Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
5pinDizzy
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 13:07:00 -
[1]
Edited by: 5pinDizzy on 25/03/2009 13:10:58
They finally get around to looking at altering ecm
Still subject to change.
Yet what do I keep reading?
"leave my ships alone ccp!!"
"ffs ccp caldari will be useless, we should all fly amarr!"
"arrrh, there will be armies of rooks everywhere! we're all going to die!!!"
"not nerfed enough CCP! delete the ships from the game!!"
One of the first people that even brought it to my attention, Bellum, was so wrapped up in himself looking like some prophecy god of balance for realising they'd actually nerf the range part that it took someone posting a cut n paste link in his thread to have any idea what the hell he was talking about outside his own head.
Same problem with the whines I think, all wrapped up with yourselves I'm not sure if any of you really know what you're talking about anymore, already seen extreme whines from every possible angle BASED ON NOTHING. JUST COMPLAINING FOR THE SAKE OF IT.
Not saying I know any better, but what CCP are proposing seems to make the best sense to me.
If any player brought the idea to the attention of ccp it might of had something to do with this guy at some point.
But it really doesn't matter.
Subject to change but the changes sound great, notice the pros and cons, aka balance.
Falcon now will have less range because it can cloak with zero penalties and warp but more ecm strength at close range because it has no firepower.
Rook will now have more range because it can't cloak without penalties but will have less ecm strength cause it has more firepower, plus caldari were crying out for a tech 2 ship that could actually use ****ing drones, they're possibly going to give it a 25m3 dronebay!!!
Because of the Falcon alternative, Rook was always useless in current balance, it'd actually make people fly it.
Scorpion get its ecm nerfed at range, but a damage bonus! That's great, it actually might be worth putting weapons on the thing now rather then a crapload of neut and nos and sometimes remote repairs.
Plus the best thing, ecm get's a kick in the nuts at range, specifically hurting the stupid falcon alts and ultimately nerfing ecm jamming chances overall, the stupid game mechanic not even the people who use ewar enjoy too much.
if you disagree with me then you should probably post a response and stop reading my signature. |
Mrs Snowman
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 13:11:00 -
[2]
complaining about people complaining means you suck even more than they do. |
Crumplecorn
Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 13:11:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Crumplecorn on 25/03/2009 13:14:10 so very /signed
Also, "it took someone posting a cut n paste link in his thread to have any idea what the hell he was talking about outside his own head." LMFAO
Also, as I understand it the changes mean the Falcon will be able to operate at the same range if it wants to, just with reduced effectiveness, so posts from whiners saying they should have reduced effectiveness rather than range, induce particular lulz. As you say, no reason, just whine whine whine. -
DesuSigs |
Azirapheal
Amarr Purgatorial Janitors Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 13:47:00 -
[4]
just look at amarrs ecm, nosferatu's.. now we have to kill our own cap (usually much bigger than an equiv sized ships) to drain theirs into ours and it stops working should they have less.
turret disruptors are only useful in small ships at close ranges... against turret ships (so not caldari, drone primary weaponsystems) or the missile based part of some matari ships
target painters do not adversely affect the target, save making them easier to hit (Easier to track at close range and high speed)
damps can be a pain but if they are too close they are worthless.
only jammers completely shut down the enemies ability to fight, save auto agressing drones (which require good timing) or fof missiles... which dont have 140km range.
only jamming in its current form shuts down people entirely
even neut/nos cant stop the capless weapons (anything non hybrid or non laser) and only hinders active tanks (a rarity in this day of silly plates and insane shield regen rates)
i had a 1v1 with a corpmate last night in t1 only fitted frigates. i took a rifter with ac's a rocket launcher and the usual lows/mids for pvp
he brought a griffin with one missile launcher, jammers jammers jammers and a hobgoblin 2
first instant i wasnt permajammed (cause he probably capped himself out the moron) i killed his lone hob2 second instant i took him into hull (he rejammed me the lucky ****) and even though it was to hull i had every intention of destroying that ship for bringing a jamming setup to a friendly 1v1.
|
TimMc
Gallente The Black Rabbits The Gurlstas Associates
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 14:40:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Mrs Snowman complaining about people complaining means you suck even more than they do.
|
NoNah
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 14:42:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Mrs Snowman complaining about people complaining means you suck even more than they do.
