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)
Thetys Caldari Breed of Malakka	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:22:00 - [91] finally! thank you soo much CCP, keep up the good work! put some more focus on the "small group pvp" in low sec please (10-15 pilots at each side) ------
Ken Goku Gallente Band of Brothers	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:23:00 - [92] This is ****ed and you're ****ed. hth
Fahtim Meidires Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:23:00 - [93] Originally by: Vio Geraci Edited by: Vio Geraci on 24/03/2009 19:10:38 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. I don't know what to do with the scorpion. It's the only battleship with an ecm bonus other than black ops, which by itself makes it a weird little ship. The cruise missiles were never entirely useful in fleet. It's just so different from every other battleship, the ship class that represents raw power. I agree that the best use for the scorpion is anti-support at 100km-ish ranges, similar to the pulse-apoc.
Malcanis R.E.C.O.N. Dara Cothrom	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:24:00 - [94] Originally by: Seran Kela Originally by: Malcanis So the "brawler" gets 2 unbonused launcher slots as DPS but the "ranged" ship gets a drone bay? Oooookay.... Brawler only refers to range. It's main role will still be ecm lock-down, not dps. The combat ship gets drones to boost it's dps, strengthening its role as a solo hunter. Solo hunters don't need to engage at long range. because if they do, their target just leave. Bringing the Falcon into Scorch/HML/Sentry range simply dooms it to die without even the compensation of being able to inflict a little damage first. Meh well whatever, I can fly plenty of other ships. Shame CCP have decided to nerf a ship without fixing the broken ships that are supposed to counter it. GG! In before Arazu pilots stop gloating and realise this doesn't help them one tiny bit...
Yonker GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:26:00 - [95] Originally by: Alex Harumichi Extra reason I'm loving this change: the Goons seem to hate it. That proves it's good for the game. Because it is absolutely ****ed in any fleet situation. ECM is fine how it is, it gives another fleet role other than Tackler, Anti-Tackler, Sniping BS. ECM lives due to range, the ECM ships give up their tank to fit ECM modules and you want to make them 'close range brawler' ships? This is ****ed, they will get primaried and die instantly. The range isn't a problem, people are just not use to countering it. Here is a secret to counter Falcons in any medium/large engagement, ready? 1 Cruiser with Combat Probes, Point, Web and ECCM. It takes all of 20 seconds to setup probes, 6 seconds to scan and you can just right click on that mean ole falcon and warp to 0. He can't get away and will melt in a few vollies. Then you just scan again, find another falcon, right click -> warp to 0 and melt him as well. At the very least they will have to warp off. Alternatively, just nerf the effect of ECM. Make it so it breaks locks and only locks them out for 5 seconds (and +1 second for each level of BS, Cruiser, Battleship and Recon(stacking with Cruiser). Kneejerk nerfing of ECM is pretty silly, there are many counters... and anything that moves us away from the generic Tacklers -> Sniper fleet role the better.
Malcanis R.E.C.O.N. Dara Cothrom	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:26:00 - [96] Originally by: Fahtim Meidires Originally by: Vio Geraci Edited by: Vio Geraci on 24/03/2009 19:10:38 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. I don't know what to do with the scorpion. It's the only battleship with an ecm bonus other than black ops, which by itself makes it a weird little ship. The cruise missiles were never entirely useful in fleet. It's just so different from every other battleship, the ship class that represents raw power. I agree that the best use for the scorpion is anti-support at 100km-ish ranges, similar to the pulse-apoc. The best thing that could be done for the scorpion would be to add 2 more highslots + 2 missile slots and give it bonuses for heavy missiles instead of cruise. Make it a genuine antisupport platform. Either that or turn it into a turret boat with a tracking bonus.
Seran Kela	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:27:00 - [97] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Seran Kela Originally by: Malcanis So the "brawler" gets 2 unbonused launcher slots as DPS but the "ranged" ship gets a drone bay? Oooookay.... Brawler only refers to range. It's main role will still be ecm lock-down, not dps. The combat ship gets drones to boost it's dps, strengthening its role as a solo hunter. Solo hunters don't need to engage at long range. because if they do, their target just leave. Bringing the Falcon into Scorch/HML/Sentry range simply dooms it to die without even the compensation of being able to inflict a little damage first. Meh well whatever, I can fly plenty of other ships. Shame CCP have decided to nerf a ship without fixing the broken ships that are supposed to counter it. GG! In before Arazu pilots stop gloating and realise this doesn't help them one tiny bit... Yes. Falcons will no longer be able to sit at range to jam ships, they will have to fly in risky situations using their cloak as defense to be effective. This kills solo falcons but not gang-multiplier falcons.
Malcanis R.E.C.O.N. Dara Cothrom	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:27:00 - [98] Originally by: Yonker Originally by: Alex Harumichi Extra reason I'm loving this change: the Goons seem to hate it. That proves it's good for the game. Because it is absolutely ****ed in any fleet situation. ECM is fine how it is, it gives another fleet role other than Tackler, Anti-Tackler, Sniping BS. ECM lives due to range, the ECM ships give up their tank to fit ECM modules and you want to make them 'close range brawler' ships? This is ****ed, they will get primaried and die instantly. The range isn't a problem, people are just not use to countering it. Here is a secret to counter Falcons in any medium/large engagement, ready? 1 Cruiser with Combat Probes, Point, Web and ECCM. It takes all of 20 seconds to setup probes, 6 seconds to scan and you can just right click on that mean ole falcon and warp to 0. He can't get away and will melt in a few vollies. Then you just scan again, find another falcon, right click -> warp to 0 and melt him as well. At the very least they will have to warp off. Alternatively, just nerf the effect of ECM. Make it so it breaks locks and only locks them out for 5 seconds (and +1 second for each level of BS, Cruiser, Battleship and Recon(stacking with Cruiser). Kneejerk nerfing of ECM is pretty silly, there are many counters... and anything that moves us away from the generic Tacklers -> Sniper fleet role the better. The real shame here is lack of imagination. ECM just isn't a good mechanic to start with. Scrap it and make the Caldari EW something entirely different.
Yunaka Vicc	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:28:00 - [99] This change makes Falcon ECM effectiveness comparable to Arazu but without drones, damage bonus, secondary EW bonus.
Fahtim Meidires Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:29:00 - [100] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Fahtim Meidires Originally by: Vio Geraci Edited by: Vio Geraci on 24/03/2009 19:10:38 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. I don't know what to do with the scorpion. It's the only battleship with an ecm bonus other than black ops, which by itself makes it a weird little ship. The cruise missiles were never entirely useful in fleet. It's just so different from every other battleship, the ship class that represents raw power. I agree that the best use for the scorpion is anti-support at 100km-ish ranges, similar to the pulse-apoc. The best thing that could be done for the scorpion would be to add 2 more highslots + 2 missile slots and give it bonuses for heavy missiles instead of cruise. Make it a genuine antisupport platform. That's how the drake was made. Quote: Either that or turn it into a turret boat with a tracking bonus. God that's a cool idea and makes a lot of sense.

Alex Harumichi Gallente Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:30:00 - [101] Originally by: Targeteer By turning ECM ships into "brawler" cannon fodder, the role of ECM is effectively dead. You did read the OP, didn't you? The part where the Rook is still a ranged platform? Sure, it will need to be a bit closer or operate in falloff... but that's what the Lachesis and Arazu have needed to pretty much always, too.
Jonathan Priest	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:30:00 - [102] Edited by: Jonathan Priest on 24/03/2009 19:30:48 I really like the proposed scorpion and signal distortion amp changes. It'll be nice having the option to throw some BCS on and do some damage without gimping yourself.
