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) |
Vadinho
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:51:00 -
[61]
Edited by: Vadinho on 24/03/2009 18:51:20 Cool just destroy the entire purpose behind the Scorpion, that's alright
Can you find a way to remove the Rokh's optimal bonus and give it a drone bonus, I don't think the Caldari are useless enough in fleets yet
|
ctttttttt
Caldari THE FINAL STAND
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:52:00 -
[62]
Im really excited to see how this turns out. A corp mate of mine had what i think is a absolutly great idea for fixing ecm. It might be a little hard to explain in words though but i will do my best. Basically a falcon can jam you just like he can now. BUT ANYONE who has "agressed" you with a hostile action, be it shooting or putting a point/web on you will be UNJAMED to that specific person. Its hard to explain so i will do my best to diagram it.
2 gangs consiting of
ship1, ship2, falcon1
second gang
ship3, ship4
1 and 2 start shooting at 3. 1 applys point/web to 3 - 2 applys point/web to 4. Falcon decloaks and james Both 3-4.
Ship4 is not being point/web or shot at by ship1. So ship4 is jammed to ship1
But both 1 and 2 are shooting 3 making 1 and 2 UNJAMED to ship 3. ship 2 has point/web on 4 - ship 3-4 must switch their target to ship 2 as ship 2 has hostile actions to both ships making him "UNJAMED" to both ship 3-4
The concept is REALLY hard to understand but i think this will eliminate the "abuse" of falcons in small gang warfare. In large gang format they will still be usefull as people will still be getting jammed and might only be able to shoot 1-2 persons.
Hope somone out there might understand what im getting at and could better explain what im trying to get across....
But at the end of the day whatever happens SOMETHING needs to be done about ecm!
|
Yunaka Vicc
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:52:00 -
[63]
Will Centurion set be changed to affect falloff?
|
Fahtim Meidires
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:52:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Tamyris
Quote: The Scorpion
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.
Summary Scorpion Changes
- removed the ECM optimal range bonus - increased the ECM strength bonus to 20% per level - added a 5% RoF bonus to cruise & siege missile launchers per level.
What? How does adding a RoF bonus to a Caldari ship that armor-buffer-tanks and has 4 spots for launchers help make it a close-range brawler? Would you mind explaining some of the reasoning behind this?
Here's what those bonuses will do to the scorpion: - removing optimal bonus: The average scorpion pilot will need to get in closer, exposing him to more danger. - increasing ECM strength: The average pilot will get off a few more jams per battle (5% more per level of Caldari BS to be exact) - 5% RoF: nothing. When is the last time you saw the scorpions as a reliable source of DPS? You bring them in the jam anything and everything that's red, not to kill it. Yes, sure, there are 4 missile launcher slots, but they won't hit anything past 100km while the scorp sits (ideally) at 200+.
As it stands, a few scorpions 200-220km off aren't really an issue - have a few dictors/covops/etc get a warp-in and send some support that way, problem solved. The main defensive layer for the Scorpion is the distance it has between itself and any enemies on grid. By removing that and not adding any other sort of defensive layer, you are essentially making a paper-thin BS that relies on chance (jams) to survive.
I never liked the idea of scorpions in fleet work. If you can fly a battleship, bring a sniping platform. Electronic warfare should be conducted at ranges shorter than large sniping ranges, that way they have to deal with anti-support. Falcons and scorps sitting way behind the lines is broken when there is no other equivalent ewar from any other race.
|
Barrey
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:53:00 -
[65]
Edited by: Barrey on 24/03/2009 18:56:23 EvE excels at strategic preparation. Fleets are much more effective if they have balanced capabilities. Removing support roles because they are effective force multipliers essentially forces everyone down the DPS path. As to the specific bonuses: A scorpion in a support role should have optimals to match other battleship's engagement ranges. Making it shorter range than fleet snipers would mean it would never get used.
And a falcon has no tank. It can't armor tank, it uses its mid-slots for its weapons so it can't speed or shield tank. So the only way for a falcon to survive is for the pilot to dictate the engagement's range and terms.
Rather than heavy-handedly nerfing ECM ships across the board, I have three alternative solutions. One problem is that a single skilled falcon can lock down many cruiser-sized ships or 1-2 battleships due to the way ECCM strengths are balanced. I would propose either:
1) Reblance sensor strengthes so that there isn't such a gap between battlehips and cruiser-sized ships and leave the ECM ships as they currently are. On simple way to do this would be to simply add in targetting resolution into the ECM formula. This would essentially give cruisers and frigates a stronger sensor strength, and it would allow people to have anti-ECM capabilities without giving up module slots.
or
2) Divide ECM into long-range/low strength and short-range/high strength categories, through either scripts or separate mods. This would force ECM ships to make the same range/effectiveness trade-off that DPS ships must make.
or
3) Divide ECM mods into cruiser-sized and battleship mods. Much like you can't use heavy turrets to shoot frigates, maybe you shouldn't be able to use the same ECM mods on both an interceptor and a carrier. Although this would effectively decrease the capabilities of an ECM specialized pilot, it would add to fleet diversity and allow another layer to the strategy of equipping a fleet.
|
Fahtim Meidires
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:55:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Vadinho Edited by: Vadinho on 24/03/2009 18:51:20 Cool just destroy the entire purpose behind the Scorpion, that's alright
Can you find a way to remove the Rokh's optimal bonus and give it a drone bonus, I don't think the Caldari are useless enough in fleets yet
Caldari definitely aren't useless in fleet. Rokh is a baller sniper, eagle and vulture are solid anti-support. I've flown both and I like to stay near the back of the sniper blob since I can engage from farther.
|
Pulsar Solaris
Vale Heavy Industries Molotov Coalition
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:55:00 -
[67]
THANK YOU! I want to have your babies. Please ignore all these people that want to permajam half a dozen ship from 200km. Nerf the thing into oblivion. I was tired of playing Falcons Online anyway.
|
Malena Panic
Gallente Veto. Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:56:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Bazman CHANGE THE ECM MECHANIC.
20 Seconds of doing nothing is the problem.
This for the love of all that's holy.
Targeted ECM should have the exact same effect as an ECM burst - break all existing locks - except that as a targeted effect only the target ships locks are broken.
Then change the ECM module cooldown to 10 seconds. Problem solved.
Suddenly ships confronted with an ECM boat have both fitting and tactical options to consider: they can fit sensor boosters to improve their scan strength (and therefore relock time), but in doing so increase their vulnerability to damps and to a lesser extent TDs. Smaller ships lose lock more often but also have the opportunity to relock more quickly, thanks to their higher base scan resolution.
Meanwhile ECM pilots themselves are afforded more tactical choices than just press butan. They can try to break smaller ships' locks more often by staggering ECM, but risk missing jams they would normally get by piling on. They also would have an increased vulnerability to fast tacklers.
Overall, this change would retain the force multiplier effect of ECM, but by *adding* decisions to the target's decision cycle, rather than taking it away. The effect on gameplay will be an increase in complexity and therefore tactical interest for everyone involved.
I urge you to consider this alternative now that you are once again looking at ECM. ... |
Frabba
GoonFleet
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:56:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Cindare In particular the Scorpion is fine. Leave it alone, please.
This. A thousand times this. The main problem people had was with FALCONS. Not scorpions. I don't have a problem with nerfing 200km+ ranges on the scorpion, but bringing us inside 160km is pointless.
|
Rawr Cristina
Caldari Naqam Exalted.
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:56:00 -
[70]
Originally by: someone
Rook:
10% bonus to Shield HP per level 5% bonus to Heavy/Heavy Assault Missile Kinetic Damage per level 5% bonus to Heavy/Heavy Assault ROF per level 20% bonus to ECM strength 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
this imo.
- Contagious - |
|
Alex Harumichi
Gallente Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 18:59:00 -
[71]
Hell, yes!
This is actually along the lines of we've also thought in our corp when we've discussed "how should these ships be balances". Surprising, actually, that CCP seems to be thinking very much along the same lines.
Finally some reason to fly Rooks and Scorps, too.
|
Sacred Glyph
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 19:00:00 -
[72]
Sounds like a good idea to me. Ignoring all the emo rage about how the falcon pilots wont be able to jam 9 billion miles out, its a good idea, every other recon is relatively close, with a jam range and a web range and neut range etc, the falcon being as far out as it is, is just daft.
Give it a tank and give it jamming, it'll still pwn, and an alternative ship - rook - which will give jam and also range plus damage is a good alternative for pilots.
