EVE Search - ECM Ships - Looking at better defined roles

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

ECM Ships - Looking at better defined roles

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

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)
Nemtar Nataal Demonic Retribution Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:52:00 - [301] Edited by: Nemtar Nataal on 24/03/2009 23:56:14 Originally by: Ephemeron I read the proposed changes and 1 thing immidiately stands out: it seems like the roles of Falcon and Rook are reversed Rook has better resistences, much better weaponry - it seems like the best choice for short range combat. It should have stronger ECM at small range. Falcon on other hand is less defensible, much weaker weapons, and it's ideal for sneaking about - it is most suitable for operating at long sniper ranges. It should have weaker ECM and long range. Do you see how that makes more sense? You are so right...and you know what the best thing about it is...if CCP does make that change it will mean that ECM ships are pritty much right back where they were 3 years ago :) I still like changing ECM optimal range to ECM fall off. Then for the Rook you give it the 25% bonus to ECM jamming strength and less fall off but a 5% bonus to optimal range but give it less fall of like 5% or 10%. Then "leave" the agility bonus for the falcon as its really usefull for somthing that basically made from tinfoyl...
BoB's Dream	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:53:00 - [302] How many time BS live in fleet battle? How many Scorpion you see in fleet battle(percent from all fleet BS)? Missile BS (Raven/Scorp) is not fleet ship. Scorpion now used only as ECM ship. Long distance jamming is a bonus. After this changes Scorpion: - not tank - not damager - not ECM ship not fish/not meet good job CCP
Abrazzar	Posted - 2009.03.24 23:55:00 - [303] One method to balance ECM would be to change the functionality of it. Switch it from a chance based but binary effect to a always succeeding but relative effect. Connect the seemingly arbitrary sensor strength with a ship stat that has actually an effect outside ECM calculations, like Max Locked Targets. Calculation would then be: Jam Strength / Sensor Strength = Percentage by which Max Locked Targets is reduced Jam strength stats would have to be rebalanced to fit to the new system. This would make ECM more reliable, better to counter by ECCM and better in line with the other ewar modules that have a similar functionality. Oh and just drop the activation amount limit of ECM bursts on the Scorpion to make it more viable. It'd be the poison for every spider tank. -------- Ideas for: Mining
Dr Resheph Amarr YOU ARE NOW READING THIS LOUDLY	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:00:00 - [304] The old deterministic EW system was a lame game of rock paper scissors, but at least it had one thing going for it which the current mechanics dont: EW ships were good for their mid slots as much as their bonuses (which there weren't any, at first). And while this might not be a smart direction to take again given how many ships have a large amount of mid slots.. it warrants considering as a partial solution. My fix for EW goes something like this. ECM Modules - Multispectral and Racial jammers should have the same strength, and approximately the same duration (20 seconds). Multispectral jammers would only break the lock while racial jammers would keep the target actively jammed for 10 out of 20 seconds. One is for causing chaos, the other for tactical suppression. Cap use on multispecs need not be high, because it effectively forces cap bonuses on the smaller ECM ships. Main difference should be range - Multispecs about 50% of Racials ECM Ships - Bonuses to jammed duration time can be included, besides range, cap and strength. A Scorpion's racial jammer for instance, might hold a target jammed for 15 out of the 20 seconds of module duration (10% per level) for a successful jam. To break down their roles: - Kitsune should get bonuses to ECM burst and not standard jammers, which is currently a completely unloved and unused module. Frigs don't have the mid slots, target slots or cap to jam the numerous enemies that could potentially insta-pop them. And they can't be the only ship in a small/fast force to fight at range. The power of this ship then depends entirely on how its flown. No messy target management, but could potentially cause allies trouble too. - Blackbird and Rook should get multispectral bonuses to lower their cycle time and cap use (10% per level) effectively making one Multispec module as effective as two on a Scorp/Kitsune/Falcon. This would allow them to cause chaos more quickly and surgically. But the ships themselves fight at much closer ranges than either Falcon or Scorp. - Scorpion should get the best EW strength bonuses, because its the fattest and priciest target (disregarding recent T2 spike) in fleet warfare. It's also the most likely to need sensor boosters, so it isn't sensible to turn it into a multiple-target juggler. And high strength is more important against larger targets like BS and capitals, which the scorp doesn't have issue with. - Falcon should have range bonuses, since it can lock at twice the range of Scorp by default and much faster - putting less emphasis on sensor boosters. Because it doesn't fight as well as Rook and doesn't have the