Oh Irony, thy name is you. Parrots, commence!
Postcount: 143281
|
Rordan D'Kherr
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 14:50:00 -
[7]
I would introduce "whine points". Everyone gets 1 per month / quarter to whine about one thingy. Will stop people whining about Falcons, whine about ECM. After both has been changed they repeat by start whining about ECM. See the pattern.
|
Azirapheal
Amarr Purgatorial Janitors Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 14:59:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Grohalmatar The proposed changes in the game development forum are obviously a nerf to falcon pilots. However, what they really are is a nerf to falcon alts.
Originally by: Grohalmatar The proposed changes in the game development forum are obviously a nerf to falcon pilots. However, what they really are is a nerf to falcon alts.
|
GTC seller72
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 15:00:00 -
[9]
Originally by: 5pinDizzy
Falcon now will have less range because it can cloak with zero penalties and warp but more ecm strength at close range because it has no firepower.
It will have less ECM str than now, i think its you who should read the blog tbh.
Originally by: 5pinDizzy Rook will now have more range because it can't cloak without penalties but will have less ecm strength cause it has more firepower, plus caldari were crying out for a tech 2 ship that could actually use ****ing drones, they're possibly going to give it a 25m3 dronebay!!!
It will have pitiful ecm str as it is getting a double nerf, one on the ship and the other from the SDA change.
|
Kuzya Morozov
Gallente Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 15:02:00 -
[10]
Good. Now I can feed on your precious tears.
|
|
K'uata Sayus
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 15:22:00 -
[11]
This is a common example of "Forum Whining Ephiphany" where a poster is dumbstruck with shock upon realizing the pervasiveness of whining on the forums.
Rather than think the consequences through, there is an almost unstoppable compulsion to post a long and erudite reflection on the uselessness of whining. Which, in effect, is, of course, a whine in itself.
Most posters recognize the futility of it all, and put in a concerted effort to make their subsequent posts constructive and good-natured.
Some, sadly, remain in that cul-de-sac in their consciousness and whine, re-whine, and whine again, ad infinitum, ad nauseum...
As has been aptly put many times: Move along, move along, nothing to see here.....
EVERYONE SEEMS NORMAL UNTIL YOU GET TO KNOW THEM. |
Ranger 1
Amarr Dynaverse Corporation Vertigo Coalition
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 15:47:00 -
[12]
Originally by: GTC seller72
Originally by: 5pinDizzy
Falcon now will have less range because it can cloak with zero penalties and warp but more ecm strength at close range because it has no firepower.
It will have less ECM str than now, i think its you who should read the blog tbh.
Originally by: 5pinDizzy Rook will now have more range because it can't cloak without penalties but will have less ecm strength cause it has more firepower, plus caldari were crying out for a tech 2 ship that could actually use ****ing drones, they're possibly going to give it a 25m3 dronebay!!!
It will have pitiful ecm str as it is getting a double nerf, one on the ship and the other from the SDA change.
Concerning the Falcon.
Quote: Summary Falcon changes - ECM Strength Bonus increased from 20 to 25% per level - ECM Optimal Range Bonus removed (52km optimal / 81km falloff w/ 2*SDA IIs) - Increase in general manoeuvrability (might give agility bonus to it to replace the ECM optimal range bonus)
Perhaps you ought to reread that section.
===== Yeah, VC is back, and we have a bone to pick with you. |
GTC seller72
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 15:56:00 -
[13]
Edited by: GTC seller72 on 25/03/2009 15:56:46
Originally by: Ranger 1
Concerning the Falcon.
Quote: Summary Falcon changes - ECM Strength Bonus increased from 20 to 25% per level - ECM Optimal Range Bonus removed (52km optimal / 81km falloff w/ 2*SDA IIs) - Increase in general manoeuvrability (might give agility bonus to it to replace the ECM optimal range bonus)
Perhaps you ought to reread that section.
I did, perhaps you should have read this part...
Quote: Signal Distortion Amplifiers
Currently they increase your ECM strength and we were looking at swapping this to an ECM range bonus.
SDA's currantly give a 20% jam str bonus per module and falcons fit 3 and even with the stacking issues and the falcons 5% jam boost per level it is a overall loss in jam str.
|
Ranger 1
Amarr Dynaverse Corporation Vertigo Coalition
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 16:04:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Ranger 1 on 25/03/2009 16:06:17 I did read it.
