These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Rubicon 1.1] Tracking Disruptor and Sensor Damp Strength Changes in Conjunction with Heat Iteration

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Scuzzy Logic
Space Spuds
#161 - 2014-01-19 15:03:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Scuzzy Logic
Re'doubt wrote:
I'm sure much has been said in this thread already, however I never thought that TP's and sebo's needed any kind of nerf.

This change hurts PVE players who use those items, and PVPers to an extent as well.

Really the only people who this change benefits are gate campers, who only need to overload for a few seconds in order to catch their prey.

I strongly encourage revisiting this change as well as others and rethinking their usefulness.


This a million times.

I still think damps should have less of a nerf and less of an OH bonus to compensate. EWAR really is more useful in long, drawn-out fights.
Deacon Abox
Black Eagle5
#162 - 2014-01-19 22:59:17 UTC
The remote midslot items do not need an overload ability. Sit at a gate in a gate camp. Cloaked scout on other side calls jump, or campers see gateflash. Start overheating. There is no tactical decision to be made on overheating or not with these modules.

Next, why are you nerfing damps, TDs, and painters? ECM still kicks more ass. And how are you going to benefit the ships that are currently bonused for these ewar modules? Any stupid ship with a spare mid can fit these modules and do just about as good a job with them. Why are you not giving the non-caldari ewar ships the weak ecm module/strong ecm boat bonuses treatment?What?

CCP, there are off buttons for ship explosions, missile effects, turret effects, etc. "Immersion" does not seem to be harmed by those. So, [u]please[/u] give us a persisting off button for the jump gate and autoscan visuals.

Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#163 - 2014-01-20 03:48:50 UTC
Scuzzy Logic wrote:
Re'doubt wrote:
I'm sure much has been said in this thread already, however I never thought that TP's and sebo's needed any kind of nerf.

This change hurts PVE players who use those items, and PVPers to an extent as well.

Really the only people who this change benefits are gate campers, who only need to overload for a few seconds in order to catch their prey.

I strongly encourage revisiting this change as well as others and rethinking their usefulness.


This a million times.

I still think damps should have less of a nerf and less of an OH bonus to compensate. EWAR really is more useful in long, drawn-out fights.


Unbonused TD's are really really powerful in 1v1 situations. Way stronger than any of the other ewar.

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Alxea
Unstable Pirate Sharks Of The Damed Sea
#164 - 2014-01-20 16:23:43 UTC
CCP You all are always so funny with your nerfs. You feel like each time you boost something it must be nerfed too like a double edged sword. lol What is up with the nerf happyness? Seriously I been playing this game since 2007 and all I see is nerf this and nerf that. If we boost it it must be nerfed too. WTF??? P
Estella Osoka
Cranky Bitches Who PMS
#165 - 2014-01-20 21:04:56 UTC
I just want to know why they are nerfing something and not fixing the T2 mods. That is where the current problem with EWAR is, meta 4 mods are better than their T2 equivalents.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#166 - 2014-01-20 21:47:13 UTC
i think SD's and TD's should get a stronger nerf and a reduced OH bonus

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#167 - 2014-01-21 02:16:45 UTC
All of these Rubicon 1.1 changes are going in the wrong direction. They make Eve much less interesting to me. And these 1 time use units are a joke for niche fleet uses only. Eve does not need nerfs to Sensor Dampening. What event prompted CCP to make SD worse? If I thought to use SD b4, this will most definitely push me away from it.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 
Liafcipe9000
Critically Preposterous
#168 - 2014-01-21 07:21:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Liafcipe9000
Oh look, CCP is nerfing tracking disruptors and sensor dampeners.
DR BiCarbonate
Doomriders.
#169 - 2014-01-22 02:44:37 UTC
Should probably nerf ecm now.... just saying.
Thorado
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#170 - 2014-01-22 11:30:09 UTC
So what exactly is the difference between the T2 variant of Tracking Disruptor and Meta 4 and T2 variant of Sensor Dampener and Meta 4? I'm new to this so IDK
Domanique Altares
Rifterlings
#171 - 2014-01-22 12:03:10 UTC
Thorado wrote:
So what exactly is the difference between the T2 variant of Tracking Disruptor and Meta 4 and T2 variant of Sensor Dampener and Meta 4? I'm new to this so IDK


Currently, in the case of TDs and damps, the performance (effectiveness) of T2 and meta 4 is the same. T2 mods are generally cheaper than meta 4 in many markets. In every other meaningful fashion, the T2 mods are inferior to the meta 4. They take more fitting, use more cap, and now that they can be overheated, will probably burn the whole rack out faster just like most other T2 mods.
Notorious Fellon
#172 - 2014-01-22 21:21:53 UTC
So now, as if initially learning this game was not enough, now we are expecting new players who are learning the ropes in PVE to be forced to overheat a TP just for it to be useful?

wtf?

Nice ninja ISK sink btw.

WH daytrippers will have fun trying to repair modules with no stations.


