These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 1.3] Remote Sensor Dampeners and the Celestis

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#21 - 2014-02-26 15:20:28 UTC
Powers Sa wrote:
RIP Maulus


SO you only need one signal amp now to get to proper targeting range for your damps Roll
Maximus Andendare
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#22 - 2014-02-26 15:24:29 UTC
Wasn't the Celestis' optimal range bonus to damps put in as a "fleet ship" counter to a Blackbird's ECM Range, so that each of them can ewar from roughly the same distance?

By nerfing the range on damps, won't that just lead to 100km+ Blackbirds going unchecked?

Enter grid and you're already dead, destined to be reborn and fight another day.

>> Play Eve Online FREE! Join today for exclusive bonuses! <<

Corben Arctus
Future Corps
Sleeper Social Club
#23 - 2014-02-26 15:26:42 UTC
Michael Harari wrote:
Will 1.3 be out before or after NEO?


What the heck is NEO?
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings
#24 - 2014-02-26 15:28:53 UTC
On noes. My Maulus. I'll have to start fitting Particle Dispersion Projectors to get decent range.

Wait. I already did that.
KiithSoban
Mackies Raiders
Wild Geese.
#25 - 2014-02-26 15:30:15 UTC
*sigh* ok. Just buff the arazu's armor tank and give it a similar optimal bonus too plz

I want to see logi appear on killmails! (by just repping)  See CSM "reasonable things"
Taleden
North Wind Local no. 612
#26 - 2014-02-26 15:37:06 UTC
I know everybody likes to pretend that EVE has no PvE content whatsoever, but as long as you're looking at damping and ewar already, would it be so hard to make NPC ewar obey the same stacking penalties and effective ranges as player ewar? Missions against Serpentis, for example, are just a royal tedious pain because they can damp from 80km away, and it only takes 2 or 3 of them to cut your target range to 20km. And that doesn't even make those missions *hard* per se, it just makes them irritating, which has no gameplay value.
seth Hendar
I love you miners
#27 - 2014-02-26 15:40:41 UTC  |  Edited by: seth Hendar
KiithSoban wrote:
*sigh* ok. Just buff the arazu's armor tank and give it a similar optimal bonus too plz

a bit of cap regen would be better imao, or a reduction in damps consumption.

they are cap hungry.....

and while we are at it, please take a look at T2 remote damps, who will ever use them?

i mean:


Phased Muon Sensor Disruptor I
meta: 4
base scan res & range reduction: -15.3%
optimal: 36 km
fallof: 60 km
cap consumption: 24 Energy
cpu: 28 tf


Remote Sensor Dampener II
meta: 5
base scan res & range reduction: -15.3%
optimal: 36 km
fallof: 60 km
cap consumption: 36 Energy
cpu: 42 tf

i'd say apply the proposed -16.66% on all of them but the T2, this way you create a real interest in T2 (or maybe reduce a tad the T2, but give him superior strenght than the meta 4 one)
Batelle
Federal Navy Academy
#28 - 2014-02-26 15:53:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Batelle
Why do the t2 recons have weaker bonuses than the celestis maulus and keres? I know Recons haven't been balanced yet, but why didn't they just get the 7.5% effectiveness back when damps were last adjusted?

Why can't you just give them the 7.5% bonus right now, especially if you're nerfing the module directly?

seth Hendar wrote:

and while we are at it, please take a look at T2 remote damps, who will ever use them?

people that have more cpu on their ship than they have isk. Really, meta4 bothers you, then that's its own issue.

Taleden wrote:
I know everybody likes to pretend that EVE has no PvE content whatsoever, but as long as you're looking at damping and ewar already, would it be so hard to make NPC ewar obey the same stacking penalties and effective ranges as player ewar? Missions against Serpentis, for example, are just a royal tedious pain because they can damp from 80km away, and it only takes 2 or 3 of them to cut your target range to 20km. And that doesn't even make those missions *hard* per se, it just makes them irritating, which has no gameplay value.


Not really relevant in this thread, but yes, this. Please. But be careful what you ask for, if they look at npc ewar they will most certainly give them scramblers that actually scramble. Hopefully they'll also reduce webs to 60% strength, and add stacking penalties there too.

