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) |
Jedziah
Asshats and Alcoholics Turbo.
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 20:47:00 -
[181]
Quote: The falcon has been changed to be similar to the pilgrim in its role as a ECM brawler at shorter ranges. It has a bigger ECM strength bonus whilst losing its ECM optimal range bonus
As per this comment,
One would expect that the Pilgrim receives a higher energy emissions bonus over the Curse to make up for a shorter range.
This is however not the case and should probably be brought in line with the Falcon.
|
ShadowGod56
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 20:48:00 -
[182]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Falcon & Rook
The falcon has been changed to be similar to the pilgrim in its role as a ECM brawler at shorter ranges. 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.
Summary Falcon changes
- ECM Strength Bonus increased from 20 to 25% per level - ECM Optimal Range Bonus removed (52km optimal / 81km falloff w/ 2*SDA IIs) - Increase in general manoeuvrability (might give agility bonus to it to replace the ECM optimal range bonus)
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.
Summary Rook Changes
- ECM strength bonus decreased to 15% per level - ECM Optimal Range bonus decreased to 15% per level (92km optimal / 81km falloff) - 5% Heavy/Heavy Assault missile velocity per recon ship level added (105km range with heavy missiles at max skills) - 25m3 drone bay / 25 mbit bandwidth added
im glad that there trying to make the rook now a ballanced, but i think it should be the other way around, the falcon should get the range bonus but not as strong of a chance of jamming, and the rook should be the brawler with the strong ECM.
it would make no sense to make the falcon get in close range when its only got 3 slots it can fit missiles to, it doesn't have the same ability as the pilgrim, the only reason the pilgrim has this ability is because it has a drone bonus and a nuet/nos bonus.
the only thing keeping the falcon alive most of the time is its range so taking it away from it is going kill the ship and it will turn into what the rook is now. the rook would be the best thing for a close range brawler because it has a bonus towards missiles, and with strong ECM bonus it would be more effective and people might actualy want to use the damn thing.
|
General Coochie
The Bastards
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 20:49:00 -
[183]
Originally by: Centra Spike "Close range brawler."
How am I supposed to offer constructive criticism when you are starting with off with such an exceptionally terrible idea?
Wait, no let me imagine for a second decloaking next to someone and attempting to jam them. My agility and base velocity bonus will keep me alive!
50-70km isnt exactly next to someone. Look at the bright side you will have even more powerful jammers should this happen. So you need less jammers for same jamming efficiency allowing you to fit a tank just like all the other recons have to do.
Got Cooch?, solo PvP movie
|
Kulmid
Asshats and Alcoholics Turbo.
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 20:49:00 -
[184]
Originally by: Centra Spike "Close range brawler."
How am I supposed to offer constructive criticism when you are starting with off with such an exceptionally terrible idea?
Wait, no let me imagine for a second decloaking next to someone and attempting to jam them. My agility and base velocity bonus will keep me alive!
Try taking off a few jammers and putting on some tank.
_________________
|
Alex Harumichi
Gallente Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 20:50:00 -
[185]
Edited by: Alex Harumichi on 24/03/2009 20:52:45 Edited by: Alex Harumichi on 24/03/2009 20:51:07
Originally by: Centra Spike "Close range brawler."
How am I supposed to offer constructive criticism when you are starting with off with such an exceptionally terrible idea?
Wait, no let me imagine for a second decloaking next to someone and attempting to jam them. My agility and base velocity bonus will keep me alive!
Welcome to the wonderful world of the Arazu. Feel free to fit a plate in lows, like Arazu needs to do. Or sacrifice EW power for shield tank. Also, like Arazu needs to do.
|
Adam C
Caldari coracao ardente Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 20:52:00 -
[186]
Edited by: Adam C on 24/03/2009 20:53:57 I don't like the current idea's of changing ecm warfare
- bringing them closer to get killed more.
Personally I rarely use falcons. I prefer to use an arazu to counter a falcon.
Typically if falcons are jamming from <200km good support ships should be able to counter that tactic within a minute or som, eliminating the warp-in spot and thats fine. Kind of fun to get it right and kind of frustrating to get it wrong.
CCP Chronotis your current thinking to make everything close so everything dies more may be diminishing tactics.
- ECM warfare is good for breaking excessive amounts rrbs usage. - Long range fleet engagements
Yes we do see falcons in most gangs it is frustrating to gamers who don't know how to form their fleets to counter them. That's their problem now isn't it.