1: He was speaking about the ship stats specifically, and in that he was entirely correct. 2: You may be amazed to learn that not all Falcon pilots fit 3 SDA's. Welcome to EVE.
Step away from the high horse my friend.
===== Yeah, VC is back, and we have a bone to pick with you. |
5pinDizzy
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 16:07:00 -
[15]
Edited by: 5pinDizzy on 25/03/2009 16:09:26
Originally by: GTC seller72
Originally by: 5pinDizzy
Falcon now will have less range because it can cloak with zero penalties and warp but more ecm strength at close range because it has no firepower.
It will have less ECM str than now, i think its you who should read the blog tbh.
I was comparing the possible post patch falcon with the possible post patch rook for why they would be both useful and still be balanced, don't bring the current ewar balance and SDA's into it when it wasn't mentioned, I assume that's what you're talking about.
Quote:
Originally by: 5pinDizzy Rook will now have more range because it can't cloak without penalties but will have less ecm strength cause it has more firepower, plus caldari were crying out for a tech 2 ship that could actually use ****ing drones, they're possibly going to give it a 25m3 dronebay!!!
It will have pitiful ecm str as it is getting a double nerf, one on the ship and the other from the SDA change.
It won't be pitiful, you can jam with no SDA's a good amount of the time, just that it won't work for long, also they're just making it so you can use the ship for ewar without having to dedicate the whole setup to it.
They're freeing the players from having to stack SDA's in the lows so they can make it what it was supposed to be, a Combat Recon.
While at the same time making it desirable for something more non combat support role like a falcon to still want to fit them to get its range back.
if you disagree with me then you should probably post a response and stop reading my signature. |
GTC seller72
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 16:08:00 -
[16]
Edited by: GTC seller72 on 25/03/2009 16:16:22
Originally by: Ranger 1 I did read it.
1: He was speaking about the ship stats specifically, and in that he was entirely correct. 2: You may be amazed to learn that not all Falcon pilots fit 3 SDA's. Welcome to EVE.
1. Ship stats are effected by regularly used fittings so quotuing them alone is pointless as a referance.
2. Even fitting just 2 SDA's and including the stacking penalty gives a greater gain than 25%. Welcome to basic math.
The changes will give the falcon less jam str at less range than it has now (when standard fittings are taken into account), but yea you can fit a plate maybe in the lows and a eanm+dcu....
Big whoop, the other recons get a gaurenteed effect and nobody uses them in anything close to med sized gang combat any more let alone thinking ppl will be using a system that is already chance based at that range...
|
5pinDizzy
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 16:18:00 -
[17]
Edited by: 5pinDizzy on 25/03/2009 16:20:15
Originally by: GTC seller72 Edited by: GTC seller72 on 25/03/2009 16:10:34
Originally by: Ranger 1 I did read it.
1: He was speaking about the ship stats specifically, and in that he was entirely correct. 2: You may be amazed to learn that not all Falcon pilots fit 3 SDA's. Welcome to EVE.
1. Ship stats are effected by regularly used fittings so quotuing them alone is pointless as a referance.
2. Even fitting just 2 SDA's and including the stacking penalty gives a greater gain than 25%. Welcome to basic math.
All falcon pilots I know fit the 1 sda and 1 plate setup to stop themselves getting alpha'd.
That particular setup post possible patch would actually be more effective then it is now at close range with the falcon getting 5% ewar strength per level.
Don't also forget they said they might play with the base strength of jammers.
Are you annoyed that ewar is getting a nerf at all?
Sure it's chance based and not guaranteed to work.
But in a game of rock, paper scissors, ecm is the raygun, it vapourises rock paper and scissors.
if you disagree with me then you should probably post a response and stop reading my signature. |
GTC seller72
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 16:24:00 -
[18]
Originally by: 5pinDizzy
All falcon pilots I know fit the 1 sda and 1 plate setup to stop themselves getting alpha'd.
That particular setup post possible patch would actually be more effective then it is now at close range with the falcon getting 5% ewar strength per level.
No falcon pilots i know fit less than 2 and most fit 3.
And yea anybody can do the basic math and make claims that ppl fit less str mods making it look like a buff....
