Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 38 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
Solid Prefekt
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 04:53:00 -
[391]
Edited by: Solid Prefekt on 25/03/2009 04:53:45
Originally by: Andrea Skye And this kids, concludes todays lesson on why you should never train up FOTM ships/modules, but rather instead train what you enjoy flying.
QFT.
|
Vanst Keal
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 04:54:00 -
[392]
Okay. In the order they were posted, I'll do what I can to disabuse you of these crazy ideas.
- ECM Range:
- Base module range shouldn't be changed. It's in line with the other EWAR types (for whatever that's worth), and for that matter it makes sense. If you want to nerf ECM range, reduce the ship bonuses on a case-by-case basis.
- Signal Distortion Amplifiers:
- Allow me to quote you:
Quote: The SDAs are something of a conundrum. They are really only worth fitting on the ECM specialised ships and are the only EWAR enhancing module we have besides the rigs. Currently they increase your ECM strength and we were looking at swapping this to an ECM range bonus and altering either the base strength of the jammers or the ECM strength bonus of the ships so they become less required in every setup and the low slots could be used for tanking for example.
Allow me to quote the relevant portion of this paragraph: Quote: They are really only worth fitting on the ECM specialised ships and are the only EWAR enhancing module we have besides the rigs.
This can be fixed by changing SDAs so they provide bonuses to every form of EWAR, be it a strength bonus or a range bonus. I understand wanting to make them less required, but the truth of the matter is that as long as they exist to provide any sort of bonus, they're going to be used in dedicated fittings. Making SDAs give a bonus to every form of electronic warfare would make every form of EWAR more useful across the board - Something I think is desperately needed for sensor dampeners and tracking disruptors, given how hard they got hit by scripting. But that's another thread.
- Ship Changes:
- While I appreciate that the development team has an idea of where you want to go with this ECM change, I don't like it. Lots of ECM users don't like it, for that matter. Why? Let me move on to the proposed ship changes, with the understanding that I don't fly and never have flown any recon ships.
- Falcon:
- This is where your "ECM Brawler" idea falls on its face. The Falcon may as well be made out of construction paper for how much damage it can take out of the box, and can't fit any tank if the pilot wants to be anywhere near effective as an ECM platform. Why is this? Well, it's a Caldari ship, and unless something changed in the last five minutes Caldari ships shield tank if they need to withstand damage. Shield modules require the use of midslots, as do ECM modules. Since ECM is arguably more useful than withstanding damage, it wins out over personal safety. So instead the Falcon range tanks, which is where you use extreme range to keep yourself from exploding, instead of excessive speed, shield durability, or armor durability. Your concept of an ECM brawler is further compounded by the Falcon's horribly anemic DPS. Comparing it to the Pilgrim is absolute madness given the Pilgrim's drone damage bonus, ability to shut down any active tank with energy neutralizers, and the fact that the Pilgrim is rarely used currently due to its short range, high cost, and barely-there tanking ability.
- Rook:
- If you want an ECM brawler, start here. The Rook is more durable and capable of doing more damage than the Falcon. Plus it can't fit covops cloaks, so it's cheaper to lose if you get shot at too much.
- Scorpion:
- NO. BAD CCP. NO BISCUIT. If you absolutely must change the Scorpion, reduce its range bonus until its ECM optimal matches the gun optimals of T2-fit fleet battleships like the Apocalypse, Megathron, and Tempest. See all those words about the Falcon? Apply them to the Scorpion now. It has the same issues regarding shield tanking vs ECM effectiveness, if somewhat reduced by being a BS.
But I bet the goonrush in here probably means this will all go in as-is, regardless of all the screaming. Oh well.
|
Roemy Schneider
BINFORD
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 04:57:00 -
[393]
the falcon looks ok this way.
are those optimal/falloff stats taken from the multispec or the racial ones? cause racials already start at 54km plus the 5%/lvl EW-extra-skill - putting the gist back into logistics |
TZeer
BURN EDEN
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 05:00:00 -
[394]
Quote: We have been looking at all the ECM ships (Griffin, Kitsune, Blackbird, Falcon, Rook and Scorpion).
Where is the Widow in all this????
|
Samiloth Justinian
Evolution Band of Brothers Reloaded
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 05:08:00 -
[395]
Falcons are to become short ranged brawlers!? Will they brawl with 2 missile slots and use its 3 low slots for armor tank? Is that the plan?