Scorpion also sounds like a good idea, battleships are meant to battle!
|
Gavin Darklighter
THE FINAL STAND
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 19:01:00 -
[73]
Another thing you could try is making the ECM mods a turret that way the ship is limited to how many they can fit and you don't have to sacrifice your tank for it. Naturally, the strength and range of the jammers would have to be rebalanced with such a change.
signature picture exceeds the size limit.~WeatherMan |
Yunaka Vicc
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 19:03:00 -
[74]
Any changes planned for EW Links?
|
Summer Night
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 19:05:00 -
[75]
Oh good. final us Caldari have our final fleet usefulness removed. maybe more vaga nerfs and less on caldari please. if teh falcon needs to get close it needs ALOT more resists and manurverability to even closly compete to it's counterparts. the range is to keep it out of danger while yo uHOPE to get a jam if your skills are good enough. arazu never looses its damp strenth maybe think about serious ship issues and game play rather then keep reducing an already over nerfed race. bring back missile damage or allow me to move my SP to another skill set.
|
Ituralde
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 19:05:00 -
[76]
I like the concept of bringing down the range on some of these things in light of the nano nerf, however it's worth reconsidering a bit on the scorpion given the massive effective range of the sniper-line battleships. A Rokh, Apoc, and Megathron can all swat at 200 kms with little difficulty, and given the fundemental long-range philosophy of the Caldari, the battleship-class ewar platform should be able to be effective at least at this range.
The speed on the scorpion and relatively low jam strength that currently exists is in my opinion generally sufficient to balance their current range. Similarly, the lack of the covops cloak capability means they are potentially vulnerable even at range, at least as much as any other sniper-type battleship-class vessel while lacking the damage capability at that range.
So, if you want the scorpion to compete practically with other battleships, it needs the flexibility to operate at the range of any battleship-class vessel.
Perhaps a better idea might be to introduce scripts for ECM the way they exist for every other electronics module in the game. Have one that boosts module range and another that boosts ECM strength, and leave the ship bonuses alone. This means that any ECM ship would be able to perform one role or the other, and would be able to hot-swap between them dynamically. _____________________________ Fear is the mind-killer.
|
Fahtim Meidires
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 19:08:00 -
[77]
Originally by: Frabba
Originally by: Cindare In particular the Scorpion is fine. Leave it alone, please.
This. A thousand times this. The main problem people had was with FALCONS. Not scorpions. I don't have a problem with nerfing 200km+ ranges on the scorpion, but bringing us inside 160km is pointless.
You have the same problem of your ewar being able to engage outside the range of most snipers trying to kill it. Snipers should always out-range ewar, since within engagement ranges ewar always has the advantage.
|
Bacchanalian
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 19:08:00 -
[78]
Originally by: Yunaka Vicc Any changes planned for EW Links?
Or the lolactivetank Eos for that matter? ____________________ GM Sunshine > oops Neurotica > Hate to see a GM in your gang say 'oops'
|
Vio Geraci
Amarr GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 19:08:00 -
[79]
Edited by: Vio Geraci on 24/03/2009 19:10:38 While I welcome the changes to the Falcon and Rook on a general level, I do see this as part of the overall trend of nerfing things until they have lost all flavor or potential for surprising variety. I realize t3 ships will be surprising, but it's kind of sad when there are only really a couple ways to fit a given ship.
I dislike the proposed changes to the scorpion. It should have a range comparable to sniping battleships. Making it a close range brawler is castrating a ship that people used to be scared to fly because of how often it would be the primary target. I don't know. I guess I'd rather see the scorpion be a mid-range ECMer, effectively hitting around 100km or so.
edit: I guess I'm a little sad that there are so few real fitting choices to be made anymore, and that the way this seems to have been caused is by making all options equally terrible.
|
Seran Kela
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 19:09:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Summer Night Oh good. final us Caldari have our final fleet usefulness removed.
Rokh
|
|
Akiba Penrose
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 19:09:00 -
[81]
I belive this thread summarizes how many of us feel about how ECM currently is implemented. Electronic Warfare Psychology.
The changes looks like an improvement tho,, thx for finally looking into this
|
Neesa Corrinne
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 19:11:00 -
[82]
I have to disagree with the proposed changes wholeheartedly. The problem with the Falcon isn't the range that it can jam from, it's the fact that there is NO proper counter for it.
Here's my proposal to "fix" the Falcon:
ECCM - Gravimetric II
A secondary electronic array that provides a significant reduction to signature radius and a boost to sensor strength for a short time. This module can be loaded with scripts to increase its effectiveness in certain areas.
Penalty: Using more than one type of this module or similar modules that affect the same attribute on the ship will be penalized.
Attributes Gravimetric Strength: 96% Signature Radius: -10%
Then you add two scripts to the game:
Sensor Strength Modification of Sensor Strength Bonus: 100% Modification of Signature Radius Bonus: -100%
Signature Radius Modification of Signature Radius Bonsus: 100% Modification of Sensor Strength Bonsus: -100%
---------------------------------
|
Alex Harumichi
Gallente Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 19:12:00 -
[83]
Extra reason I'm loving this change: the Goons seem to hate it.
