EVE Search - ECM Ships - Looking at better defined roles

Check My IP Information

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)
Andrea Griffin	Posted - 2009.03.25 14:40:00 - [571] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Please provide constructive feedback on the ideas and changes. These changes are not yet on sisi and we will announce when they are. As always, everything is subject to change! I think this is perfectly fine, and it bring ECM more in line with what we already have with turrets: Close range, high damage guns, and long range, lower damage guns. Seems perfectly reasonable to me. Myself, I'm very interested in the close range, higher strength ships (I hope the Griffin is one of them). Variety is good. Too bad about the Falcon Whine on the forums though. Now it is "Falcons are too powerful!" Next it will be "OMG, Falcons are useless!"
Jallem Sims Minmatar Quantum Industries	Posted - 2009.03.25 14:49:00 - [572] falcons are paper thin.... have you flown the rapier recently? i am sorry you guys that are so upset feel that your safety ship is no longer an easy ride.... you will have to fly it now, put a tank on it, use some of those slots for a tank rather than all out ewar. in my rapier i have to fit 2 LSE's and have shield rigs too... and i not even going to mention the cap! and i have to be within 40k to use my ewar bonus.... and i still melt! each force recon pilot feels the same pain too :-/ but we understand the gains and bonus we have on the fleet by being there. //i also fly a falcon, but i know they are overpowered, thats why i trained up for one// to the snipers will hit me everytime now... how big is your sig? in the crusier class ship? try learning the art of transversal... oh, you mean you have to actually fly your ship? please... give a better solution rather than 'you ruined our lives'... otherwise you will find it gets nerfed a lot harder because YOU couldn't think of a more reasoned way.
Muad' Dib Gallente Beyond Divinity Inc	Posted - 2009.03.25 14:54:00 - [573] Edited by: Muad'' Dib on 25/03/2009 14:56:48 So i missclicked on CCP's Chronotis' profile and i found this. To quote from his bio : Originally by: CCP Chronotis Long term eve player who was persuaded by the Jovians to join their organization and was teleported to Polaris a long time ago. Has since that time focused on the science and industry aspect of Eve Online. They sure picked the right fella for pvp changes, haven't they ? --- I smack just for myself. * Your signature file is to large. Please note: we do not allow signature files larger than 24000 bytes - Fallout
Mendolus Aurelius Federation Apotheosis of Virtue	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:01:00 - [574] Originally by: Jallem Sims falcons are paper thin.... have you flown the rapier recently? i am sorry you guys that are so upset feel that your safety ship is no longer an easy ride.... you will have to fly it now, put a tank on it, use some of those slots for a tank rather than all out ewar. in my rapier i have to fit 2 LSE's and have shield rigs too... and i not even going to mention the cap! and i have to be within 40k to use my ewar bonus.... and i still melt! each force recon pilot feels the same pain too :-/ but we understand the gains and bonus we have on the fleet by being there. //i also fly a falcon, but i know they are overpowered, thats why i trained up for one// to the snipers will hit me everytime now... how big is your sig? in the crusier class ship? try learning the art of transversal... oh, you mean you have to actually fly your ship? please... give a better solution rather than 'you ruined our lives'... otherwise you will find it gets nerfed a lot harder because YOU couldn't think of a more reasoned way. Yes, because Falcon has so many mids it can fit ECM, MWD, LSE, and Sensor Boost and somehow many to be useful. Seriously, I put a MWD on my Falcon, and suddenly I am using 80% of my cap just to warp from point A to B (and yes I have the related skills at IVs and Vs). And the MWD itself is a joke, I can run it for... 20 seconds while my other mods are active? IMO the biggest problem is that the Falcon can hit too many targets, whereas the other recons are limited to single or double targets. Falcon can lock down a small gang by itself. Switch optimal and falloff and reduce jamming strength by only a small margin so it's better than Blackbird, worse than Rook, which necessitates stacking the ECM to jam up one or two targets down at most. Or alternatively, consider making ECM subject to signature radius penalties and change nothing else. If a Rokh can hit me at +150km, I should be able to jam him at +150km IF AND ONLY IF I am in the ship supposedly designed to counter snipers. Meaning, that BS with a large sig, is easier for me to jam up. {...and they will respect a line drawn in the sand more than forgiveness}
Inspirer	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:05:00 - [575] Can drones be really usefull when you (dev team) see rook as a long range ecm boat? Maybe drones will be more usefull on close range ships? Falcon with its shield capacity, no guns and 3 low slots won't be able to tank anything. So in my opinion falcon should stay long range boat with lower ECM strength and without guns. As for rook. It can be middle or even close range ECM boat with some damage and nice ECM strength.