Makes perfect sense to me. *boggle*

Crime, it is not a "career", it is a lifestyle.
Maxemus Payne
THE BOARD OF EDUCATION
#173 - 2014-01-22 23:48:01 UTC
CCP, I would ***** and complain about your unneeded changes, but I know it would be useless. You've already stopped listening to the users with the RLML nerfs... now you're changing more things that are not broken. Why not do something worth while like:
A. Add a stacking penalty to ECM drones
B. Fix missiles
C. Fix Sov



Please, stop meddling in things that are NOT broken and start prioritizing things that actually are. Thank you.

-Max


PS: The damage application of missiles is so abysmal that none of the missile launcher systems were being used with the exception RLMLs(because they were the only ones that actually applied any damage)... and now you wan't to nerf TPs thus furthering their uselessness.

. . . W T F. . .

When you lose touch with the player base and start catering to your agendas... you lose people. You're losing me.
Player trust is dropping and if you cannot see that maybe someone needs to be put in charge that can.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#174 - 2014-01-23 08:57:50 UTC
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Scuzzy Logic wrote:
Re'doubt wrote:
I'm sure much has been said in this thread already, however I never thought that TP's and sebo's needed any kind of nerf.

This change hurts PVE players who use those items, and PVPers to an extent as well.

Really the only people who this change benefits are gate campers, who only need to overload for a few seconds in order to catch their prey.

I strongly encourage revisiting this change as well as others and rethinking their usefulness.


This a million times.

I still think damps should have less of a nerf and less of an OH bonus to compensate. EWAR really is more useful in long, drawn-out fights.


Unbonused TD's are really really powerful in 1v1 situations. Way stronger than any of the other ewar.



Close range yes, ifyou want to harass an enemy group from range and just avoid coutner fire Damps are better.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#175 - 2014-01-23 08:59:09 UTC
Maxemus Payne wrote:


PS: The damage application of missiles is so abysmal that none of the missile launcher systems were being used with the exception RLMLs(because they were the only ones that actually applied any damage)... and now you wan't to nerf TPs thus furthering their uselessness.

. . . W T F. . .

When you lose touch with the player base and start catering to your agendas... you lose people. You're losing me.
Player trust is dropping and if you cannot see that maybe someone needs to be put in charge that can.



That is completely wrong.. there is a reason why the ship we use the most are Tengus with HAMS. Usually only interceptors are safe from it.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#176 - 2014-01-23 09:00:46 UTC
Deerin wrote:

Make TP"s scripted. But only let bonused ships use scripts, and remove their TP bonuses

.



Ok that makes no sense. Make only bonused ships be able to use scripts, but then remove all bonus from the ships.. therefore no bonused ships anymore.. negating your first statement...

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Vincintius Agrippa
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
#177 - 2014-01-24 17:57:14 UTC
TP's are barely worth the mids on any ship as it is.
Only YOU can prevent internet bullying!
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#178 - 2014-01-27 10:03:51 UTC
All very fancy, love the attention heat gets, one of the best features in Eve ... but, why oh why don't you take this opportunity to revamp everything eWar?

It is a chaotic mix of 'why bother', 'nice' and 'OMG, spam that ****' ...
Corben Arctus
Future Corps
Sleeper Social Club
#179 - 2014-01-27 10:24:23 UTC
Clearly TPs were totally overpowered.
Rab See
Stellar Dynamics
#180 - 2014-01-27 13:37:39 UTC
I think its generally understood that TPs are 'useless' in pvp because its better to bring .. >insert favourite ewar/damage assist module here< .. Thankfully, the changes were reverted on painters quickly - perhaps a dev viewed the stats and noted that they only get used to kill NPC rats, rarely anything else.

Viewing painters vs webs.
Web are (very) short ranged (forget bonuses for now). Painters are long ranged. Webs are all or nothing, painters have falloff.

Why does a MWD, with no skills, increase sig by 500% ... because its penalizing you for using real speed at the expense of making you easier to hit (track). Compare that to a web, it kills your speed, making you easier to hit and controls range, versus the painter that adds a paltry 30%. You are getting little from it in comparison to the MWD. Of course, a MWD only makes you bigger and easier to hit, a painter makes the target bigger for everyone to hit and lock.

To really change the use of painters it would need a monumental boost. Something like a base of 125% to closely match the effect on a web on a ship. The afterburner is a direct counter to the web (more or less). 125% would make painters OP in combat because? The target would be easy to hit, it would have to use speed/traversal/range to mitigate damage - an afterburner for example. The drawbacks are that this long range tool would do much the same as a web, effect wise, but would obviously fail to hold down the target to kill.

This brings me to the conclusion that painters are fine, but something else is required. A Lowslot mod to amplify the effect, range and strength? A script, with suitably lowered stats, to further amplify the effect or range? The lowslot mod would be like Signal Distortion Amps, but worse - bonused ships for webs and painters would only get benefits to one of their mod types. Scripts ... a lot better. Range or Strength - simple.