EW module of the month. ______________ Join the Family
Salient Soldier Minmatar Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.10.25 21:32:00 - [26] Originally by: Kakita Jalaan Please just get it done in one lump, so that we can go back to actually fighting in fights, and not sitting damped/jammed/nossed to hell and back and watch our ship die from any arbitrary ship that decided to fit the EW module of the month. Amen Brother!
Donatien Francois	Posted - 2007.10.25 23:11:00 - [27] I absolutely agree. I was fitting my Thorax out for a pvp op in my new 0.0 corp a while ago, relatively new to PvP at the time, and was asking for advice. I was told that the single most important thing I could fit was a couple of sensor dampeners, with maybe a tracking disruptor for backup. I asked why, and was told because the best tank was to not get hit in the first place. Between an equal number of ships, the fight should come down to player skills, tactical use of the right ships and fittings, and the ability to work together as a team, not who has the most dampeners. If there is ever a set-up that against equal odds is automatically more powerful than anything else in the game, that setup is overpowered, no matter how much the flavor of the month players whine. They're only mad because now they'll have to wait for someone with a brain to find another game-breaking setup so they can go back to being l33t. It strikes me that the new E-war frigates coming out are the ideal subjects for this sort of change, too. Just like interceptors are now getting bonuses to webber range to suite their role, E-war frigs can be the target of the bonuses to jammer range/strength. What if instead of 35-48% range reduction from jammers, it's 15-20% (plus skills), and remove the falloff to make their range 25-30km (plus skills)? Then E-war frigs get a 10%-50% bonus to the effectiveness of sensor dampeners, but also suffer a 25% range penalty, forcing them to get a little closer to damp-tackle. E-war cruisers like the Arazu still get big range bonuses, but not effectiveness bonuses, suiting them for anti-sniper damping, but less so for up-close and personal tactics.
Sanctus Maleficus Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.10.25 23:24:00 - [28] I'll be honest that I only skimmed the thread, since I'm short on time right now, but what if damps did keep the same effect, but their effectiveness was affected by sensor strength, much like ECM. That way, they would be less effective against larger ships, and ECCM modules would counter damps, as well.
Sanctus Maleficus Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.10.26 03:53:00 - [29] Edited by: Sanctus Maleficus on 26/10/2007 03:54:17 Had another idea. Why don't we leave the power of Damps the same, but drastically drop the optimal of them, and then give specialized ships a better range bonus. Give them like a 4k Optimal with like a 4k falloff in their effectiveness. That way, if you're close enough to damp, then you're probably getting shot. EDIT: Doh, just noticed that Reggie already posted that. Well, I concur!
Wrayeth Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.10.27 00:53:00 - [30] Sorry if this has already been said in this thread, but damps need the ECM treatment: make them useless on ships that don't have a bonus for them, and require lowslot modules to make them effective on top of that. On top of that, reduce their effectiveness even more so they won't be as effective as they were pre-nerf even with a dedicated ship with lowslot modules, just to make sure they're absolutely useless in most situations. Oh, wait... Seriously, though, it should get the ECM treatment without going quite so overboard. At the same time, boost the ECM ships a bit so that they're actually useful; right now the only ECM ship that's any good is the rook because of it's 20% bonus instead of 10%. -Wrayeth n00b Extraordinaire "Look, pa! I just contributed absolutely nothing to this thread!"

Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.