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
#29 - 2014-02-26 15:57:09 UTC
Icantspellwell wrote:
While you are at it can you nerf the lock range on celestis and blackbirds? As it is now the celestis base lock range is 75km and the blackbird is 85km while the bellicose is only 42.5km and the arbitrator is 50km. The celestis and blackbird have longer base targeting ranges than most gallente and minmatar battleships and is +/- a few km on amarr/caldari battleships. Would help nerf their long range dampening in my opinion since they would be forced to lose a damp for another sebo to lock as far as they have been.


+1

However, I don't think that's enough. Damps (bombs as well, but that is better left for another thread ...) are making Shield-BS-doctrines completely unviable for large scale fleet-combat (safe for the token BL-Alpha-Mael-Fleet there is not much to go around in the current meta) as a single dampening ship can easily render two battlehips useless. On top of that celestices boast a ridiculous amount of tank for a t1 cruiser (~60k ehp with links). Bonuses of t1 ewar cruisers should generally be brought in line with their t2 counterparts, otherwise there will be few incentive to ship up. I propose:

1.) Remove Range bonuses from celestis hull
2.) Remove either one low OR mid slot and replace it with a high one (layout like arbitrator for example)

Also consider making the effectiveness of dampeners depend on some additional factor. I find it troublesome that some form of ewar would have so much more impact on large/expensive ships (bs/carriers etc) than on small ships. For example a ship's sensor strength could be factor in to leverage effectiveness to some degree.
seth Hendar
I love you miners
#30 - 2014-02-26 15:57:15 UTC
Batelle wrote:
Why do the t2 recons have weaker bonuses than the celestis maulus and keres? I know Recons haven't been balanced yet, but why didn't they just get the 7.5% effectiveness back when damps were last adjusted?

Why can't you just give them the 7.5% bonus right now, especially if you're nerfing the module directly?

Quote:
Name: Arazu
Hull: Celestis
Role: Force Recon Ship

Force recon ships are the cruiser-class equivalent of covert ops frigates. While not as resilient as combat recon ships, they are nonetheless able to do their job as reconaissance vessels very effectively, due in no small part to their ability to interface with covert ops cloaking devices and set up cynosural fields for incoming capital ships.

Developer: Duvolle Labs

Duvolle Labs manufactures sturdy ships with a good mix of offensive and defensive capabilities. Since the company is one of New Eden's foremost manufacturers of particle blasters, its ships tend to favor turrets and thus have somewhat higher power output than normal.

Gallente Cruiser Skill Bonus:
5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage per level
7.5% bonus to Remote Sensor Dampener effectiveness per level

Recon Ships Skill Bonus:
20% bonus to Warp Scrambler and Warp Disruptor range per level
20% reduction in CPU need for cloaking devices per level

Role Bonus:
80% reduction in liquid ozone consumption for cynosural field generation
50% reduction in cynosural field duration

Note: can fit covert ops cloaks and covert cynosural field generators


Kat Ayclism
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#31 - 2014-02-26 15:57:16 UTC
GOOD. Nerf them even more. Swing wildly like you do when nerfing caps.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#32 - 2014-02-26 16:00:52 UTC
Kat Ayclism wrote:
GOOD. Nerf them even more. Swing wildly like you do when nerfing caps.


ccp nerfs caps?
Batelle
Federal Navy Academy
#33 - 2014-02-26 16:00:53 UTC
seth Hendar wrote:
stuff


Whoops. See, I thought they had also gotten that buff, but for some reason it wasn't showing on the site i was looking at. Oops

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#34 - 2014-02-26 16:02:01 UTC
Maximus Andendare wrote:
Wasn't the Celestis' optimal range bonus to damps put in as a "fleet ship" counter to a Blackbird's ECM Range, so that each of them can ewar from roughly the same distance?

By nerfing the range on damps, won't that just lead to 100km+ Blackbirds going unchecked?


The term "Race to the Bottom" applies.

fozzie hates EWAR.
Less ships blow up when EWAR is onfield, as it directly inhibits applied DPS.
It does not matter that it differentiates the small gang players and smart players from the F1 monkeys (yes, I am aware of the irony of the large blobs using Celestis fleets).

In CCP's world, anything that increases the amount of ships blowing up is a good thing. (of course null sec cartel NAP's and NIP's are exempt from that concept at CCP).