multispec bonuses, it has no purpose in being at close combat ranges. But with the exception of Scorpion, its jamming strength is still equal. In other words, its the most defensive/survivable EW platform to compensate for what other ships have. I have some more ideas about other forms of EW. Dampeners right now are pretty broken because they rely on stacking multiple modules for any serious effect - and even then there are circumstances in any engagement where lock range and lock speed are completely irrelevant. They should have a defensive effect on the ships using them, like reducing signature radius because of all the spatial distortions being emitted - making them harder to lock and gank by all enemies to some degree, and not just one. Painters are just plain stupid, because there are no equivalent modules which it counters. In my opinion, they need to have some gameplay integrated with the tactical overview or solarsystem map. ie, paint somebody and they become a warpable object to anybody in your gang. Great for fleet maneuvers because it doesn't rely on a frigate getting right up someone's butt (or nearby wrecks/cans/sentries). Tracking Disruptors have the least problems, so I won't go into much detail there. But their current format makes them boring as hell to use.
Bobby Atlas Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:01:00 - [305] The sensor damps are absolutely useless, how about actually focusing on sensor damps for a change. Take stock of the statistical data that CCP retains to generate base lines on the reality of how insignificant sensor damps have become; a marginalized ewar asset where by even the specialized gallente recons make no effective use of the damps. I do support changes in range to ECM ships, especially the recon class caldari ECM boats as there upper limit on range can put them so far out that they are near invincible. We long tolerated over powered Sensor Damps then/now tolerate over powered ECM in the face of gimped Sensor Damps. It is time CCP realize that the Sensor Damps and ECM can serve as counter-balances for each other if you actually looked at them both in the same context at the same time, instead of every year picking only one of them apart , nerfing the other and leaving a perpetual imbalance.
Kalissa Dauntless	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:03:00 - [306] You're going to make the falcon a brawler? You do know it's made of tin foil and falls apart when a small insect passes somewhere close to it? Instead of all this jiggery pokery nonsense which will throw things into the total unknown, why not simply do this: Reduce the ECM strength of the ship, giving targets more of a chance to resist jamming. Bellum's thread on it
Nemtar Nataal Demonic Retribution Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:06:00 - [307] Originally by: Bobby Atlas The sensor damps are absolutely useless, how about actually focusing on sensor damps for a change. Take stock of the statistical data that CCP retains to generate base lines on the reality of how insignificant sensor damps have become; a marginalized ewar asset where by even the specialized gallente recons make no effective use of the damps. I do support changes in range to ECM ships, especially the recon class caldari ECM boats as there upper limit on range can put them so far out that they are near invincible. We long tolerated over powered Sensor Damps then/now tolerate over powered ECM in the face of gimped Sensor Damps. It is time CCP realize that the Sensor Damps and ECM can serve as counter-balances for each other if you actually looked at them both in the same context at the same time, instead of every year picking only one of them apart , nerfing the other and leaving a perpetual imbalance. Here Here...well sayed m8
Valkorsia Caldari Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:06:00 - [308] Originally by: MMak Who is that idiot? Who proposed it?! Close range on falcon without any tank? ****.. This should be quoted several times until CCP understands their own game mechanics.
VaderDSL Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:08:00 - [309] Give the falcon a bit of a tank, but to be hones you'll have to actually think tactically before you uncloak a falcon or two, no longer can you uncloak whenever you want and start jamming, you'll have to be smart about it, as it should be. Rapiers, Arazu's, Pilgrims have all had to learn how to pick targets, when to uncloak and how to survive, the falcon pilots will adapt, there will be tactics. Suck it up and roll with the changes.
Nemtar Nataal Demonic Retribution Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:08:00 - [310] Originally by: Kalissa Dauntless You're going to make the falcon a brawler? You do know it's made of tin foil and falls apart when a small insect passes somewhere close to it? Instead of all this jiggery pokery nonsense which will throw things into the total unknown, why not simply do this: Reduce the ECM strength of the ship, giving targets more of a chance to resist jamming. Bellum's thread on it Cause it will only make ECM viable in small scale engagements as large fleets have massive numbers of ships with way to high sensor strenght.