But Sects	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:32:00 - [103] WHINERS WIN! WHINERS WIN! WOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Kebabski coracao ardente Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:32:00 - [104] People whinign escp goons that falcon doesn't need nerfing fail. Saying falcon is cool for pvp and is keeping pvp interessting, while it's actually the one ship that ****s pvp all the time. ''Let's try to take that small gang on in my won'', meh falcon decloaks and permajammed. jammers are overpowered anyway, being able to permajam someone shouldn't be possible, takes the fun out of the game 'Peachy Lil Babe'
Cpt Cosmic	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:32:00 - [105] removing the optimal of the scorps destroys its use in sniper battles. also scorp is paper thin and is always primaried first, you should build the bonuses around this.
DaiTengu Gallente GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:32:00 - [106] I don't fly ECM ships, nor do I fly anything caldari in regular fights. However, I'm not sure if this change was thought through completely. Unless you're planning on giving armor tanking bonuses to the scorpion and the Falcon, there's no way that these ships will even be remotely effective. You're taking a ship that's a shield tanker, who uses it's midslots not for shield tanking, but for e-war modules instead. The only thing that these ships have going for them right now is the ability to jam at range, if anyone lands on top of them, they're toast. I'm all for balancing ewar, don't get me wrong. the ability for a falcon to jam 2-3 carriers is insane, but this isn't the way to do it. There is no balancing here, this is just making the ewar platform completely unusable.
Fahtim Meidires Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:35:00 - [107] Originally by: Malcanis The real shame here is lack of imagination. ECM just isn't a good mechanic to start with. Scrap it and make the Caldari EW something entirely different. Gallente - Sensor, warp drive disruption Amarr - Turret, capacitor disruption Minmatar - Signature, propulsion disruption Caldari - Jamming Agreed it's very weird.
Panzram GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:35:00 - [108] As a falcon hater i say bravo. Was hoping for a subtle nerf but making them short range "brawlers" (hah!) really twists the knife. Oh, and making the combat recon the long range one is brilliant (if you're trying to screw over ecm pilots that is) with the useless drone bonus the icing on the nerf cake. Rook use will remain at current levels, ie almost none, and falcon use will plummet in fleet warfare. If you carry through with this there is no saving the falcon, and i say good riddance. You take a nice crap on the scorpion too to round out the carnage. Don't be discouraged by the negative responses from the ECM fairies, dragging the last e-war platfrom down to the near uselessness of the others IS a type of balancing. Removing the hulls altogether would tidy up the market too.
Vio Geraci Amarr GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:36:00 - [109] Originally by: Fahtim Meidires I don't know what to do with the scorpion. It's the only battleship with an ecm bonus other than black ops, which by itself makes it a weird little ship. The cruise missiles were never entirely useful in fleet. It's just so different from every other battleship, the ship class that represents raw power. I agree that the best use for the scorpion is anti-support at 100km-ish ranges, similar to the pulse-apoc. I agree that it's quite strange in that there are no other battleship platforms for ewar. I'd like to see other races get larger platforms for ewar, but maybe CCP has just decided that there shouldn't be any such platform and that the scorpion should be relegated to close-range and therefore useful only for camping gates and stations --a lowsec and empire ship rather than a nullsec ship.
Yonker GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:37:00 - [110] Originally by: Kebabski People whinign escp goons that falcon doesn't need nerfing fail. Saying falcon is cool for pvp and is keeping pvp interessting, while it's actually the one ship that ****s pvp all the time. ''Let's try to take that small gang on in my won'', meh falcon decloaks and permajammed. jammers are overpowered anyway, being able to permajam someone shouldn't be possible, takes the fun out of the game If only there were some single module that cuts ECM effectiveness in half... hmmm. You don't even need everyone to fit ECCM. Just 1 anti-ECM ship... ECM ships have 0 tank.