And what is this “additional utility” you have in mind for the rook when it gets a drone bay and increased range? Have not the Caldari ship builders figured out by now that sniper ships and drones don’t go well together.
But forget about the rook, and I will not even begin commenting on the scorpion idea, let’s talk about the falcon.
The reason why falcons are high on the primary list is not because they can fight from a distance, it is because they have powerful ECM. To give them stronger ECM and short range will only ensure that they are primaried, and with the only tanking it is suitable for (range) gone, they will not be able to do much in fleet battles before dying.
That for example cruise missiles became a weapon made to be used against ships that need to be larger then a BS to have full effect was amazing enough. To make paper-thin ECM ships short ranged ships is just unbelievable. I have yet to be in a fleet fight where I am safe in a falcon. Every ship with range are out to get the falcons, making them spend more then a little of their time fleeing and returning from the fight.
Originally by: CCP Chronotis We have been looking again at ECM ships focusing on their roles and whether these ships can be improved overall to better define their roles a little more.
So you want to “define” their role by making falcons short ranged brawlers? Right now they are very specialized and it is pretty clear what a falcon should do, stepping outside the thing that makes them good (range and ECM) means that they die quickly. To make them more like other ships (short ranged brawlers O_O) is not defining their role, it is an attempt to mainstream the ship.
If you have this weird urge to bring the falcons into weapon range of every single ship that wants to kill it in a fleet fight, then you need to give it the means to survive it long enough to have a chance to escape. Great speed, resist & rep or range is the tanks of Eve. So-So speed, resist & rep or range is no tank in Eve.
Also, this should not be forgotten: A falcon can jam ships and then wait until either someone makes that ship escape/die, or the falcon can flee. It can not actually end a fight by themselves, only prolong it until someone else bails them out. Furthermore, the day other specialized ships gets specialized mods that only works well on one race, then we can start to compare ECM ships to other ships.
Right now the falcon is a nuisance in a fleet fight that everyone wants to get rid off. If you bring the falcon in close then it is not only a nuisance that everyone wants to get rid off, but everyone can actually shoot it as well.
|
Jim Raynor
Caldari Clarity of Purpose
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 05:09:00 -
[396]
if you're going to make caldari ecm useless at least boost caldari offense so there's at least some reason to fly these ships
4 launcher scorpion? no offense, even with bonuses. falcon? paper thin 2 launchers? ok..
i mean i agree that falcons were stupidly overpowered but ecm is about the only reason to fly caldari in pvp these days.
also scorpion as a short range 'brawler' will make it useless..
------ I'll make a sig later. |
demonfurbie
Minmatar Covert-Nexus Dark Cadre
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 05:10:00 -
[397]
Originally by: TZeer
Quote: We have been looking at all the ECM ships (Griffin, Kitsune, Blackbird, Falcon, Rook and Scorpion).
Where is the Widow in all this????
see thats what ccp thinks about black ops
the forgotten ship class
|
OgreMerk
Caldari Ba Da Bing
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 05:19:00 -
[398]
Edited by: OgreMerk on 25/03/2009 05:20:21 These changes don't really seem like a nerf; just a slight re-adjustment. The problem will still be there. Eve is turning into a game of who has the better jamming. As far as I knew there shouldn't be any one thing that is mandatory, the ECM module / jamming ship is though. It doesn't matter if your fighting 1v1, small gang, or big fleet. 90% of the time it just comes down to jamming strength. This also makes small scale PVP loose its appeal. As gangs add falcons and falcon killers to counter the enemy. The fleets just get bigger and bigger.
In my opinion, ECM should have the same ranges as webbers, neuts, and disruptors. A falcon is just as fragile as any other recon, so they can be right there next to us. Another problem I see is that currently, a falcon can permanently jam. The only way this should happen is when there's sensor dampening in conjunction with the jamming.
Its gonna be a tricky thing to nerf the ECM, without just completely removing it. No other module in game has the ability to render any target completely useless.
I guess some possible changes could be:
- Only 1 jamming module per ship. Jamming type changed with scripts.
Shorten the range to match other ewar. Shorten the actual time a target is jammed, but leave the module cycle time the same. Lower strength and range of ECM modules; add strength/range scripts like other EWAR Mods.