UmaThurman	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:14:00 - [576] Any ECm jammer ship is primary target. Do you really think it is good idea to place ECM ship in the middle of battle? You want to add 5% of ROF for Scorpion, it is really "great" help for role of this ship. The changes what you plan just destroy original roles.
Zenuo Nexus	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:15:00 - [577] Nice one.. I'm really looking forward to do 30dps in my Falcon on my opponent in close range combat not bothering this ship could not even tank a few drones for a minute. And not mentioning a Falcon is primary in every fleetfight i've been. Oh, and theres still the Rook. Woohh.. dangerous. Fittet with 5 worthless launchers in distance combat. But who cares if u could now let some drones surround you while attacking from 150km distance. Hell, that are changes Caldari pilots always waited for. Seeing a few million sp flushing down the drain just because some other players are not able to fit countermeasures against ecm. Sorry for the sarcasm, but these changes cant be taken seriously. PS: to all Pilgrim and other pilots, you dont have to fit racial types of modules let your ship become a bit effective.
Rordan D'Kherr	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:16:00 - [578] RR Scorp gangs! \o/
sih noh	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:17:00 - [579] a pilgrim cant td that 200k sniper so that it cant hit him, an arazu wont damp at that range. webbing/painting it sure as hell isnt going to help. why should your race be the only one able to disable that ship at that range? and why should said ship also be the only effective counter to itself, thats rediculous. as for the tank suck it up and fit 2 LSE like the rest of the recons have to for buffer. and then disable less ships at a time, like the other recons too. oh no some balance might be on the horizon what ever will we do.
6Bagheera9 Slacker Industries The Boat Violencing Initiative	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:19:00 - [580] The proposed changes to the Scorpion don't make a lot of sense to me. It is not considered to be overpowered and the removable of its optimal range bonus would negate its role in 150km fleet engagements, denigrating them into simple slug fests. The proposed roles for the Falcon and Rook seem very confused. It would make more sense for the Rook to have less ECM optimal and more jamming strength, encouraging it to fight at the same ranges that it could use its heavy missiles. The Falcon is more naturally configured to be an ECM sniper because of its cloak and its lack of hi-slots(insufficient potential dps, even with a new bonus, for it to risk getting close.) Let it keep its optimal range bonus (perhaps nerfed, but still present), but at the cost of its jamming potential. This would also be inline with how short ranged weapons do more dps than longer range ones. Please don't try to rewrite the entire game to fix this one issue. While the Speed nerf was on the whole good, it did make faction low-slot speed modules useless and snake implants nearly so (compared to the other pirate implants).

