EVE Search - Sticky:[Rubicon] Electronic Attack Ships

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Rubicon] Electronic Attack Ships

» 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 .. 18 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 12 post(s)
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 403	Posted - 2013.10.08 16:07:00 - [301] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: I also don't think the tackling ranges are a problem. Killing support has gotten substantially easier over the last couple years and tackling has gotten harder as a result. I think having some support ships around that are difficult to fly well, have a different style than recons but provide some similar functions seems really positive for gangs of many sizes. Eh. For some ships, perhaps. Try killing kiting tackle with a drone ship. My 2 DDA dragoon's warriors do 178 dps and go 7875m/s, but I wouldn't count on them to trouble anything but an untanked T1 attack frigate. It amuses me when people think unbonused warriors actually do anything. Also, skirmish links haven't really gotten better, but they've gotten more prevalent, and they just throw everything off.
Kahega Amielden Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 972	Posted - 2013.10.08 16:07:00 - [302] - Quote Quote: http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/65063/1/WarpSpeedAfter.jpg And yea, some of the EAF's are bad at dealing with drones.. but most aren't really unless we are talking bonused lights here. Also controlling your drones tends to be hard when jammed/damped. Ohh and then of course there is a ton of frigates, destroyers and cruisers that don't have aflight of lights. What are you getting at with the image? It shows exactly what I said. AFs, bombers, and EAFs are 6.75/sec. Frigates are 6. Dessies are 5.25. T1 cruisers are 3. Most combat cruisers have a flight of lights. Only a few, (mostly ones that already have no problems dealing with frigates for other reasons), lack it. EAFs won't die instantly to a flight of drones but they certainly won't be tanking them for that long.. EAFs aren't fast, tanky, or damage-y enough to deal with them.
ArmyOfMe Teddybears. Nocturnal Legion 179	Posted - 2013.10.08 16:11:00 - [303] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: It seems to me like those of you that are most concerned are players who really dislike ewar as a system, and therefor dislike these ships. I'm not sure anything but keeping these nerfed into the ground is going to sound good to you, and I understand that as a player who struggled with ewar a lot. I also don't think the tackling ranges are a problem. Killing support has gotten substantially easier over the last couple years and tackling has gotten harder as a result. Do I hate ew? oh hell yes i do, but ive learned to live with it. Learning to live with loads more of it as a pirate on the other hand will be impossible.. And how in the world can you say tackling has become harder over the years? Are we even playing the same game? All you have done is make it harder and harder for big ships to roam solo or in small gangs in low sec. The Web nerf and the ******** boost to scrams made sure that nobody can fly a battleship solo in low sec ever again. And yet here you are claiming that tackling has become harder.
Sven Viko VIkolander Stay Frosty. 88	Posted - 2013.10.08 16:12:00 - [304] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: I also don't think the tackling ranges are a problem. Killing support has gotten substantially easier over the last couple years and tackling has gotten harder as a result. I think having some support ships around that are difficult to fly well, have a different style than recons but provide some similar functions seems really positive for gangs of many sizes. This is absolutely right, and it is going to get worse with the introduction of Heavy RMLs which are anti-support/tackle on beast mode. I have the opposite worry as many in this thread, then--frig platforms are increasingly being pushed into isolated roles, such as frig v frig FW and RVB (and the latter is mainly for whoring on larger kills without taking an isk hit for many non-newbies). So, I'm worried the only time we will see EAFs are in limited FW engagements, and in cloaky dishonor "1v1s" (e.g. a step up from cloaky griffins). Make frig platforms harder to hit by larger, non-dedicated ships, and then we might see EAFs actually used.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 403	Posted - 2013.10.08 16:13:00 - [305] - Quote Kahega Amielden wrote: EAFs won't die instantly to a flight of drones but they certainly won't be tanking them for that long.. EAFs aren't fast, tanky, or damage-y enough to deal with them. Fortunately they can warp out and come back within about 10s.

CCP Rise C C P C C P Alliance 2966	Posted - 2013.10.08 16:18:00 - [306] - Quote My stance is definitely not "it's okay if this destroys the meta because we can change it after", it's that I don't think it will mess up the meta but if it did somehow I would be here to fix it. I talked with Fozzie a bit and we may be up for making some small changes to some of the range bonuses and maybe to their mass to make them a bit easier to catch. Still going to wait a little longer before committing to any changes. ps - this is a great way to start a post "Dear ******* christ on a stick." =D