But sure I wouldn't want 00's of falcons in everygang that is the only thing that needs to be balanced. Increase the expense of them is the only thing I can suggest.
|
Mortimer Phinn
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 20:54:00 -
[187]
Maybe ECM modules should work more like turrets. Remove the racial aspect of them and add a multiplier for strength depending on how many are put on a given target. A megathron can shoot 7 targets each with one gun, but will do crap for damage, it is only when you put all guns on one target that they reach their effectiveness. Do the same with ECM, put one on a target and you really won't accomplish much, put 4 ECM on a target and he is permajammed for all intents and purposes, but you are now only affecting one ship.
|
Dagda Morr
Seppuku Warriors
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 20:56:00 -
[188]
Broadly, I think the ECM fixes are probably needed - they seem somewhat confused though.
The Scorpion is hardly a ship that people complained about - the ECM range is completely appropriate for it's function as a fleet battleship.
I'm confused about the Rook/Falcon changes though - Surely the ship mounting a covops cloak should be the long-range sniper ecm and the short range brawler should have the drone bay and added jam strength.
Whichever ship is picked to be short range, it needs to have better durability regardless. If the ship wants to even mount the modules it's intended for, it gives up almost all it's tank.
|
Rexthor Hammerfists
Rage of Inferno Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 20:56:00 -
[189]
What about giving the falcon and scorp armor resist bonuses. Its completely out of the line for caldari ships, but so are missiles on gallente ships like the lachesis, or drones on amarr ships like the pilgrim and curse.
It would be completely in line with how current gangs work, and the only way to make the falcon and scorp work as close range brawlers. -
|
ShadowGod56
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 20:56:00 -
[190]
Originally by: Kulmid
Originally by: Centra Spike "Close range brawler."
How am I supposed to offer constructive criticism when you are starting with off with such an exceptionally terrible idea?
Wait, no let me imagine for a second decloaking next to someone and attempting to jam them. My agility and base velocity bonus will keep me alive!
Try taking off a few jammers and putting on some tank.
it would serve no purpose AT ALL being closer to the battle, yeah the falcons 3 high slots are really going pump some serious DPS into the target, and even if you put a better tank on the falcon waht will that do? nothing range is its strength it need to be switched with the rook
|
|
Stuart Price
Caldari The Black Rabbits The Gurlstas Associates
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 20:58:00 -
[191]
I like most of this but am going to jump on the rapidly developing bandwagon.
Falcon should keep its range. Being forced to jam in falloff with reduced strength is all that's needed. Make the Rook the brawler. Let it fit HAMs, light drones and a mix of buffer and jamming to be useful in small gangs.
Scorpion I'm undecided on since I can see wisdom is giving it either role tbh. If you make it a long-range ship then the second bonus can be either a missile speed bonus OR a shield amount bonus.
Another consideration is this:
E-war takes medslots. Shield mods take medslots. An ECM ship can use it's e-war OR it can tank. It cannot do BOTH at the same time (without being terrible at both). The matari recons already suffer this as well. Much as I hate to suggest it, another possible solution would be to hard-lock the amount of ECM modules you can mount (along similar lines to only being able to fit one MWD, or a certain amount of turrets etc) and make all ECM multispec with the ability to script them against specific races.
Putting the 'irate' into 'Pirate' |
Merdaneth
Amarr PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 21:01:00 -
[192]
Edited by: Merdaneth on 24/03/2009 21:02:00 CCP Chronitis, your major beef is with the ECM mechanic itself, it will always make it very hard to properly define ECM ship's roles. Basically, ECM is nearly literally a 'remove your opponent from the game from X seconds' mechanic. Such a mechanic is very very rarely fun to play against.
See this well-read and (surprisingly) full of decent responses thread here: Electronic Warfare Psychology
As for some misconceptions: Signal Distortion Amplifiers are not *only worth fitting on ECM specialized ships*. In fact, I have multiple setups fitting SDA's, and I fly Amarr only.
What is true, is that the difference between ECM specialized ships and non-specialized ships is so large that when you can fly an ECM specialized ship, there is little reason to fit an ECM module to a non-specialized ship. In fact, the difference is so large that I rely on it when flying my ECM fitted Amarr ships, nobody sees it coming. This difference is much more marked than with other forms of EW. Ships of all types and sizes fit TD's, Neutralizers, Nosferatu's, Painters, Scramblers, Webifiers etc. but only ECM spec ships tend to fit ECM.