Frabba GoonFleet	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:37:00 - [111] Originally by: Kebabski People whinign escp goons that falcon doesn't need nerfing fail. Saying falcon is cool for pvp and is keeping pvp interessting, while it's actually the one ship that ****s pvp all the time. ''Let's try to take that small gang on in my won'', meh falcon decloaks and permajammed. jammers are overpowered anyway, being able to permajam someone shouldn't be possible, takes the fun out of the game Most goons from what I have seen actually were expecting the Falcon nerf. It's the scorpion nerf that is suprising us.
Loki L'Odin Gallente Asshats and Alcoholics Turbo.	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:37:00 - [112] win that is all
Fahtim Meidires Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:38:00 - [113] Originally by: DaiTengu I don't fly ECM ships, nor do I fly anything caldari in regular fights. However, I'm not sure if this change was thought through completely. Unless you're planning on giving armor tanking bonuses to the scorpion and the Falcon, there's no way that these ships will even be remotely effective. You're taking a ship that's a shield tanker, who uses it's midslots not for shield tanking, but for e-war modules instead. The only thing that these ships have going for them right now is the ability to jam at range, if anyone lands on top of them, they're toast. I'm all for balancing ewar, don't get me wrong. the ability for a falcon to jam 2-3 carriers is insane, but this isn't the way to do it. There is no balancing here, this is just making the ewar platform completely unusable. Disagreeing honestly. The Rook becomes a great solo hunter once you add the drones and better missiles. Falcons now have to show restraint and take calculated risks when engaging as opposed to before (250km cloak jam is no risk).
Alex Harumichi Gallente Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:38:00 - [114] Edited by: Alex Harumichi on 24/03/2009 19:41:56 Edited by: Alex Harumichi on 24/03/2009 19:39:26 Originally by: Yunaka Vicc This change makes Falcon ECM effectiveness comparable to Arazu but without drones, damage bonus, secondary EW bonus. You don't use damps much, do you? If you did, you'd realize that at closer ranges (the ranges most battles tend to happen) damps don't do squat. In addition, due to stacking penalty anything more than 4 damps is useless (and that 4th doesn't add much). Also, outside shortish optimal (and note damp ships have no range bonus whatsoever) it becomes random. Oh, and you usually need 3+ damps on one ship to have any useful effect. Compare and contrast with ECM. 100% shutdown of weapons, regardless of ship weapon range. No stacking penalty. Even one module "hit" is enough to totally shut down a ship. ECM is vastly more powerful than damps. No contest. That's the reason you see Falcons all over the place, instead of Arazus or Lachs. Duh.
Fahtim Meidires Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:39:00 - [115] Originally by: Vio Geraci Originally by: Fahtim Meidires I don't know what to do with the scorpion. It's the only battleship with an ecm bonus other than black ops, which by itself makes it a weird little ship. The cruise missiles were never entirely useful in fleet. It's just so different from every other battleship, the ship class that represents raw power. I agree that the best use for the scorpion is anti-support at 100km-ish ranges, similar to the pulse-apoc. I agree that it's quite strange in that there are no other battleship platforms for ewar. I'd like to see other races get larger platforms for ewar, but maybe CCP has just decided that there shouldn't be any such platform and that the scorpion should be relegated to close-range and therefore useful only for camping gates and stations --a lowsec and empire ship rather than a nullsec ship. If they turn the scorp into a hybrid ship with a tracking bonus and ewar strength it becomes a great anti-support ship.
ScoRpS 0utbreak KrautbreaK	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:40:00 - [116] eccm is just too weak to meaningfully counter ecm without using up say 3 slots so thats a 1:3 ratio for a modi****of success. So although i welcome these changes i would also like to see eccm modules being boosted to help further balance the situation for remote reppers vs ew.
Malena Panic Gallente Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:41:00 - [117] 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. Here's my proposal to "fix" the Falcon: ECCM - Gravimetric II If you'd ever fit ECCM you'd know the pointlessness of wasting a precious midslot on a chance based mechanic. The problem isn't the Falcon, it's 'twenty seconds with your thumb up your ass'. Fix the game mechanic instead of trying to 'balance' the ships please. ...
deltauk1 Vale Heavy Industries Molotov Coalition	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:41:00 - [118] I fly both a rook and falcon (max sp's) and totally agree with the optimal nerf as jamming from 200k is a little ridiculous. If the sda are going to have a range rather than strength bonus is there really any need to nerf the ship jam strength bonus as filling lows with sda's makes a big difference to how many cycles you get in and without them your not going to be permajamming 6 or seven ships even with current ship strength bonuses. I think the removal of ridiculous optimals and sda strength bonuses would be an adequete nerf. Also doing this will boost eccm modules efficiency unless you intend on rendering them obsolete through these changes? Role wise I think nothing needs changing there, making a falcon a close range ship is crazy and is basically just turning it into expensive cannon fodder, if you really intedn on changing the roles give the rook an rof bonus and make that the close range 'brawler' it is the 'combat' recon after all and the falcon should remain the 'tactical' ecm boat. These changes will make life a lot easier for hostile gangs as all they'll need is a cerb loaded with eccm and em missles to take out any ew boat as they'll be well within missle range, that's not to mention other sniper ships. Personally I'd like to see the optimal nerf come into play although the falon have the same optimal as the planned range for the rook and leave sda's as they are that way ecm boats retain they're strength but are forced into range of hostile ships meaning they have to concentrate more jammers on snipers etc leaving less to use on the rest of the enemy fleet this would also still give use to eccm modules. On a final note I think a lot of this has come abotu through the abuse of ecm ships especially falcons, we recently had an engagement with a hostile gang of 17, 7 of their ships were falcons which was over 1 falcon for two of our ships, I understand people play the game how they like but use of ecm like that is what gives it such a bad name. that's my say on the proposed changes anyway
Malcanis R.E.C.O.N. Dara Cothrom	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:41:00 - [119] Originally by: Seran Kela Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Seran Kela Originally by: Malcanis So the "brawler" gets 2 unbonused launcher slots as DPS but the "ranged" ship gets a drone bay? Oooookay.... Brawler only refers to range. It's main role will still be ecm lock-down, not dps. The combat ship gets drones to boost it's dps, strengthening its role as a solo hunter. Solo hunters don't need to engage at long range. because if they do, their target just leave. Bringing the Falcon into Scorch/HML/Sentry range simply dooms it to die without even the compensation of being able to inflict a little damage first. Meh well whatever, I can fly plenty of other ships. Shame CCP have decided to nerf a ship without fixing the broken ships that are supposed to counter it. GG! In before Arazu pilots stop gloating and realise this doesn't help them one tiny bit... Yes. Falcons will no longer be able to sit at range to jam ships, they will have to fly in risky situations using their cloak as defense to be effective. This kills solo falcons but not gang-multiplier falcons. Hahahaha are you serious? "Solo Falcons"? Tell me you were being ironic? Please? Reality check: Falcon has a 5-6 second targeting delay, plus a none-too-exciting scan res. If it has to be at ~50Km, even cruisers can target it, easily targeting it before the falcon can lock. No "using your cloak for defence" when targeted. What will actually happen is: uncloak, try and get 1 jam against a few targets, warp out. If there are any bubbles, then the Falcon is effectively prevented from returning. If there are gate guns, the falcon cannot engage at all (I for one welcome our new unbreakable lo-sec RR BS blob overlords ). Thus the new Falcon is only really useful in high-sec or as a kind of alternate heavy covops.
Seran Kela	Posted - 2009.03.24 19:42:00 - [120] Originally by: Malena Panic 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. Here's my proposal to "fix" the Falcon: ECCM - Gravimetric II If you'd ever fit ECCM you'd know the pointlessness of wasting a precious midslot on a chance based mechanic. The problem isn't the Falcon, it's 'twenty seconds with your thumb up your ass'. Fix the game mechanic instead of trying to 'balance' the ships please. This is the thread to offer your alternative Caldari ewar mechanic.



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.