Shoukei Caldari Boobs Ahoy	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:21:00 - [581] Great work guys. Could you look into ECCM as well? As it stands now, even with 3 ECCM fitted, falcon can still keep you jammed all too well.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar M. Corp	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:25:00 - [582] Originally by: 6Bagheera9 The proposed changes to the Scorpion don't make a lot of sense to me. It is not considered to be overpowered and the removable of its optimal range bonus would negate its role in 150km fleet engagements, denigrating them into simple slug fests. The proposed roles for the Falcon and Rook seem very confused. It would make more sense for the Rook to have less ECM optimal and more jamming strength, encouraging it to fight at the same ranges that it could use its heavy missiles. The Falcon is more naturally configured to be an ECM sniper because of its cloak and its lack of hi-slots(insufficient potential dps, even with a new bonus, for it to risk getting close.) Let it keep its optimal range bonus (perhaps nerfed, but still present), but at the cost of its jamming potential. This would also be inline with how short ranged weapons do more dps than longer range ones. Please don't try to rewrite the entire game to fix this one issue. While the Speed nerf was on the whole good, it did make faction low-slot speed modules useless and snake implants nearly so (compared to the other pirate implants). Have to agree on that. But since falcon can cloak and combined with range it would NEED to be quite weaker than the rook on jamming str. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Zenuo Nexus	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:27:00 - [583] Originally by: Shoukei Great work guys. Could you look into ECCM as well? As it stands now, even with 3 ECCM fitted, falcon can still keep you jammed all too well. Well.. with luck a Falcon can jam if he throws all modules on you but he's never able to do the dmg to bring you down
Melina Quaid	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:32:00 - [584] Edited by: Melina Quaid on 25/03/2009 15:36:13 Edited by: Melina Quaid on 25/03/2009 15:32:29 I wouldn't mind getting a slight ECM strengh boost and have the range reduced as it gets closer to the way I'll probably fly it. I thought about a THEORICAL setup which I think would work pretty nicely to probe n' nail mission-***s : Quote:** [Falcon, New Setup 1] Damage Control II Power Diagnostic System II Power Diagnostic System II ECM - Spatial Destabilizer II ECM - Phase Inverter II ECM - Ion Field Projector II ECM - White Noise Generator II Caldari Navy Invulnerability Field Domination Warp Disruptor Gistii B-Type Small Shield Booster Covert Ops Cloaking Device II Recon Probe Launcher I, Spook Scanner Probe I Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket Particle Dispersion Augmentor I Particle Dispersion Augmentor I Just don't look at EFT's Recon Probe Launcher nor the Spook probe as they got changed in AP and I don't have the tiniest clue about what they got changed to. + 118 Defence efficiency, allowing you to tank drone fire while your rockets melt them down. + SDA's get changed, but I assume not the rigs, so go for the rigs and swap SDA's for PDU's to enhance your tank, cap, and even make this setup cap stable. + Domi Disruptor allows you to get a point on your target while staying out of range of Heavy Neuts and staying well into ECM optimal range. - The only flaw I can see in this, should I repeat, THEORICAL setup, would be the lack of a speed mod to dictate the tight range between 25-29km. That said, I wouldn't say no to either a slight base resistances increase, or a slight base HP boost.
Lijhal FrEE d00M Fighters	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:34:00 - [585] Originally by: Mendolus Yes, because Falcon has so many mids it can fit ECM, MWD, LSE, and Sensor Boost and somehow many to be useful. You forgot Falcons need to fit 4 racial jammers while other recons only fit 2 at least ... 3 slots left for mwd, invu, lse (wohooo, bc signature size), web, disrupter, whatever ... wow
UmaThurman	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:34:00 - [586] It is really not good idea to move jammers into middle of the batlle. Any jammer is primarry target. If you move them into optimal range of any weapon, they are dead ships very quickly. They cannot tank any DMG as they use in the tank slots jammers... If you cut optimal range like your plans for Scorpion, players get new gift from you, new useless ships.
Scarlet Pimpernel Clan Eshin	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:34:00 - [587] Originally by: Shoukei Great work guys. Could you look into ECCM as well? As it stands now, even with 3 ECCM fitted, falcon can still keep you jammed all too well. What you didn't see was that he probably had to use all his jammers to do it
Shoukei Caldari Boobs Ahoy	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:36:00 - [588] Originally by: Zenuo Nexus Well.. with luck a Falcon can jam if he throws all modules on you but he's never able to do the dmg to bring you down Point i tried to make is, if you sacrifice all your mid slots, making your ship more or less completely useless, at least you should know that you wont be almost perma jammed by just one falcon.
mPistoleroZ	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:38:00 - [589] great work guys... plz remove ALL e/w next time cuz at present only eccm works (lol dampeners, lol nos) imagine the falcon in fleet.. it wont even load grid... close range = many can hit it instead of boosting a little other e/w you want to remove this from pvp more and more! so yes, the bigger the better! ps. pls nerf the already nerfed Scorpion
Shoukei Caldari Boobs Ahoy	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:39:00 - [590] Originally by: Scarlet Pimpernel What you didn't see was that he probably had to use all his jammers to do it What other ship completely invalidates any other ship, no matter what the fittings? All have their uses and counters, with any other recon there's something a smart person can do. With falcon, even fitting modules that are supposed to counter it, don't actually counter it. Falcon can also easily fit a monster armor tank. 1600mm plate plus 2 EANS.