I'm sure I'll think of some other crazy ideas later
|
Havok Pierce
Gallente The Bastards
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 05:19:00 -
[399]
When are Remote Sensor Dampeners and their associated ships getting a look? Currently the Gallente EAF is basically another tacking interceptor hull with more paper and less speed. The Lachesis is a long-long point with a pathetic attempt to do damage, and the Arazu is a cloaking tackler.
Originally by: CCP Wrangler There's a Community petition category??
|
Roemy Schneider
BINFORD
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 05:22:00 -
[400]
Originally by: Havok Pierce When are Remote Sensor Dampeners and their associated ships getting a look? Currently the Gallente EAF is basically another tacking interceptor hull with more paper and less speed. The Lachesis is a long-long point with a pathetic attempt to do damage, and the Arazu is a cloaking tackler.
well, now you'll be able to damp'en falcons.. still in deep falloff but hey... but yeah, all those other EW could do with more optimal. willing to sacrifice some falloff for that - putting the gist back into logistics |
|
Matrixcvd
Caldari Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 05:24:00 -
[401]
Edited by: Matrixcvd on 25/03/2009 05:24:34 CCP Chronotis, have you ever PVPed? and more importantly have you ever FC'd? Do you understand fleet combat? Do you understand this game at all? Let us dissect your gibberish
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Generally the ECM optimal range is a little too long with massive optimal ranges possible which would place the ECM specialised ships so far out of the fight to be almost completely safe but suffer no effective hit quality decrease.
so are you going to adjust ranges on sniper BSs because 1 volley from an unjammed sniper is all that it takes to permanently remove a falcon from the field
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
To bring them closer to the fight we are looking at swapping the base optimal and falloff ranges so at the longer ranges jammers would be operating more in falloff and hence have a lower chance of 'hitting' with their jammers at the extreme ranges.
YOu mean to make them easier to kill for noobs that get caught off guard and wtfpwn'd and cried on the forum for 2 years. Thats really what we have found out. It takes 2 years of forum whining before you finally cave in.
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
We have been looking at all the ECM ships (Griffin, Kitsune, Blackbird, Falcon, Rook and Scorpion). We wanted to ensure each ship had a more focused role which was not just bigger, longer range and better than the others so only one wins outright.
Everytime you "focus" a ship into a given roll, it means you reduce its capabilities to the point where nobody wants to fly it. There already clear distinctions between ships, its called ISK and SP and finally experience. Because without the experience you will just lose isk and prolly sp cause you get podded alot. THe scorp is bigger than the falcon, so size really has nothing to do with it so this statement is just pish
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
The falcon has been changed to be similar to the pilgrim in its role as a ECM brawler at shorter ranges.
"Carriers are the Swiss Army of Eve" I never thought i would hear a better line but "ECM Brawler" has now improved upon stupid dev poasts...R U SERIOUS? what does that even mean?
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
It has a bigger ECM strength bonus whilst losing its ECM optimal range bonus. In addition its agility and base velocity and have been increased to allow it to be more manoeuvrable at shorter ranges. BONUSES: BLAH STUPID
so this just makes a cloaking ship warp faster. Changing the optimal range bonus so the ship turns better is just a cover for making the game easier for noobs and allowing people to disengage quicker, making this game more hello kitty
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
The rook operates at longer ranges, able to attack at distance and whilst having a weaker ECM strength but longer ECM range than the falcon can lay some real damage on its target gaining a heavy/heavy assault and standard missile velocity bonus in addition to a small drone bay for additional utility. BONUSES: BLAH STUPID
so you took the force recon concept and mashed it into the combat recon role and voila we are suppose to fly your fail ships
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
We are looking at putting the scorpion into the short range brawler role. To that end we are looking at removing its ECM Optimal range bonus, increasing the ECM strength bonus a little and adding a cruise/siege launcher rate of fire bonus so it can get close and personal. BONUSES: BLAH STUPID
SO GIVE THE SHIP AN INCREASED ARMOR BUFF, AN EXTRA LOW SLOT AND MAKE IT A BETTER ARMOR TANK SO IT CAN ACTUALLY BRAWL AT CLOSE RANGE. ARE YOU COMPLETELY BLIND TO HOW THIS GAME WORKS. WHO CARES ABOUT A ROF INCREASE FOR AN EXTRA 78 DPS YOU EFT WARRIOR.
|
sylvester stallowned
Trotters Independent Trading
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 05:28:00 -
[402]
Edited by: sylvester stallowned on 25/03/2009 05:29:58
Originally by: Thercon Jair @ the people complaining about the falcon becoming a short-range brawler:
So, 54km base + 50% range from the "Long Distance Jamming"-skill @ lvl5 means you get 81km optimal. Oh my! Now you're so up close and personal, it's scary.