What I am really worrying about is the part of the dev's comment about laying the groundwork for future changes. That comment really worries me.
Taleden
North Wind Local no. 612
#35 - 2014-02-26 16:08:31 UTC
Batelle wrote:
Taleden wrote:
I know everybody likes to pretend that EVE has no PvE content whatsoever, but as long as you're looking at damping and ewar already, would it be so hard to make NPC ewar obey the same stacking penalties and effective ranges as player ewar? Missions against Serpentis, for example, are just a royal tedious pain because they can damp from 80km away, and it only takes 2 or 3 of them to cut your target range to 20km. And that doesn't even make those missions *hard* per se, it just makes them irritating, which has no gameplay value.


Not really relevant in this thread, but yes, this. Please. But be careful what you ask for, if they look at npc ewar they will most certainly give them scramblers that actually scramble. Hopefully they'll also reduce webs to 60% strength, and add stacking penalties there too.


You know, I wouldn't even mind too much if some (high-level) PvE content involved scramblers. That's a part of the game that people should have to deal with, so as long as they're added in a balanced way (i.e. still possible to survive and solo with proper tank, DPS, and anti-frigate tactics).

One of the main reasons I'm arguing for NPC ewar to behave the same as PC ewar (range, stacking, etc) is because it's stupid and confusing (especially for new players) for the same basic game mechanics to work *completely differently* in a PvE vs PvP context. PvE could help players to learn how to deal with and counter various types of ewar, but right now it doesn't, only because the ewar they see in PvE is completely different from what they'll see in PvP.
Goldensaver
Maraque Enterprises
Just let it happen
#36 - 2014-02-26 16:08:34 UTC
Batelle wrote:
seth Hendar wrote:
stuff


Whoops. See, I thought they had also gotten that buff, but for some reason it wasn't showing on the site i was looking at. Oops

EVElopedia never seems to get updated, sadly.
Ryu Chaos
Noir.
Shadow Cartel
#37 - 2014-02-26 16:14:08 UTC
I dont understand why disruptors(tracking and sensor) isnt like ecm. Make it a % chance that you will apply ewar so ppl can actually train for it, there is no point if it will defo apply ewar if its under optimal, ECM rightfully is a chance module(you increase it or decrease it depedning your fit). Since celestis is a damp platform make it need more modules, like falcon/blackbird needs signal distortion amplifiers to be effective.

@RyuChaos_
Batelle
Federal Navy Academy
#38 - 2014-02-26 16:14:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Batelle
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Maximus Andendare wrote:
Wasn't the Celestis' optimal range bonus to damps put in as a "fleet ship" counter to a Blackbird's ECM Range, so that each of them can ewar from roughly the same distance?

By nerfing the range on damps, won't that just lead to 100km+ Blackbirds going unchecked?


The term "Race to the Bottom" applies.

fozzie hates EWAR.
Less ships blow up when EWAR is onfield, as it directly inhibits applied DPS.
It does not matter that it differentiates the small gang players and smart players from the F1 monkeys (yes, I am aware of the irony of the large blobs using Celestis fleets).

In CCP's world, anything that increases the amount of ships blowing up is a good thing. (of course null sec cartel NAP's and NIP's are exempt from that concept at CCP).


Completely ignores the post he quoted about blackbirds... check
Shows up to personally attack Fozzie and his motives every time he makes a post... check
Complains about small gang getting nerfed while acknowledging that its actually a blob nerf... Cognative Dissonance check.
"nullsec cartels"... check
claims nullsec cartels are exempt from the basic rules (of ship explosion).... absurdity check, ccp loves those "cartels" precisely because they're the biggest drivers of ship explosions and the biggest purchasers of new ships.

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.
Batelle
Federal Navy Academy
#39 - 2014-02-26 16:16:13 UTC
Goldensaver wrote:
Batelle wrote:
seth Hendar wrote:
stuff


Whoops. See, I thought they had also gotten that buff, but for some reason it wasn't showing on the site i was looking at. Oops

EVElopedia never seems to get updated, sadly.


That would be normal, but its even stranger. Evelopedia is correct on this one, but eve-uni wiki is wrong!!!! Shocked

https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Arazu
http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Arazu

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.
Goldensaver
Maraque Enterprises
Just let it happen
#40 - 2014-02-26 16:20:38 UTC
Batelle wrote:
Goldensaver wrote:
Batelle wrote:
seth Hendar wrote:
stuff


Whoops. See, I thought they had also gotten that buff, but for some reason it wasn't showing on the site i was looking at. Oops

EVElopedia never seems to get updated, sadly.


That would be normal, but its even stranger. Evelopedia is correct on this one, but eve-uni wiki is wrong!!!! Shocked

https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Arazu
http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Arazu

Wat?! Inconceivable!