Pallidum Treponema Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:40:00 - [591] As a skilled falcon pilot with zero losses, I can agree that the falcon is an overpowered ship. It should be noted though that a falcon is NOT a solo-pwn-machine. The Falcon is a support ship that relies on its fleet mates in order to get the job done. What I think needs to be done is some careful tweaking rather than a complete overhaul of ECM. I'll address a few points in my post. 220km+ optimal range. This is the primary reason for why falcons are overpowered at the moment. Most sniping battleships are optimized for 150-180km ranges, with locking ranges of around 200km. This puts the falcon outside of locking range for most BS, not to mention the range of the guns. This can be countered by having sniping BS that are set up to hit falcons even at that range. Rokhs and Apocs in particular can reach and kill and/or drive off hostile falcons. Eagles can also perform this role. Smaller support ships can also be used successfully to drive off and/or tackle hostile falcons. Tweak: The optimal range can be tweaked. The Falcon could be brought down to standard sniping ranges. Around 150-180km would ensure that the falcon is within range of a hostile sniping BS fleet. Additionally, as has been mentioned, the falcon and other long range ECM ships could be tweaked so that they'll have to choose between going close range or fighting in their falloffs. Force Multiplier. Currently, the Falcon can be a significant force multiplier. A force with a large percentage of falcons can ensure that a hostile fleet has their firepower significantly reduced as well as having their targetting coordination disrupted. This is not necessarily a bad thing. In fact, this game could use some MORE force multipliers, otherwise it'll degenerate even more into a game of who can bring the most battleships. If other Ewar ships could be used in this way, there would be more variety on the battlefield, and more importance would be put on having a good support fleet to counter the ewar - this would also open up more roles for new players other than being just tacklers. Tweak: Enable other recons to perform a force multiplier role as well. EW on the other recons could use a boost. Minmatar recons got a huge nerf with the web changes. Allow them a web strength bonus to make them more useful, as well as giving them a range bonus to target painters, for instance. Similarily, giving Amarr recons a bonus to tracking disruptor range would allow them to perform this role in fleets. Falcons vs Rooks. It's obvious to anyone that the Rook is the close range brawler of the two. Even if the slot layouts weren't obvious (the rook has far more highslots), the name of the roles should be a huge hint. The COMBAT recon is the one that's supposed to be, you know, fighting, whereas the FORCE recon is the one that's supposed to be sneaky sneak. That much said, it's obvious that the rook is far underpowered right now. There is almost no reason for anyone to bring a rook over a falcon, other than the little bit of extra DPS. Tweak: Make the Rook a better option for close range fighting. Reduce the Falcon's strength slightly, and give the Rokh slightly more strength for a huge reduction in optimal range. Oh, and give it a resists bonus instead of damage. That'd make even me fly one. ;) Scorpions. Don't for the love of God nerf Scorps! It is currently the only EW battleship with the ability to work in a sniping fleet. I'd much rather see the other tier 1 battleships given an EW role as well, which would allow them to work in the force multiplier role as well. Another option would be to introduce a new group of tier 1 EW battleships, of which the scorp could be the lead ship, with a new battleship taking the Scorp's place. Yes, Falcons are overpowered, but the answer is to TWEAK them, not to change the entire concept.
Taedrin Gallente Golden Mechanization Protectorate	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:43:00 - [592] The main issue with falcons and rooks, as far as I can see, is that they are the only ship in all of EVE to receive THREE bonuses to the same thing. All other recons only get one or two bonuses to individual ewar systems. Rapier: damage bonus target painter bonus web range bonus cloak bonus Huginn: damage bonus target painter bonus web range bonus damage bonus Arazu: Damage bonus remote sensor damp bonus Warp scram range bonus cloak bonus Lachesis: Damage bonus remote sensor damp bonus warp scram range bonus damage bonus Pilgrim: Tracking disrupter bonus drone damage bonus NOS/Neut strength bonus Cloaking bonus Curse: tracking disrupter bonus drone damage bonus NOS/Neut strength bonus NOS/Neut range bonus Falcon: ECM cap use bonus ECM range bonus ECM strength bonus cloak bonus Rook: ECM cap use bonus ECM range bonus ECM strength bonus damage bonus ----- See anything wrong here? The issue is that all other recons have to split their bonuses between two ewar systems. Caldari are able to focus 3 of their bonuses on ECM. The end result is that these ships are able to focus on ECM so much that they become overpowered in this regard. I would suggest that you take away one of the ECM bonuses, and replace it with a damage bonus or something. If they lose the cap bonus, then they have their overpowered ECM, but can't use it indefinitely. If they lose the strength bonus, they have long range ECM, but it's not overpowered. If they lose their range bonus, then they have overpowered ECM, but have to risk their ship by getting close(r) to the fight.
Raketefrau Caldari Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:45:00 - [593] Edited by: Raketefrau on 25/03/2009 15:46:26 While you're balancing these ships (which I find highly unnecessary to begin with), PLEASE give the Rook back its highslot. I still don't understand the reasoning for that at all. It was like, "What's not broken? Oh, let's **** with it." Making the Falcon a close-in ship would require serious adjustments to its DPS, which is currently 0. The rook is a far better candidate for this, if it's your plan. Why would you make the rook, which actually has some offense, the long range ship, while making the falcon, which can't hurt a frig, a short-range ship?
Raquel Trotter Trotters Independent Trading	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:48:00 - [594] Edited by: Raquel Trotter on 25/03/2009 15:51:22 Originally by: Serret Nevets I don't even fly a falcon, and here's a decent fit for this change: [Falcon, change?] Damage Control II Ballistic Control System II Power Diagnostic System II Large Shield Extender II Large Shield Extender II ECM - Spatial Destabilizer II ECM - Phase Inverter II ECM - Ion Field Projector II ECM - White Noise Generator II Y-T8 Overcharged Hydrocarbon I Microwarpdrive Covert Ops Cloaking Device II Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Torrent Assault Missile Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Torrent Assault Missile 200mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I THIS! Funny how this fit looks just like the standard fit for every other races covert-recon.... All these whines and the falcon will still be more powerful than a rapier / arazu / pilgrim The range needs nerfing more, and give us ECCM rigs and hardwires please.
Monticore D'Muertos Caldari Dirty Deeds Corp. Axiom Empire	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:51:00 - [595] Edited by: Monticore D''Muertos on 25/03/2009 15:55:00 just delete the rook and falcon from game and give us something else. or give more ecm burst bonus and let it not jam friendlies 4x extender 3x ecm burts warp in at 0
PirateGorex Amarr Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:52:00 - [596] Those of you advocating the death of 7 Caldari ECM ships and cheering these game-changing 'improvements', just remember, Amarr nerfs are next
Devron Nexus	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:54:00 - [597] Originally by: Pallidum Treponema As a skilled falcon pilot with zero losses, I can agree that the falcon is an overpowered ship. It should be noted though that a falcon is NOT a solo-pwn-machine. The Falcon is a support ship that relies on its fleet mates in order to get the job done. What I think needs to be done is some careful tweaking rather than a complete overhaul of ECM. etc... This are some suggestions making sense. Agree with that.
Pallidum Treponema Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:57:00 - [598] Adding another thought. Signal Distortion Amplifiers Falcon pilots currently use at least two and optionally three of these in their three low slots. I myself has always used three and never lost a single falcon. However, by reducing the optimal range of the falcons to 150-180km you instantly bring them into range of an entire hostile sniping fleet. This ensures that the falcon WILL take more hits from hostile snipers, which in turn requires a falcon pilot to use more slots for tanking. A falcon pilot could still use three SDAs for instance, but would instead drop two jammers for LSE IIs. This reduces the effectiveness of the falcon, as its jamming strength is automatically reduced. It also increases their mortality rate, as they will now have to fight within the range of their targets. The low slots could also be used for tanking, allowing the falcon to engage more targets, but at a weaker jamming strength against each individual target. This opens up for more options for the falcon pilots rather than the cookie cutter setups we have today. By tweaking the optimal range of the falcon, you could still allow the falcon to operate in the "untouchable" 200-220km bracket, but they would then need to fight in their falloff ranges, which makes them less powerful in a battle. This is a very simple TWEAK that doesn't require the ship to be completely nerfed/overhauled. It also instantly makes the scorpion a more viable ship as it has more survivability than a falcon, and would now have more range (unless that one is range nerfed as well). The Rook still needs a boost, but that's another matter. Once again, my point here is that a simple tweak of reducing the range of the falcon to the 150-180km bracket instantly transforms an overpowered ship to one that is still powerful but far easier to kill, or to counter. It also boosts the scorpion as its usefulness goes up as the falcon becomes less overpowered.