A Rapier has not more tank than a falcon, and the range on the webs is with 40km also only half the range of the "new" jammers. Additionally, painters have quite a short optimal range.
I'd say this is pretty much ballanced.
THIS!
80k optimal + faloff is way to much IMO, falcons should have to fight at the same ranges as all the other races recons, ie 40km or less. Make it 40k optimal with 20k Faloff pls.
Imagine a rapier / arazu / pilgrim that can web / point / neut at over 100k.. Overpowered right?
All these whines and cries about falcons having to fight up close are so funny, well they still won't have to fight as at close range as ANY other covert-recon, and will have the same EHP as a rapier.
Ever seen a rapier fitted with NO shield extenders or no Armor buffer (instead of the LSE for Armor gangs)... No, why? Because without them they are a wet paper bag without the proper fittings just like the falcon.
|
Matrixcvd
Caldari Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 05:33:00 -
[403]
those are just the blatantly ridiculous statements in your poast... after further analysis. you clearly don't FC, don't play the game and or utterly fail and need to blob to do anything.
Falcon, warps cloaked, jams at 220km with RECON V, max jam strength is 13. it does no damage.
You could just slightly lower the the optimal but you feel the need to reinvent the game under the guise of making it more fair but your real goal is to limit the effectiveness so that anyone can hop in a BB and be 90% of the way to a falcon and make all the new and low SP people feel happy. make it easier for losers to PVP and the weak to blob up and continue to just suck the life outta this game.
EWAR on a pilgrim is located in its HIGH SLOTS EWAR FOR A FALCON IS IN ITS LOW SLOTS
I could go on and tear your little thesis apart but its useless, enjoy the failure cascade that you are creating for yourselves
its not comparable, now instead of the pilgrim failing, the falcon will be useless... you people just don't get it or you do and my tinfoil hat says you think its better for everyone to be able to fly everything and do everything after 1 month and that training and specializing is not the way....
|
Kernok
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 05:34:00 -
[404]
different approach
i dont think the problem with ecm is jamming strengh but so much but the fact that your useless for 20 seconds, what if the jam time were reduced to something like 5 seconds base, and a range skill changed to instead increase this ammount of time up to maybe 10. less permajamming would = less whining i think. also bring falcon range down only to 150k so they have to deal with sentries and chalk it up to an adjustment to speed required an adjustment to ecm range
i also support the idea of making eccm add a base ammount of sensor strength instead of a % so its more viable on smaller ships.
|
sylvester stallowned
Trotters Independent Trading
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 05:38:00 -
[405]
Edited by: sylvester stallowned on 25/03/2009 05:44:03 To satisfy all the whiners please give the falcon some extra missiles slots and an ROF bonus in line with other recons.
And reduce the effectiveness of ECM in falloff ranges please.
<3 joo Chronotis
|
Kix'i
Warp Asylum.
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 05:38:00 -
[406]
About time! I still think that ecm should do something besides break lock completely, as it is very boring to be jammed. When u are damped u can fly to a closer range. Tracking disrupted; you can try and balance out transersal and get closer. Neuted; you can cap inject and balance out cap using mods.
When you are jammed (even with 2 overloaded eccm with current mechanics) you cannot do much of anything besides deagro or let drones do a very little amount of damage. There are plenty of suggestions for what ecm could do so maybe investigate these on the test server for people to toy with?
Matrixcvd is complaining about fleet combat, I'm not so sure if he is aware of the small gang aspect of ecm just now where a falcon makes a small gang go to spectator mode. This is the main problem with ecm just now, not fleet combat.
That said please make any changes asap as just now the fun of combat is nerfed by ecm.
|
Namaraa
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 05:43:00 -
[407]
CCP: Now that you're nerfing Scorpion range, what exactly are missile Caldari going to fly in fleet battles?
|
Tolarus
Clown Punchers. Clown Punchers Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 05:50:00 -
[408]
Edited by: Tolarus on 25/03/2009 05:53:57 AHAHHAHA on man you guys really know how to make some 'tweaks'. That range reduction is ridiculous.
Alot of pilots dont like any type of ECM being used agaisnt them in combat, so why not just remove ECM from the game all together, cause you know, "that pesky ECM sure does make The PvP difficult".