Fear Not The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:09:00 - [311] Originally by: musgrattio Change ECM optimal to a base of 50km, base falloff of 50km. A Rook with these bonuses would be optimal 20% bonus to ECM strength per level 5% bonus to shield capacity per level 5% bonus to Heavy/Heavy Assault Missile Velocity per level 5% bonus to Heavy/Heavy Assault ROF per level Falcon: 10% bonus to ECM optimal per level 10% bonus to ECM strength per level 96% to 100% Cloak bonus 10% bonus to ECM falloff per level There you go, you have 2 ships that while nerfed, are still very, very useful. +1 This seems a fair compromise.
Tykkis	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:09:00 - [312] I think the problem is that Falcon and Rook have excellent ship bonuses, 3 bonuses focused on single module. Combine this with 7 midslots and you got something to whine about. Consider giving the ships 2 bonuses for ECM(cap use + str or range) and 2 for missile dmg and whatever. reduce 1 midslot maybe and add 2 launcher hardpoints to falcon.
Levaria Gallente Ever Flow Axiom Empire	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:11:00 - [313] The Falcon pilot inside me contained within the cold hard exterior harbering the warm fuzzy ecm loving interior cries out against the nerf (somewhat) BUT. I can understand where many other players and CCP members are coming from. I do agree that I have grown somewhat complacent and enjoyed the fact that I could sit at over 200+km and bbqsauce jam other pilots with little or no risk. Do I like that..Yes...is it fair, depends. I sure as heck didnt like being jammed from that far out, but at least I was prepared most of the time (brough other Falcon's with to counter ECM, had ceptors, ECCM's fitted). For those time's that I was not, I wished that I could cave in the skull of that particular pilot's Falcon. That said. I do think the Falcon needs a rebalance, but if they intend to make it short range it needs BONUSES, the only tank the Falcon has was is it's range. If it is to get up close and into someone's face it needs to be able to SURVIVE, more low slots, launcher and damage bonuses, better resists, speed, etc..... I never thought the day would dawn when I would write a post about Falcon's getting up close and pew pew. But hey this is Eve. Anyhow, CCP I hope you pay attention to the good and the bad in these post's and take it with a grain of salt. I am trusting you with my baby (the falcon) so make her daddy...errr mommy proud. ~Pirates May Cry but Care Bears will die!~
Robsta Craw	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:12:00 - [314] play your own game much? I think not. 1) ECM is primary so flying one as a brawler is pretty funny. range is your only protection. 2) ECM is primary so for a few moments in time the ship is awesome then poof. which is fine as long as you are worth flying. 3) RoF bonus on a Scorpion doesnt make it a brawler it makes it a low DPS worthless primary. missiles have no place in fleet warfare. Id suggest looking harder at ECCM and fixing the other 3 races EWAR rather than breaking the fourth. Reducing strength of ECM by 25% wouldnt break it, killing the range and making it a brawler on the other hand is pretty rediculous. Im sure all of this has been said 50x over so I will stop here.
Tonto Auri Vhero' Multipurpose Corp	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:12:00 - [315] That's why I not fly Caldari. What the point of flying OP race and then - bah - get hit by "nerfbat"? Well over five years of flying IWIN ships - go on screaming, guys, you deserve it! -- Thanks CCP for cu
Flex Carter Caldari Caldari Independant Mining Association	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:13:00 - [316] Wow.... Nice wake-up call Devs. Now go get'em... Oh wait, those are my ships.
Allahs Warrior Gallente I.M.M	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:15:00 - [317] Scorp is fine tbh No need to change the scorp, it can't escape like the falcon, can sit and boost the sniping BS's strength and actually have a role, since it doesn't have much of a tank.
Valkorsia Caldari Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:23:00 - [318] Quote: the only tank the Falcon has was is it's range. Quote: And the counter to that was always using intercepters to chase down Falcons and get them off the field quickly. Quote: If it is to get up close and into someone's face it needs to be able to SURVIVE, more low slots, launcher and damage bonuses, better resists, speed, etc. There is no chance for survival in a Falcon in any kind of small gang engagement if you are in the optimals and scram/disruptor/web range of everything on the field with a pulse of the mwd. You can't jam everything. CCP might as well paint a flashing 'Primary' target on the ship if these changes are implemented. Quote: I never thought the day would dawn when I would write a post about Falcon's getting up close and pew pew. None of us did.
Sugarush KIA Corp KIA Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:24:00 - [319] Horrible ideas. The only reason the falcon survives a fight is because it remains out of range. Even then it still has to be wary of tacklers. If you are going to nerf the optimal range of ECM, you really need to buff the resists of the EWAR ships. Otherwise they are always primary and get nuked the second they try to do their job. Try to use a falcon at 80k and see what happens to it.
Quesa Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:24:00 - [320] I'm okay with the range change. The problem I'm having with bringing Falcons in closer is that the only thing they bring to the table is ECM. They don't bring DPS, they don't have any REAL survivability except for their ability to cloak. You mentioned wanting to change the Falcon into a short range brawler, however the Pilgrim has a good amount of DPS via T2 Med drones and the abusive ability to nuke anyone's cap. Coupled with turret disruption and nearly the lowest sig radius of all Force Recons, makes this an ideal brawler. When you look at the Falcon, all you can imagine is a fragile, stale chip hanging from your ceiling just out of your reach that is only attached by an old piece of masking tape and thin piece of fishing line. When you try to tank up a Falcon, or any Caldari ship for that matter, you increase the sig radius of that ship by many times what you started with, creating not only a ship that will always be primaried, but a ship with the sig radius of a capitol thus easy to nuke very fast. Most of us Caldari Pilots have already come to terms that our ships just aren't PvP friendly and cross-trained, the Falcon was one of those ships that actually made us feel like our racial ships had a place in fleets. Again, I will agree that my ability to jam outside a double sensor boosted Sniper was a bit much and what you are suggesting is interesting, however you aren't giving the Falcon the necessary survivability tools to become a brawler such as the Pilgrim. To comment on the other Force Recons. The ridiculous lack of EWAR strength of the other recons forces them to not fit for their primary EWAR abilities, such as Damps and Target Painters. When an Arazu equips for EWAR + Tackle ganking ratters, you fit 3 Damps and a couple disruptors. You have to use all 3 damps on a BS and pray to God they don't have a sensor booster to counter them. I applaud your thinking in trying to bring Caldari ECM more in line with other ECM but you have a long way to go before you'll get any positive feedback from Falcon/Rook pilots about changes. Don't listen to the Falcon winers either, they are not interested in balance in the slightest only the vindication that their incessant whining will yield a more favorable engagement.
SniperWo1f Omega Enterprises Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:26:00 - [321] so wait the falcon with it's 1900 shield is going to be right in the thick of it with no resistance tank bonuses and all it's mids filled with ecm . oh yeah good thinking . rook long at 100k umm yeah lets put paper with the range of almost everybody in a bs or sniper hac yeah thats a recipe for disaster . scorp a is now ghetto raven . thats amazing . all these ecms ships are supposed to be tanking with their mids now right ... what about the ecm mods ..oh wait they can mix i mean and invuln yeah that'll save you or wait how about we just change caldari to armor tankers and just delete all shield mods . yay ccp way to stick it to the falcon ! those ships were so annoying i almost had to use tactics thanks ccp ! "In Rust We Trust"
Valkorsia Caldari Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:29:00 - [322] Edited by: Valkorsia on 25/03/2009 00:29:57 Originally by: SniperWo1f so wait the falcon with it's 1900 shield is going to be right in the thick of it with no resistance tank bonuses and all it's mids filled with ecm . oh yeah good thinking . rook long at 100k umm yeah lets put paper with the range of almost everybody in a bs or sniper hac yeah thats a recipe for disaster . scorp a is now ghetto raven . thats amazing . all these ecms ships are supposed to be tanking with their mids now right ... what about the ecm mods ..oh wait they can mix i mean and invuln yeah that'll save you or wait how about we just change caldari to armor tankers and just delete all shield mods . yay ccp way to stick it to the falcon ! those ships were so annoying i almost had to use tactics thanks ccp ! Best, most accurate post in this whole thread.
Cutie Chaser Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:30:00 - [323] Could we get an extra 1-2 launcher slots on the scorpion? Then there might be a chance at being a short-range brawler. *** Thats a Templar, the amarr fighter. Its a combat drone used by carriers.
Cletus Graeme Caldari Duty.	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:33:00 - [324] Edited by: Cletus Graeme on 25/03/2009 00:34:15 Originally by: CCP Chronotis ECM Range This is a great idea as long as it is applied correctly to right the ships. Please also don't forget that ECM ships currently have minimal tank and dps so if you nerf their ECM ability then you must boost something else to balance this. If ECM is overpowered and needs nerfing a little that's fine but don't make ECM ships useless to fly when you do that. Originally by: CCP Chronotis Signal Distortion Amplifiers Another great idea. These mods were originally added to prevent NON ECM ships from being able to jam effectively unless they sacrficed low slots to fit them. It was felt that ECM ships could afford to use the low slots to do this. As a result they are only used by ECM ships but take up slots that could be usefully used for something else E.g. tank, damage, mobility, eccm (via backup arrays), scan res (via sensor amps) etc etc Completely removing these mods and moving the bonuses they provided into the ECM ship bonuses will keep these ships effective while still preventing ECM from being useful on other ships (as orignially intended) and als free up lowslots for use. Originally