Anyway like i said nobody uses the other recons in med sized gang v gang combat or fights even close to that size because of the range problem getting them popped, and the other systems have a gaurenteed effect at that range not one that is chance based even before it gets its str gimped.
|
Ranger 1
Amarr Dynaverse Corporation Vertigo Coalition
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 16:32:00 -
[19]
Originally by: GTC seller72 Edited by: GTC seller72 on 25/03/2009 16:16:22
Originally by: Ranger 1 I did read it.
1: He was speaking about the ship stats specifically, and in that he was entirely correct. 2: You may be amazed to learn that not all Falcon pilots fit 3 SDA's. Welcome to EVE.
1. Ship stats are effected by regularly used fittings so quotuing them alone is pointless as a referance.
2. Even fitting just 2 SDA's and including the stacking penalty gives a greater gain than 25%. Welcome to basic math.
The changes will give the falcon less jam str at less range than it has now (when standard fittings are taken into account), but yea you can fit a plate maybe in the lows and a eanm+dcu....
Big whoop, the other recons get a gaurenteed effect and nobody uses them in anything close to med sized gang combat any more let alone thinking ppl will be using a system that is already chance based at that range...
So you are saying that the changes would adversely affect how YOU use a Falcon in your current fitting/play style.
Thats rather the point, isn't it?
Apparently, too many Falcons are being fitted purely for maximum jamming at maximum range. CCP appears to want to change that and bring a bit more balance to their use.
You make an awful lot of baseless assumption on how the EVE player base should fit this ship. Not everyone fits the Falcon the way you do, but enough are that they are throwing game balance a bit out of whack. Accept that and move on. More fitting options will be opened up and a wider variety of tactics will come into play. This is a good thing. The Falcon will still be a formidable EW platform even with the proposed changes.
Will it be a bit more "at risk" than it currently is? Yes, especially if you continue to fit in the same old cookie cutter way you currently are. Again, this is not a bad thing.
===== Yeah, VC is back, and we have a bone to pick with you. |
5pinDizzy
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 16:37:00 -
[20]
Think of it like a the nanonerf.
When you'd pile every single possible available bonus onto one ship to make it an uber as possible.
full rack of ecm rigs, full mid of ecm modules, full low slots of ecm modules...
ewar implants.
It gets ******ed so they have to do a similar thing and change it people can open their options and actually fit half interesting setups rather then the same old cookie cutter crap.
Of course can do basic maths, we know ecm will be a little weaker weaker for the falcon and a good bit weaker for the rook (compensated by massive combat bonuses).
if you disagree with me then you should probably post a response and stop reading my signature. |
|
5pinDizzy
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 16:41:00 -
[21]
Edited by: 5pinDizzy on 25/03/2009 16:41:59 forums lagging for some reason. though other stuff fine, strange. sorry for double post.
if you disagree with me then you should probably post a response and stop reading my signature. |
GTC seller72
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 16:45:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Ranger 1
So you are saying that the changes would adversely affect how YOU use a Falcon in your current fitting/play style.
Thats rather the point, isn't it?
Apparently, too many Falcons are being fitted purely for maximum jamming at maximum range.
You make an awful lot of baseless assumption on how the EVE player base should fit this ship. Not everyone fits the Falcon the way you do, but enough are that they are throwing game balance a bit out of whack.
So is that a long winded way of you saying i was right about the str nerf?...good lets move on shall we?.
Originally by: Ranger 1 More fitting options will be opened up and a wider variety of tactics will come into play. This is a good thing. The Falcon will still be a formidable EW platform even with the proposed changes.
Will it be a bit more "at risk" than it currently is? Yes, especially if you continue to fit in the same old cookie cutter way you currently are. Again, this is not a bad thing.
This is not about ppl wanting to add tactics this is about ppl not wanting to use them to deal with falcons as they are.
And i have eyes and 6 years of eve experiance that tells me that close range recons are NOT used in gang even close to med sized in gang vs gang combat because they just die and cost a lot.
It will not be "at risk" because it will be "not used" just like the rest are not, even in a 2-3 ship gank squad the gaurenteed effects of the other recons will make them a better choice to use just like they are now.
So worthless in gang combat due to range just like the other recons and STILL worthless in 2-3 ship gank squads because its effect cannot be gaurenteed like damps or TD's and webs ect...
I do not need to wait for it to be on sissi to know these things and nor does anybody else with any experiance, but then that exact end result is exactly what the pro nerfits wanted..
|
Ranger 1
Amarr Dynaverse Corporation Vertigo Coalition
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 17:17:00 -
[23]
Originally by: GTC seller72
Originally by: Ranger 1
So you are saying that the changes would adversely affect how YOU use a Falcon in your current fitting/play style.
Thats rather the point, isn't it?
Apparently, too many Falcons are being fitted purely for maximum jamming at maximum range.
You make an awful lot of baseless assumption on how the EVE player base should fit this ship. Not everyone fits the Falcon the way you do, but enough are that they are throwing game balance a bit out of whack.
So is that a long winded way of you saying i was right about the str nerf?...good lets move on shall we?.
Originally by: Ranger 1 More fitting options will be opened up and a wider variety of tactics will come into play. This is a good thing. The Falcon will still be a formidable EW platform even with the proposed changes.
Will it be a bit more "at risk" than it currently is? Yes, especially if you continue to fit in the same old cookie cutter way you currently are. Again, this is not a bad thing.
This is not about ppl wanting to add tactics this is about ppl not wanting to use them to deal with falcons as they are.
And i have eyes and 6 years of eve experiance that tells me that close range recons are NOT used in gang even close to med sized in gang vs gang combat because they just die and cost a lot.
It will not be "at risk" because it will be "not used" just like the rest are not, even in a 2-3 ship gank squad the gaurenteed effects of the other recons will make them a better choice to use just like they are now.
So worthless in gang combat due to range just like the other recons and STILL worthless in 2-3 ship gank squads because its effect cannot be gaurenteed like damps or TD's and webs ect...
I do not need to wait for it to be on sissi to know these things and nor does anybody else with any experiance, but then that exact end result is exactly what the pro nerfits wanted..
1: You completely missed the point both the original poster and I made about the ECM strength of the Falcon, so if your misunderstanding the statement makes you correct in your book "go for it".
2: I wouldn't attempt to play the "I've been playing this game longer than you, and have more experience" epeen card, as you'd most likely lose on both counts.
You seem fixated on the Falcons role in medium to large scale gang warfare. You might consider that the Falcons role in engagements of this size are very limited even in its current state.
1: They are an eggshell, and in larger engagements there is a much higher probability that there will be significant firepower brought to bear on it even at extreme range. One or two Rohks getting a lock on your Falcon at 200km+ is going to ruin your day. There are tactics you can use, yes (decloak, jam, cloak until your jamming cycle finishes) but those same tactics are as effective at 100km as they are at 200km +.
2: In those situations as a general rule a Scorpion was a much more viable selection. The proposed changes to the Scorp may change this, but then we have the tough little Rook to play around with now.
Yes, a Falcon does have value in a fleet combat situation, but its value does not revolve "primarily" around its ability to jam. Its value is as a cloaked scout that can gather intelligence of enemy movements, provide warp in points, and use its jamming capabilities to jam out tacklers and escape if its cloak gets blown. You know, to be used for recon.
However, Falcons truly come into their own in small gang combat (like all other recons), and would continue to be a valuable asset in that theater even with the proposed changes.
===== Yeah, VC is back, and we have a bone to pick with you. |
GTC seller72
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 17:34:00 -
[24]
Edited by: GTC seller72 on 25/03/2009 17:46:15
Originally by: Ranger 1
1: You completely missed the point both the original poster and I made about the ECM strength of the Falcon, so if your misunderstanding the statement makes you correct in your book "go for it".
I misunderstood nothing i added certain facts that were convinently ignored, along with realisic scenarios.
Originally by: Ranger 1 2: I wouldn't attempt to play the "I've been playing this game longer than you, and have more experience" epeen card, as you'd most likely lose on both counts.
I am less than 3 months away from my 6 years in eve aniversary with around 3k kills in all forms of pvp easily found/provable on modern KB's/BC ect, but a lot more kills on older KB's from the pre battle clinic era....so i highly doubt you are going to be much older as eve was still all shiny when i started playing pal.
Originally by: Ranger 1 You seem fixated on the Falcons role in medium to large scale gang warfare. You might consider that the Falcons role in engagements of this size are very limited even in its current state.