You guys built the ECM system, those range numbers for the falcon dont look like they were thought through very well Is it over powered now? Yeah alittle, but seriously? At that range as paper thin and fragile as they are you seriously expect them to still be practical?
Beef up the Falcons HPs for shield and armor, make the cost of building them 50% less then they are now and slap a drone bay on it like the Rook.
Been flying them for close to two years now and by no means are they an "I Win" button that some people panic about when they see one on the battlefield.
*Range is an issue, yes, lets tweak that, tweak not knee cap. With max skills, t2 fittings and rigs, its still a challenge flying them as they are now.
|
Leyline777
Surge.
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 05:53:00 -
[409]
Ok... I understand that ecm (the caldari version that is) is very powerful and possibly broken depending on situation. However many players have brought up the issue that distance is the caldari jamming platforms tank... If you want to kill its range a tiny bit or instead reduce its strength go right on ahead and do it... but if you kill its range boni... you will effectively remove it from the hands of pirates. Now; before i get flamed for being a whiny pirate; I understand adapt or die. But this change, skews the usage of these ships inordinately in the favor of anti pi, or even non blinky individuals. If you had instead buffed the other racial ewar id have applauded you. This however.. is yet another misguided change by a ccp that is out of touch with the player base.
If youd give the rook HAC type resistances, more mids and kept the range down id cheer. If you just halved the ecm bonus on the falcon and or messed with its cpu or range id be ok. But now youve effectively brought them into the gate gun range where they cannot mount a gate class tank and still do their job (same applies to scorp).
Please reconsider this unlike you did with the massive empyrean failure... --
My sig doesn't fit and the sig limit is ******ed >>. (yes this is a "jetcan".. get over it) |
Hyneid Fehlhaishyo
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 05:56:00 -
[410]
Edited by: Hyneid Fehlhaishyo on 25/03/2009 05:56:46 This is the worst thought-out and heaviest handed idea I have seen since the last time you "ballanced" most HACs and all Command ships into oblivion. Do you play your own game? A falcon as a "short range brawler"?
Fine, the Falcon is too invulnerable. Try Boosting ECCM effectiveness or eliminating some penalties for fitting one, or try Boosting damps on specialized ships (remember damps? Yeah, you nerfed those away as well) The default answer to all problems in this game is not the F*cking nerf bat.
Edit: Oops. Alt post (Exothermos)
|
|
Killde
Veto. Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 06:08:00 -
[411]
This seems like using a sledgehammer to kill a fly. I really don't think massive wide sweeping changes to a backbone line of Caldari is the best approach to this problem. ECM is certainly a problem, but part of the problem is that there is no effective counter to ECM at the moment. Forcing them into guns range with their paper tanks is not the solution, you shouldn't always have to kill something to counter it.
Instead let's look at other methods. First we see ECCM, by design it should be a counter to ECM. It does a reasonible job as counters go, at least as well as tracking computers overcome tracking disruptors and sensor boosters overcome sensor dampers. However unlike those other counter it has no fringe benefit. There is no advantage to running around with an 80 sensor strength. If you add a fringe benefit to ECCM, people might be more willing to use them, and less likely to be caught with their pants down when ECM does show up.
Other methods are disabling the ECM. ECM is always a good option but it only aggravates the 'too many ecm ships' problem. So how about other options? Damps seems like they'd be a great solution if only they didn't have such a pitiful optimal range/lack of ships with an optimal range bonus. A simple change such as increasing dampers optimal range or giving a ship, such as the arazu or lachesis, a optimal range bonus of 20% per level would make these solid counters to ECM that attempts to jam at extreme range, and yet still allow jammers to come under 80km and jam targets.
|
Unforgivin
Caldari Ichiban Boshi
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 06:11:00 -
[412]
you have boosted the roaming falcon :) i love it, warp to celestial warp back and im instantly in optimal, increased ecm strength, its beautiful :)) you have also made rooks into better falcon neutralizers/killers.
i will be first to admit perma jamming someone from 200km+ always makes me feel guilty, with these nerfs/boosts i might actually lose my first falcon
|
timulous
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 06:12:00 -
[413]
this is a stupid idea i spent 3 to 4 months training my falcon so its the best...
notice all the people that are crying are the none falcon pilots. this ship was built for range just like the manticore. instead destroying a good ship with stupid ideas people need to fly its counter ship. arazu
and there are plenty of people that can one shot a falcon i have seen it done heaps, its not a close up ship you cant out fit a shield tank onto a faclon cos of the jammers. if anything you need modulated jammers not this stupid nerf..
first you hit caldari with a missle nerf and now you want to hit its strongest fleet ship..
ccp you have it wrong
leave the falcon alone!?!?!?!?!
|
Bai Guang
Caldari Edge Of Infinity H E L I C O N
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 06:15:00 -
[414]
I for one am absolutely appalled by the majority of what CCP is proposing. I have read the majority of the comments here and it seems that their are quite a few good ideas to address the ECM "issues". The only problem is trying to filter through the massive amounts of garbage posts of people who have had their pride hurt when a lowly caldari pilot who has spent the better part of a year perfecting their ECM craft (since that's all we are good for since the missile nerf) got a jam cycle on them, preventing them from WTFPWN LAWLSTOWN the poor fella.
I am starting to have my doubts about CCP.... /me flashes back to StarWars Galaxies and the awesome new "Combat Upgrade" *shutter*
Now: Falcon = super expensive paper bag Then: Falcon = wallet draining isk cyclone of doom
Bottom Line: drop optimal range a bit, sure, but dont turn us into pinata's. Direct the nerf warfare at another race for a little while CCP.
|
Holden Thorpe
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 06:22:00 -
[415]
Edited by: Holden Thorpe on 25/03/2009 06:22:10 http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/823/brawlawlor.jpg
Says it all, really. |
Thorian Baalnorn
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 06:32:00 -
[416]
Lets just save the headache and remove caldari ships from the game. They werent exactly great at pvp to begin with. the only thing they really had going for them is ecm and the drake. The rest of caldari ships were ok. Missles got nerfed and all caldari missleboats got a big nerf. Now lets nerf ecm cause people are to lazy to figure out a way to deal with falcons, instead its much easier to cry a river to ccp.
falcons are like... a flying paperbag. As it is they get primaried and will get primaried because of ecm...Making them a short range ship with no tanking ability whatsoever is going to make them a 100 mil isk instaloss.
my favorite part is the can free up lows for tanking...i dont know if you heard but caldari are shield tanks... armor tanking one usually isnt a good idea. and 3 slots isnt going to give you any tank worth filling the slots. with running all active mods in your mids your not going to have the cap to run an armor repper etc. not that the tank matters as your going to be primaried and anything in range is going to hit you.
As it was said i think a fair " nerf" would be to only switch optimal and falloff of jammers.
the real problem is people want to be able to fly whatever ship they want with thier best pvp fit and still be able to fight a fleet with a falcon in it. So they whine so they can have their max gank fit without having to swap out for anti-ecm mods.
i have two words in regards to fighting falcons...ECCM and SNIPER...actually how about you just make eccm mods more effective?
Caldari has had enough nerfs in the past year dont you think?
|
Bazman
Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 06:35:00 -
[417]
The reply's are everything I could have hoped for
reminder: Change ECM mechanics -----
|
LordVodka
Earned In Blood
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 06:40:00 -
[418]
Looks ok but I think you could do better! I personally have a char with recon 5 to fly falcons and cal bs 5 for scorps etc.
The falcon changes are well deserved!!! The ship was borderline rediculous, and I like how you chose to shorten the range that's all that ever really needed to happen. I think it's also good that the rook now has a purpose again was stupid when the rook and falcon had equal strengths and the falcon had a covert ops cloak.
The scorpion on the other hand I think should be changed!!!!!!!!! The scorpions the best candidate for the ranged sniper ecm. It's big and slow for one so it's easier for people to get tacklers out to, and with cruise missiles it's the natural choice for a sniper. I don't see a ton of people complain about scorp in eve. They are slow enough they typically get locked down at a gate long before they ever got out to range. It's a ship that didn't need a massive change, and I hope you'll consider rethinking that one.
|
Lord WarATron
Amarr Shadow Reapers DAMAGE INC...
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 06:45:00 -
[419]
Leave ECM as it is, but remove that 20 second Jam cycle. All problems with ECm trace back to the long cycle rather than the actual act of lock breaking. --
Billion Isk Mission |
FistFul O'Dumbass
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 06:45:00 -
[420]
I still havent read one, not ONE convincing arguement as to WHY the ECM mechanics or any of the current ships need to be nerfed or changed in any way.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 38 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |