|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
   |
Posted - 2009.03.31 12:16:00 -
[1]
 Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Things
Some generic comments:
SDAs must be balanced such that not fitting them is a viable option. If their bonus to ECM strength and range is too good, then no-one will fit anything else, as is currently the case. I preferred the range-only bonus tbh, unless the dual bonus is weak - but even 10% to strength/range may still make it stupid to fit anything other than SDAs.
Scorpion should indeed be kept in the role of cheap disposable fleet BS - meaning effectiveness at range and rails.
Balancing the Falcon and Rook will be tricky - the covops cloak is immensely powerful. It's not enough to just give the Rook some missile DPS, the Rook will probably have to offer some significant ECM strength advantage (via raw ECM strength or ECM range) over a Falcon at a range where its missiles are still useful.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.03.31 12:32:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Alex Harumichi
Edited by: Alex Harumichi on 31/03/2009 12:23:24
Originally by: Gypsio III
SDAs must be balanced such that not fitting them is a viable option.
...
Balancing the Falcon and Rook will be tricky - the covops cloak is immensely powerful.
Both of these points are extremely important to the issue. I get the feeling that the devs don't quite understand just how critical the covops cloak is to the fact that the Falcon is so overpowered. The Rook needs to be much better in order for it to have a role.
Of the top of my head, the advantages of the Rook could be:
Much more DPS than Falcon at a range where it's useful (so needs missile velocity bonus).
More defence against tacklers (so 25/50 m3 of drones with 25 m3 bandwidth (e.g. Warriors and light ECM drones), whereas Falcon has no drone bay).
Faster/more agile/smaller sig.
Greater ECM strength/optimal/falloff bonus.
Yeah, there's a lot there, but I think that's the level of stuff necessary to counter the covops cloak. It really is that powerful. But the devil is, as always, in the detail.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.03.31 13:11:00 -
[3]
Thanks for the update.
But I'm still concerned that, even at 10% range/strength, SDAs are essential mods. And, as far as I can tell, the Falcon has the same strength and range bonuses as the Rook, making the Rook pointless. The Rook must have advantages in ECM range/strength to counter the covops cloak.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.03.31 17:20:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Gypsio III on 31/03/2009 17:21:08
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
The scorpion with max skills and a BZ-5 (caldari racial jammer) will have a optimal range of 72km and a Falloff range of 80km with a ECM strength of 7.875 without any other modules or rigs fitted.
Be VERY careful that you don't make it more effective to fit damps than ECM on a Fleet Scorpion.
Consider a max skilled Scorpion with ewar optimal rigs and 3x SDA. It will have ECM ~100 km optimal, 80 km falloff and ~10 strength. This means that it has a 25% chance to jam an opposing Apocalypse at 180 km.
Now consider a damper-Scorp, with the same ewar optimal rigs and RSD IIs. It has RSD optimal/falloff of 71 km and 91 km, giving a 50% hit chance with the RSDs on a target at 162 km, where the -42.5% lock range will have exactly the same effect as a successful jam cycle.
At 162 km, the RSD Scorp will have a ~50% "jam" chance, whereas the ECM Scorp will have a ~33% chance.
At 200 km, the RSD Scorp will have a ~25% "jam" chance, whereas the ECM Scorp will have a ~17% chance.
This could be a real problem. Independent checking of the numbers would be appreciated!
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.04.01 13:18:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Baudolino
Falcon with damage and drones? Who comes up with this crap. Falcon is paper thin- it`s like the stealth bomber- if someone targets it- it`s dead.
Current Falcons are paper-thin because they have no tank fitted. It's quite straightforward to get over 30k EHP on a Falcon (while retaining 5x ECM), putting it at similar EHP levels to any another tanked force recon.
You can do it on a Rook as well, although you'll have no PG to fit any weapons afterwards. PG boost needed there.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.04.01 16:59:00 -
[6]
This is the tanked Falcon I made up:
Damage Control II
1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Amarr Navy Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
10MN MicroWarpdrive II
Large Shield Extender II
5x ECM
31,865 EHP. Using faction items is usually "cheating" in this sort of comparison, but AN EANMs are fairly cheap. It's 31,079 EHP with T2 EANM, so maybe not worth the ISK anyway. Rig slots free still. Speed 1100 m/s.
You could criticise this a dual tank. But it's a buffer tank - it doesn't matter where the EHP are, as long as the fit is sensible and the EHP satisfactory. Anyway, does having the DC make it a triple-tank? And spreading the EHP between shield and armour (and structure) avoids resist holes.
In comparison, an Arazu with 1600 plate, DC and dual Navy EANM has 32,040 EHP (30,025 EHP with T2 EANMs) - essentially the same as the Falcon.
Obviously this is a comparison of armour tanks. Whether that's meaningful depends on whether people will prefer to armour- or shield tank the future Falcon, which will probably depend on tactics and the balance between SDAs and rigs. A shielded Falcon with DC, LSE and overheated Inv has 21,302 EHP, for comparison.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.04.01 17:17:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Polinus
You realize that rapier has the signature of a Battleship?
I don't. I realise that it has a 200 m sig with skills trained and MWD off, but that's not BS-sized. Or even BC-sized.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.04.02 14:50:00 -
[8]
When I get on Sisi later I'll have a look at the balance between damper-Scorp and ECM Scorp at fleet ranges again. Carnifex seems to think that ECM Scorp is sensible again though.
But my other concern still seems to be valid. What is the motivation to fly a Rook over a Falcon? Both seem to have the same ECM range and strength. As an ECM pilot, your main concern is ECM, not DPS, and so the superior DPS of the Rook is fairly inconsequential, particularly given the immense tactical utility of the covops cloak.
I still can't help but think that the Rook should get ECM that is slightly stronger or longer-ranged than the Falcon to make up for the immensely powerful covops cloak.
Also, sufficient PG for the Rook to fit a rack of HMLs, MWD and 1600 plate would be necessary - otherwise the first thing to go is the HMLs, leaving you with no DPS advantage over the Falcon anyway.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 15:37:00 -
[9]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Scorpion
we changed the bonus back to 20% ECM optimal range per level. Still means a range reduction due to the base jammer stat changes but will give you more ECM accuracy at longer range.
Oooh nice. I don't think that the current TQ fleet Scorp is regarded as overpowered, so it would be good to see it not hit too hard here.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.04.06 13:15:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Dasalt Istgut
These ships are now broken and useless. I was getting sick of falcons but ffs if you're going to put them in Arazu disruptor range at least let them fit a goddamn tank.
It's trivial to get a Falcon to the same EHP as an Arazu. Next. 
|
|
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.04.07 19:18:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Gypsio III on 07/04/2009 19:25:57
RSD are still better on Fleet Scorp than ECM.
Max skills assumed. ECM Scorp has 2x ewar optimal rigs, 1x ecm strength rig and 3x SDA. Gives ECM optimal of 147 km, falloff of 52.5 km and strength of 9.4. To jam SS 20 Apoc at:
150 km: 48%
175 km: 39%
200 km: 24%
225 km: 11%
RSD Scorp has 3x ewar optimal rigs. To get successful damp hit at:
150 km: 60%
175 km: 40%
200 km: 25%
225 km: 14%
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.04.11 10:49:00 -
[12]
Sisi Scorpion:
Caldari Battleship Skill Bonus:
15% bonus to ECM Target Jammer strength per level
10% bonus to ECM Target Jammer optimal and falloff range per level
A couple of pages ago I pointed out that, at fleet ranges, a Scorp was better off fitting RSD. Now its range has been nerfed. Lolz.
RIP Fleet ECM Scorp. CCP, if you don't want Scorps to be viable in sniper fleets, at least gives a close-range brawler.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.04.13 10:13:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Spartan dax
That's not how fallof works. It would be better if the ECM modules strength dropped as it went further into falloff but it doesn't work like that. If you have 6 ECM's only 3 will typically work while in one falloff and they will do so at full strength.
Heh. And what, exactly would the difference be? (Hint: none.)
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.04.13 12:29:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Spartan dax
Gypsio you surprise me. OFC there would be a difference with a strength reduction falloff instead of module reduction. Different jamming priorities for starters, more support less BS. The support would have better chances of not getting jammed etc etc.
Your supposition holds true if we assume Scorps will continue with their current behavior of jamming BS's though. But that's an assumption I'm not willing to make or concede to.
Hmmm. Maybe I misunderstood you? I was saying that there's no difference in the to-jam chance between ECM that, in falloff, has a ôto-hitö chance (as currently is the case) and ECM that always hits in falloff, but with appropriately reduced jam strength.
E.g. Attempting to jam a SS 20 target with a Strength 8 jammer at one-falloff range. Currently, we get a 50% ôto-hitö roll, followed by the 40% ôto-jamö roll, giving a 20% jam chance. If we altered mechanics such that ECM always ôhitö in falloff, but with a reduced strength, then weÆd get a 100% ôto-hitö chance, but jammer strength would have been halved to 4, giving a 20% ôto-jamö chance û the same as under current mechanics.
But I may have misread your post and now am blathering on about something completely irrelevant. 
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.04.13 15:55:00 -
[15]
Well, maybe I'm being thick, but I'm still not seeing the difference between a 50% to-hit module chance, and a 100% to-hit chance with halved jam strength.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.04.14 15:41:00 -
[16]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Hi all, a very quick update on the scorpion:
The ECM Optimal and falloff bonus has been increased to 20% per level.
This is a small boost upon what is currently there to allow its operation jamming range to be more effective.
Nice one. This should ensure that it's more sensible to fit ECM on a Fleet Scorp, rather than RSD.
Although I can't help but think that maybe RSD should be the ewar to use at fleet ranges, with ECM for use at closer ranges. That would push the Scorp into the brawler role initially discussed...
|
|
|
| |
|