That proves it's good for the game.
|
Alex Harumichi
Gallente Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 19:15:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Neesa Corrinne I have to disagree with the proposed changes wholeheartedly. The problem with the Falcon isn't the range that it can jam from, it's the fact that there is NO proper counter for it.
The range is a huge part of that. If it needs to operate (much) closer, it will also become a lot more vulnerable in multiple ways.
|
VCBee2777
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 19:18:00 -
[85]
I am a goon. I love this change. I hate falcons. They are really annoying. I am happy with this change. |
Neesa Corrinne
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 19:18:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Alex Harumichi
Originally by: Neesa Corrinne I have to disagree with the proposed changes wholeheartedly. The problem with the Falcon isn't the range that it can jam from, it's the fact that there is NO proper counter for it.
The range is a huge part of that. If it needs to operate (much) closer, it will also become a lot more vulnerable in multiple ways.
If you even halve the range it will become completely useless. The problem with the Falcon isn't that the ship or it's bonus is too powerful, it's that the counter for it is a useless paperweight until someone puts a jammer on you and even then the strength isn't high enough to keep from being jammed.
Leave the Falcon alone, fix ECCM. This will mean that every gang will have a couple of heavy tacklers with ECCM in their mids (My version of ECCM which doesn't suck bawls) whose sole purpose in life is to grief falcons... and if not, then the gang is fail. ---------------------------------
|
Targeteer
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 19:19:00 -
[87]
ECM is the only role I enjoy playing in EVE. Many pilots hate flying ECM ships because it involved no direct damage to ships. At least with ECM I can positively contribute to a large battle before anti-support takes me out.
By turning ECM ships into "brawler" cannon fodder, the role of ECM is effectively dead. Long-range ECM with a paper-thin ship gave players a chance to survive in battle (except Rooks with their short-range, what a dumb set-up and it's currently the first thing to get nuked in fleet battles).
CCP killed Remote Sensor Dampeners a while back without thinking about their bad decision. I suppose CCP needs to nerf ECM so their Wormhole "Sleepers" content becomes tougher.
Sometimes I wonder if CCP even understands their own game.
Ask your Band of Brother Reloaded bribed bum buddies to do more testing for you. They aren't going to be useful to EVE much longer.
|
Dano Ei
Viziam
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 19:20:00 -
[88]
A Falcon range nerf was overdue as muppets jammed to >200km out but this is a bit ******ed. A Falcon is not a brawler, it has a utterly **** tank and fitting a plate and a rep wont change that because of base stats.
I usually dont uncloack my Falcon <40 km as the likelyhood it will die is close to 100%.
Awesome jam vs. no tank at all is the Falcon. Some nerf on range i agree on but this is completly overdoing it. Make it so they can be effectivly hit by snipers and its all balanced again (lets say max. lock at 150km for a falcon, something like that).
p.s. lol at pilgrim reference. yeah you see them all around brawling...ow wai- no they all just died Laughing
|
Morikai Acler
Caldari Demon Theory Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 19:20:00 -
[89]
If you want to make the Scorp a close range brawler ecm boat the best thing you could do is make it a cross between what it is now, and what it use to be back in 04 before the ECM bonus's were put on it. I believe the bonus's on it back then were hybrid optimal or missile dmg, and 10% shield HP per level. I remember Scorps having a lot of shields back then.
If you want to make it a close ranger brawler, then the best thing would be 15% to ecm strength per level and 10% shield HP per level. It wouldn't be a viable close range dmg dealer due to the lack of missile or hybrid hardpoints. But, if you don't give a weapon specific bonus it leaves it open to use rails, blasters or cruise/torps. That and you might need to change the hardpoint layout to 5/5 or 6/4 Missile/turret.
As far as the Falcon goes, thats still not too bad of a jamming range, considering they have covert cloak to use. But, they're paper thin, you may need to increase their tank and offensive abilities just.... slightly.
|
Fox Ogmo
Net 7 The Last Brigade
|
Posted - 2009.03.24 19:21:00 -
[90]
Originally by: Dangerously Cheesey So instead of figuring out how to make other electronic warfare modules (RSD, Tracking Disruptors, etc) more viable in fleet fights, you have just decided to nerf ECM to the point where it will be as useless as the others. Strong work.
As frustrating as hostile ECM boats are i have come to accept them, and must agree with Cheesey, especially when considering us poor minnies with target painters + 60% webs..
|
|
|
|
|
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 |