CCP Chronotis	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:58:00 - [599] Thanks for the constructive feedback so far! In the first pass on sisi, we will look at the falcon and rook with their suggested roles switched as many of you suggested so the rook will be the "brawler" (short range ECM strength bonii) and falcon will be the weaker but longer range "sniper" varient. The skill bonuses and other changes to the caldari recons will then look like this: Rook: Caldari Cruiser Skill Bonus: 5% Bonus to Light & Heavy Missile Velocity per level 10% reduction in ECM Target Jammer capacitor use per Level Recon Ships Skill Bonus: 25% bonus to ECM Target Jammer strength per level 5% bonus to heavy and light missile kinetic damage per level Attribute Changes: +25m3 drone bay +25mbit drone bandwidth Falcon: Caldari Cruiser Skill Bonus: 20% Bonus to ECM Target Jammer Optimal Range per level 5% Bonus to Medium Hybrid Optimal Range per level Recon Ships Skill Bonus: 20% bonus to ECM Target Jammer strength per level -96% to -100% reduction in Cloaking Device CPU use per level Attribute Changes: +1 turret hardpoint / -1 launcher hardpoint Scorpion The scorpion remains unchanged from the original suggestion for now. Whilst this change would make them less usual at long range jamming, they can still jam out to ~140km using their falloff (setup for ECM range) so whilst their role in the long range scenario is reduced, their new short range scenario is much better. The Widow Forgot to mention it would be getting an increase in ECM strength bonus same as the scorpion. Will make a seperate post on black ops themselves. I will update the original post with these changes in a minute. There is no ETA on when these changes will be on sisi for testing as we are currently testing for Apocrypha 1.02. Some time after that is deployed to TQ, then we will move sisi to a version where you can start to playtest these changes and we will continue to monitor feedback and make more tweaks as needed.

Vina Caldari Destructive Influence Band of Brothers Reloaded	Posted - 2009.03.25 15:59:00 - [600] Alright, as probably the most senior ECM user still playing this game, this is what should be done: First, ECM base strengths need to be changed so that with lvl 5 ship skills the ECM effectivness with ship bonus is slightly more than a same ship class amount. so IE; griffin with caldari frigate lvl 5 (75% bonus to ecm strength + 25% from sig disp) should yield an ECM strength of 10. that keeps ECM low base strength. (base ecm strength should be 4.5 on t2) Griffin: 10% ecm cap usage 15% ecm effectiveness Kitsune: 10% ecm cap usage 15% ecm effectiveness 5% missile rof 5% missile velocity Rook: 5% missile rof 5% missile velocity 30% ecm jammer strength 5% shield HP Falcon: 25% ecm effectiveness 10% ecm optimal range 10% hybrid optimal covert cloak bonus Blackbird: 10% ecm optimal 25% ecm effectiveness Scorp: 50% effectiveness bonus 20% optimal range (this will make it the only ECM ship viable in a fleet fight... as it should be) Widow: 50% ecm effectiveness so with a base ECM strength of 4.5 we have: Griffin/kitsune: 9.84 on racial Blackbird/falcon: 12.6 rook: 14 Scorp/Widow: 19.68 This more closely matches sensor strengths of the ships these ships are matched with. it also matches the rook up with the widow in being kick-your-ass at close range ships (which should be reserved for t2 ships only, no t1 ecm brawlers.. lol what a stupid idea.) As people ahve said before, the whole problem with ECM is the range/effectiveness is not balanced on a SHIP CLASS basis. that's waht needs to be fixed. Battleships should be the best, not falcon. -----------------------------------



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.