by: CCP Chronotis Ship Changes Modifying the ships so that they provide diversifed roles is a superb idea. Starting with long vs short range ECM is a good initial approach but don't forget to compare each ship individually with the others. There should be something unique that each ship offers, different from the others, that makes it worth flying. IMO, this should be true for ALL ships in EvE. E.g one might excel at jam strength, another at range, another at number of jammers (i.e more midslots) etc Obviously, there's a limit on how varied ECM can be between ships so other ship attributes can also enter the balancing equation (damage/tank/mobility etc) Originally by: CCP Chronotis Falcon & Rook Personally, I think you have these ship changes the wrong way around. Falcons have minimal dps/tank and rely on their cloak to survive so making them into close range ships seems silly. You can't directly compare the Falcon with the Pilgrim because unlike the Falcon, the Pilgrim has offensive capability (via nos/neuts and drones) which makes it worthwhile getting close to a target. To make them comparable you'd have to also give the Falcon some offensive capability which would probably make it overpowered. It would make more sense to allow the Falcon to maintain range as it's tank but give the Rook some bonuses that would allow it to engage at close range without instapopping. The fact that missiles take time to reach their target and are better of used at close range is another reason to support making the Rook the close range ECM ship. Until now, it's kinetic missile bonus has only been useful in a defensive role as it can jam well outside it's own missile range. Originally by: CCP Chronotis The Scorpion I like the suggested changes as they bring the Scorp closer to the Raven as a close range missile boat and we all know (see above) that long range missiles suck in PvP. TBH, any changes to this ship are worth considering as it is very seldom used anymore which is sad.
Mei Han Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:34:00 - [325] Edited by: Mei Han on 25/03/2009 00:36:56 Arazu pilots such as myself are forced to play in a 60Km radius while at the same time sacrifice valuable midslots in order to fit some LSEs for survival. And after all that the best effect of the Arazu ship since Damps are ** is to hold 3 or 4 targets unable to warp, but able to distance themselves from us or kill us*. So am very sorry but i laugh at kids that lost their "easymode" toy in their game. Even though i never whined for Falcons, I was always read an answer to the falcon whiners. "Fit an ECCM!" Now i can gradly say back at them "Fit some tank and get used to die like the rest Recons! If every Ewar was as "balanced" as ECMs in Falcons are... we would make a post in CAOD every time we managed to lock something.*
SheriffFruitfly Caldari	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:35:00 - [326] Amazing how the whiners win everytime. Just ban Caldari, and be done with it, ccp. __________________________________________________________
Verone Gallente Veto Corp	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:36:00 - [327] I like where you're heading with this, but there's a fundamental difference in the way a Pilgrim and a Falcon work that means simply swapping the Falcon's role bonuses makes it useless rather than making it a Caldari version of Pilgrim. The entire slot layout of the Falcon, Scorp and Rook would need to be radically re-designed to ensure it worked properly at close ranges. \o/ EON FICTION WRITER OF THE YEAR! \o/ >>> THE LIFE OF AN OUTLAW <<<
SusanXP	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:42:00 - [328] lol way to go CCP. For Caldari we had: Missile Nerf ECM Nerf Missile Nerf #2 ECM Nerf #2 Sweet. Haven't seen any other race nerfed that hard. Caldari ships were never the solo-pvp boats ok, but takin away the fleet capable ships as well renders Caldari quite useless. Good job indeed! Instead of nerfing just every thing to useless either leave it like it was and peeps will find a solution (yes i liked dual-MWD and 10 drones and instapoppin frigs with torps :P ) or just nerf all things that arise as useable till all things suck and noone wants to play anymore. Way to go!
Haakelen Gallente Angels. Acid.	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:45:00 - [329] Sometimes it seems like you're actually, seriously trying to kill your game, CCP. This idea is of the same quality as your carrier ideas, and QR. Which is to say, it's **. But hey, this adds to the list of T2 ships that are **ing worthless. Now you can just nerf logistics, inties, and hictors, and nobody will ever fly a T2 ship again. Except for your precious legion of drooling mongoloid L4 mission farming WoW converts.
Vaustrien Caldari The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple	Posted - 2009.03.25 00:46:00 - [330] I got Recon V and flew Rapiers and Falcons. You nerfed webs at the end of 2008. Now you are planning to nerf ECM. Insert generic whine here. Then again, I guess every other Recon has lost its use these days, eventually every T2 ship is going to be so horrible that everybody just flies T1 - slightly worse than T2 but a fraction of the cost.

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

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.

ECM Range

Signal Distortion Amplifiers

Ship Changes

Falcon & Rook

The Scorpion