CCP decided in the past that ECM was 'so powerful' that only specialized ships should be able to effectively use it, which has somewhat resulted in the current level of specialization, and the popularity of only certain shiptypes.
A big problem with ECM as well is that it has only a single size of jammers, and thus affects smaller ships with much greater effectiveness, with no feasible way to counter it for most frig and cruiser size ships. As pointed out by others, a single Griffin in an FW plex is very hard to bypass.
Currently by upping the ECM strength bonusses, and changing SDA's to range bonus, you make it even more neccessary for ECM specialized ships to super-specialize, and thus increase the changes of a Falcon being primary. The strength of the effect, and the role specialization helps create the current 'all-or-nothing' no fun enviroment.
Why do these changes make it more fun for everyone involved?
____
The Illusion of Freedom | The Truth about Slavery |
JackofHearts
Viper Squad Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 21:02:00 -
[193]
what about people who fight in low sec? can we still be out 170km's ?
|
Thoregras
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 21:03:00 -
[194]
Edited by: Thoregras on 24/03/2009 21:04:34 I have a simple solution, reduce the optimal, falloff & strength of all jamming modules by 1/3rd and give them 2 scripts one that increases range by 100% and 1 that increases strength by 100%
Done simple and balanced.
Oh and you might wanna actually have a look at the maths of ECM coz more often than not falcons perma jam there target. Which tbh should never happen.
Also - Arii Smith is a CORP THIEF, Please do not buy that character, as we will leave it KOS after the transfer. |
Vasili Z
Foundation Sons of Tangra
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 21:11:00 -
[195]
Holy ****ing Jesus, it's about damn time. I approve.
Whining does work. -------
Eve requires no skill anymore |
ShadowGod56
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 21:11:00 -
[196]
Originally by: Thoregras Edited by: Thoregras on 24/03/2009 21:04:34 I have a simple solution, reduce the optimal, falloff & strength of all jamming modules by 1/3rd and give them 2 scripts one that increases range by 100% and 1 that increases strength by 100%
Done simple and balanced.
Oh and you might wanna actually have a look at the maths of ECM coz more often than not falcons perma jam there target. Which tbh should never happen.
high % numbers is not perma jamming, if you can find a an example that has a 99.9-100% chance of jamming chance i will stand corrected.
|
Renarla
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 21:11:00 -
[197]
Remove non-racial jam strength from the specialized mods, so that racial jammers will only jam the race they're meant to jam, and all will be well along with the proposed changes.
|
Dee Carson
Caldari Seppuku Warriors
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 21:12:00 -
[198]
Falcons should still have a range advantage over Rooks.
Rooks should have DPS advantage over Falcons.
Scorps should... Well... Scorps should continue to look more like an interweb spaceship than a Domi.
DC
http://deecarson.blogspot.com/ |
Vasili Z
Foundation Sons of Tangra
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 21:13:00 -
[199]
Originally by: Renarla Remove non-racial jam strength from the specialized mods, so that racial jammers will only jam the race they're meant to jam, and all will be well along with the proposed changes.
This idea's pretty chill, I also approve. -------
Eve requires no skill anymore |
Odinegras
Gallente 0utbreak KrautbreaK
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 21:15:00 -
[200]
Originally by: ShadowGod56
Originally by: Thoregras Edited by: Thoregras on 24/03/2009 21:04:34 I have a simple solution, reduce the optimal, falloff & strength of all jamming modules by 1/3rd and give them 2 scripts one that increases range by 100% and 1 that increases strength by 100%
Done simple and balanced.
Oh and you might wanna actually have a look at the maths of ECM coz more often than not falcons perma jam there target. Which tbh should never happen.
high % numbers is not perma jamming, if you can find a an example that has a 99.9-100% chance of jamming chance i will stand corrected.
racial jammer on a falcon gives a jam strength of 14. Inties have 10 ish sensor strength. So Inties can be jammed 100% of the time.
|
|
Thoregras
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 21:16:00 -
[201]
Originally by: ShadowGod56
Originally by: Thoregras Edited by: Thoregras on 24/03/2009 21:04:34 I have a simple solution, reduce the optimal, falloff & strength of all jamming modules by 1/3rd and give them 2 scripts one that increases range by 100% and 1 that increases strength by 100%
Done simple and balanced.