At least it has a role, at least for now, as it is heading for the scrap[ heap along with the others..
Originally by: Ranger 1 1: They are an eggshell, and in larger engagements there is a much higher probability that there will be significant firepower brought to bear on it even at extreme range. One or two Rohks getting a lock on your Falcon at 200km+ is going to ruin your day. There are tactics you can use, yes (decloak, jam, cloak until your jamming cycle finishes) but those same tactics are as effective at 100km as they are at 200km +.
If that is so (and it is not as they cannot operate well at 100km due to falloff along with a lot of other things you missed), but if it is you are saying that the nerf is pointless....
Originally by: Ranger 1 2: In those situations as a general rule a Scorpion was a much more viable selection. The proposed changes to the Scorp may change this, but then we have the tough little Rook to play around with now.
That tough little ROOK you are refering too has a jamming STR right now of 9 using racials when you do not fit SDA's (as they are getting nerfed as well) now include the 25% jam str nerf on top of that and it working in falloff........so maybe if you are facing a gang of noob ships or T1 frigs you may get a cycle off..
|
Carniflex
Caldari Fallout Research Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 18:51:00 -
[25]
While I was not on opinion that ECM was perfect I consider the current version of changes to be worse than current situation. I'm especially annoyed about proposed Scorpion change as in my opinion this will make the ship useless - like yeah - 'short range brawler' ... sure.
Around 140 km max range with the new signal amps and max skills. That is then outer edge of falloff as far as I can understand. What it does it effectively removes Scorpion as fleet platform leaving only Falcon as viable fleet ECM platform. It kinda seems ... wrong ... as in my opinion fleet warfare has always been playground of battleships. Removing battleship from that role and leaving a cruiser class hull in that role just seems wrong.
In 'short range' there is better ships to take out than Scorpion. Starting with e-war Raven and all the way to the Armageddons in gank setup.
In the end ofc it's not the end of world. I have been specialized in scorpion and ECM for long time already but characters of my age can fly a lot of different ships. There is something else out there and after short turmoil ECM will be buried and new best e-war shall emerge.
So in a nutsell - proposed changes suck.
|
Trathen
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 19:12:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Trathen on 25/03/2009 19:14:47 Chances are forum whines did not initiate this change. Believe it or not, CCP does actually have some game designers, and game designers know this regarding balance"
When everyone finds it necessary to bring as many of a certain type of ship everywhere, all the time, it probably needs a second look.
We're at a point where you judge which side is going to win based on Falcon count alone. We're talking about a ship that can completely shut down another ship (save self-activated modules) from out of combat range (You still need to point and damage them of course, provided their Falcons didn't jam you first). You're not a totally awesome player in a balanced ship if you've figured that out.
_ |
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 20:43:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Mrs Snowman complaining about people complaining means you suck even more than they do.
It is better to suck than to stink. Anyway, speaking of sucking ...
Whining is the sound of change and when stupidity gets knocked of its track. It is equal to the squeak of a door before its hinges get oiled. After all, the change will apply for every player of EVE. How can this be a problem?! Some n00bs, who were hiding in e-war, now learn how to fight - or how to die. This is good news in the world of EVE. -- If there is anything in your life you fear of losing, then keep your mouth shut once in a while. |
Al'Htaed
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 20:54:00 -
[28]
I have a Falcon alt that has maxed jamming, falcon skills and I support this change fully.
The range on Falcon was ridiculous. I was perma jamming anything at 240km with no fear of ever getting killed. Also I am really looking forward to the boost to Scorpions effectiveness. Scorpion should be able to achieve the range of other sniper battleships with it's ECM though.
|
GTC seller72
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 21:03:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Al'Htaed I have a Falcon alt that has maxed jamming, falcon skills and I support this change fully.
The range on Falcon was ridiculous. I was perma jamming anything at 240km with no fear of ever getting killed.
Can we has cheezz oops no i mean.. linkage to a KB with proofs or a name to check on BC pls...
|
Ranger 1
Amarr Dynaverse Corporation Vertigo Coalition
|
Posted - 2009.03.25 21:20:00 -
[30]
You can be as obtuse as you like, it doesn't change the fact that every single point I made still stands.
Especially the experience part.
===== Yeah, VC is back, and we have a bone to pick with you. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |