| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
welsh wizard
0utbreak
KrautbreaK
   |
Posted - 2009.02.21 20:27:00 -
[1]
 Originally by: Allahs Warrior
Edited by: Allahs Warrior on 21/02/2009 20:04:35
Falcon wins whether you fit ECCM or not.
Fleet with a falcon (or 1 falcon advantage): Other side either lost 3-4 ships from fighting capability.
Fleet with a falcon (or 1 falcon advantage)and other side fit ECCM: other side has sacrificed (on average) 1-2 (sometimes 3) slots on every single one of their ships, most likely being the all-important midslots, and now you have a fighting advantage, and you STILL jam some ships.
name any other ship that costs same as a falcon that can do that. Oh wait there isn't, because ECCM modules are absolutely worthless compared to the other things that are fit to counter other EW
Bring your own.
---------------
RIP Crazy Horse |
welsh wizard
0utbreak
KrautbreaK
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 22:13:00 -
[2]
Edited by: welsh wizard on 21/02/2009 22:14:34
The ship does nothing else, that means you need to give it something in return if its nerfed drastically. The Falcon could probably endure a slight range reduction but not too much. As it has (realistically) a 1 slot tank with massive resistance holes, so it needs its range too. Can the same be said of the other Ewar boats? Do they have one role and very little survivability? No they don't.
More than any other series of ships the ECM boat nerf snowball quickly becomes an avalanche. This won't change until the ships are given some other use. As a result I don't think they'll ever be nerfed without a complete re-design. CCP have already tried nerfing ECM and we all know how that went.
As stated in the other thread, its important to distinguish between boring and overpowered. ECM and the Falcon fall squarely into the former.
---------------
RIP Crazy Horse |
welsh wizard
0utbreak
KrautbreaK
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 22:36:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Cpt Leks
Originally by: echohead
If falcons were really unbalanced they would be solo pwning people like the old curses/pilgrims. Falcons still have a paper tank, they still have zero DPS, they are slow. Even small gangs can be fitted to deal with falcons and blackbirds. for example many ships with decent speed and a turret disruptor can solo any turret based BS.
People are very inflexible when it comes to dealing with things in eve. There is more to ship and fleet makeup than tank/gank. EW ships are a must in gangs, but then so are fast tacklers.
How about less falcon complaint threads and more how to kill falcon threads.
Rather than saying "even small gangs can be fitted to deal with falcons and blackbirds" give a good example?
Falcons dont fly alone ever of reasons mentioned above, so to deal with falcon u need to get through his gang first. but since falcon can knock off 3-4 members of ur gang it not as easy done as said.
So, are you going to counter the real arguments? Or just ask the same tired old wall butting questions people always ask when they're simpily frustrated and don't have a point?
You're bored of being jammed, so am I. That doesn't automatically mean the culprit is overpowered.
---------------
RIP Crazy Horse |
welsh wizard
0utbreak
KrautbreaK
|
Posted - 2009.02.22 00:55:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Mortuus
Not that I think this thread is necessary (we already know falcons are IMBA) but how is it that you should have to specifically fit to counter a ship by using a Fleet Sniper setup BS with at least 2-3 ECCMs to take care of a single Falcon? Basically, the problem with the Falcon is not its jamming strength, the problem is, that unlike every other form of EW, they can engage from 160+km and be successful.
I think that if Falcons were forced into the 30-60km range most of the problem would be solved.
Similar range to that of the other recons... Ok then, how do you propose we increase its tank? Also what is your proposal for its second role? Or is your post just like all the other knee jerk responses?
I'm not saying your idea isn't viable as a part way compromise but do you honestly think it'd be balanced in its current state with a 60-90km effective range?
Actually forget balance, would it even be fair?
---------------
RIP Crazy Horse |
welsh wizard
0utbreak
KrautbreaK
|
Posted - 2009.02.22 16:06:00 -
[5]
I'm fully aware of whats changed in the last year despite my absence dude. You stick its optimal within the range of the sniper hacs and every BS and its going to become the last choice. It doesn't have a large enough tank or any defence to speak of to enable it to operate at anything less than 160km. Even at that range its two volley fodder for any sniper BS.
If its going to get its range nerfed in a big way then it needs buffing in other areas to make it more worthwhile at short ranges.
---------------
RIP Crazy Horse |
welsh wizard
0utbreak
KrautbreaK
|
Posted - 2009.02.24 23:59:00 -
[6]
Edited by: welsh wizard on 25/02/2009 00:01:42
Originally by: UMEE
Originally by: welsh wizard
Originally by: Allahs Warrior
Edited by: Allahs Warrior on 21/02/2009 20:04:35
Falcon wins whether you fit ECCM or not.
Fleet with a falcon (or 1 falcon advantage): Other side either lost 3-4 ships from fighting capability.
Fleet with a falcon (or 1 falcon advantage)and other side fit ECCM: other side has sacrificed (on average) 1-2 (sometimes 3) slots on every single one of their ships, most likely being the all-important midslots, and now you have a fighting advantage, and you STILL jam some ships.
name any other ship that costs same as a falcon that can do that. Oh wait there isn't, because ECCM modules are absolutely worthless compared to the other things that are fit to counter other EW
Bring your own.
you're a ****ing idiot.
Maybe, but atleast I'm right.
edit: Also, have to agree with the posts about ECCM not being good enough on frigs & cruisers. Could do with buffing in some way to make it more effective to their sensor strength. Bigger bonus on smaller masses or something.
---------------
RIP Crazy Horse |
| |
|