Oh and you might wanna actually have a look at the maths of ECM coz more often than not falcons perma jam there target. Which tbh should never happen.
high % numbers is not perma jamming, if you can find a an example that has a 99.9-100% chance of jamming chance i will stand corrected.
racial jammer on a falcon gives a jam strength of 14. Inties have 10 ish sensor strength. So Inties can be jammed 100% of the time.
Also - Arii Smith is a CORP THIEF, Please do not buy that character, as we will leave it KOS after the transfer. |
Gespenst Jager
Pumpkin Scissors Bright Side of Death
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 21:16:00 -
[202]
CCP Chronotis
Lol Nice idea but this is not enough. After this nerf players will still have possibility to create Caldari chars and to fly on the caldari ships. It is unfair. So i demand completely remove Caldari race from EVE and close this question
|
Pattern Clarc
Celtic Anarchy Force Of Evil
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 21:16:00 -
[203]
I think you forgot to boost the pilgrim (it doesn't have stronger ewar bonuses than the curse).
Also, is it too much to ask for hybrid bonuses on one of those ewar ships? ____
My Blog Is Awesome
|
Dee Carson
Caldari Seppuku Warriors
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 21:16:00 -
[204]
Originally by: ShadowGod56 high % numbers is not perma jamming, if you can find a an example that has a 99.9-100% chance of jamming chance i will stand corrected.
The determinate factor is the sensor strength of the target.
I will permajam every hull with sensor strength less than 14 or so in my preferred Falcon fit.
For battleship targets (sensor strength of 22 or so), I have to be ready to apply 3 jammers for a 94% probability of success.
DC
http://deecarson.blogspot.com/ |
Xiobe
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 21:17:00 -
[205]
Originally by: Thoregras Oh and you might wanna actually have a look at the maths of ECM coz more often than not falcons perma jam there target. Which tbh should never happen.
You can perma-damp, perma-tracking-disrupt (heh) and perma-target-paint (rofl). Why not perma-jam?
Originally by: ShadowGod56 high % numbers is not perma jamming, if you can find a an example that has a 99.9-100% chance of jamming chance i will stand corrected.
Falcon: Jam Strength of 13.5 Interceptor: Sensor Strength of 12
100% Jam every time. :) -- lose. their. they're. there. couldn't care less. lego. colour. flavour. |
Alex Harumichi
Gallente Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 21:18:00 -
[206]
Any chance of applying the same logic to the Gallente and Minmatar recons?
Give Lachesis a damp range bonus, increase Huginn web range bonus. Might make them more interesting. Make Arazu and Rapier the more close-range ships.
|
Lord TYMAN
You're Doing It Wrong
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 21:20:00 -
[207]
Edited by: Lord TYMAN on 24/03/2009 21:21:45 edit : actually read some of the other replies, seems I was right on the money
Could I be as bold as to suggest the following (might have already been suggested but there's not a big chance im going to read 7 pages of whine)/
o Keep falcons as long range jammers - but obviously nerf the strength as the victim becomes further away. ie - within 40km the jam strength is similar to what it is now, but at 200km the chances of jamming are greatly reduced
o Make the rook something other than a complete joke. I EFTd one the other day, i think i couldn't get it above 90dps. make the rook the "brawler" ship you speak of, but boost it's dps significantly and make it have very good close range jamming strength. put it on par with the curse as being a "oshi" recon.
that is all.
|
cok cola
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 21:21:00 -
[208]
imho, take the falcon range down in the same perportion that inty's were slowed recently since that indirectly buffed their range, and lower the ammnt of time a target is jammed by half so ecm is more of a lockbreaker, bs's take a long time to relock anyways, and thats enuff. ------------------------------------------
|
Kil2
Club Bear Turbo.
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 21:21:00 -
[209]
Edited by: Kil2 on 24/03/2009 21:24:27 so freaking excited.
im sure balancing ecm for both small gang and fleet is not easy, but from the small gang side these ships have been a problem large enough to force a lot of my corp mates to basically stop pvping. these changes are ideal for our type of pvp. no more falcon alt behind every single pilot you engage, since flying a falcon or scorp will actually require attention and management now.
good job guys, thanks <3
edit: btw you guys that think caldari cant pvp are wrong. again im no fleet expert, but i fly more and more caldari in small gangs all the time. ferox 4 life
|
Lilredridinghood
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 21:25:00 -
[210]
other than optimal and falloff of ecm being switched, which i think is a good idea, thats alot of mucking around for something an eccm boost could have done.
|
|
|
|
|
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 |