Kahega Amielden Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 972	Posted - 2013.10.08 16:18:00 - [307] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: Kahega Amielden wrote: EAFs won't die instantly to a flight of drones but they certainly won't be tanking them for that long.. EAFs aren't fast, tanky, or damage-y enough to deal with them. Fortunately they can warp out and come back within about 10s. Assuming a 1 AU warp, per the figures given in the graph, it will take ~4s to align, 14s to complete warp, 4s to align back, and another 14s to land back on grid...So, out of the fight for 36s assuming perfect piloting and zero time to lock up and reapply ewar.
Harvey James Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 534	Posted - 2013.10.08 16:22:00 - [308] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: It seems to me like those of you that are most concerned are players who really dislike ewar as a system, and therefor dislike these ships. I'm not sure anything but keeping these nerfed into the ground is going to sound good to you, and I understand that as a player who struggled with ewar a lot. I don't feel convinced that they will be so good they will blot out the sun and no one will be able to have a fight, and I've said if that becomes a big issue we will make tweaks. I also don't think the tackling ranges are a problem. Killing support has gotten substantially easier over the last couple years and tackling has gotten harder as a result. I think having some support ships around that are difficult to fly well, have a different style than recons but provide some similar functions seems really positive for gangs of many sizes. One thing I can agree about is that it's important for them to be close enough to be countered and the extreme lock range might put that at risk. That said, their lock range is almost the same as the t1 disruption frigs which are faster and have smaller sig, and no one is saying t1 disruption frigs are impossible to deal with. I'll make sure we talk about this internally some before they ship and if others feel concerned we can tune the ewar or lock ranges down a bit. actually as far as i can tell there have been only a few posts with the i hate e-war so i want it nerfed to the ground... that sounds like a shrug off and a dismissal of our views like .. you hate ecm so you're opinion will be discounted ... a little disrespectful really.. personally i own a curse and rapier and have always wanted EAF's to be useful for a small gang great for young pilots to see if they like them before committing to the long stretch that recons are and a cheap counter to recons themselves mainly the quicker lock time kitsune vs falcon etc... but have always felt they lacked somewhat but not in the e-war department ... more the flying paper ship theme that limits inties and SB usefulness in high sec wars/ low sec roams. Recons should have a range advantage over EAF's but even recons need range nerfs really 100km webs are too much and too easy too achieve .. 60km plus points.. its too hard for small mobile gangs to remain even vaguely mobile enough in a fight it just ends up in brawls or not getting fights in the first place.. its a shame after cruisers have been made useful to then bring these changes out just encourages more bc brawls or no fights at all. Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please.
Garviel Tarrant Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 1493	Posted - 2013.10.08 16:26:00 - [309] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: My stance is definitely not "it's okay if this destroys the meta because we can change it after", it's that I don't think it will mess up the meta but if it did somehow I would be here to fix it. I talked with Fozzie a bit and we may be up for making some small changes to some of the range bonuses and maybe to their mass to make them a bit easier to catch. Still going to wait a little longer before committing to any changes. ps - this is a great way to start a post "Dear ******* christ on a stick." =D I get annoyed quickly when something threatens my terrible "elite frig-scrub pvp" <.< And to whoever i was taking to about warp speed before The warp speeds of EAF's in relation to other frigates is entirely irrelevant, the fact is that they will land on you faster than you can react to in most cases. BYDI recruitment closed-ish
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 404	Posted - 2013.10.08 16:30:00 - [310] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: My stance is definitely not "it's okay if this destroys the meta because we can change it after", it's that I don't think it will mess up the meta but if it did somehow I would be here to fix it. I talked with Fozzie a bit and we may be up for making some small changes to some of the range bonuses and maybe to their mass to make them a bit easier to catch. Still going to wait a little longer before committing to any changes. ps - this is a great way to start a post "Dear ******* christ on a stick." =D If you can convince me that recons aren't totally broken, maybe I'll believe you that these proposed EAFs aren't totally broken as well.


CCP Rise C C P C C P Alliance 2966	Posted - 2013.10.08 16:35:00 - [311] - Quote Can you convince me that they are? The most popular Recon sees less airtime than a Stabber. I'm sure that won't sound sufficient but I'm not sure how it could be proven. Quote: that sounds like a shrug off and a dismissal of our views like I feel like acknowledging this type of thing may not be smart but if it isn't obvious from my interaction here on the forums I can say it very straight forwardly - I would never intentionally dismiss the input of players, no matter how much I might disagree.

Garviel Tarrant Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 1493	Posted - 2013.10.08 16:37:00 - [312] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Can you convince me that they are? The most popular Recon sees less airtime than a Stabber. I'm sure that won't sound sufficient but I'm not sure how it could be proven. Quote: that sounds like a shrug off and a dismissal of our views like I feel like acknowledging this type of thing may not be smart but if it isn't obvious from my interaction here on the forums I can say it very straight forwardly - I would never intentionally dismiss the input of players, no matter how much I might disagree. Isn't that just because t3's do the same thing with commandship tanks? BYDI recruitment closed-ish
Harvey James Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 534	Posted - 2013.10.08 16:48:00 - [313] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Can you convince me that they are? The most popular Recon sees less airtime than a Stabber. I'm sure that won't sound sufficient but I'm not sure how it could be proven. Quote: that sounds like a shrug off and a dismissal of our views like I feel like acknowledging this type of thing may not be smart but if it isn't obvious from my interaction here on the forums I can say it very straight forwardly - I would never intentionally dismiss the input of players, no matter how much I might disagree. im sure you don't do it intentionally you listen more than the rest of the devs do put together... but it still happens as evidenced by this thread and the overwhelming response of you have took the wrong approach even by people who use recons like myself who are even saying recons are OP and like the other post we are talking about the secondary e-war mainly .. Please listen to us on this we want EAF to be more survivable than T1 e-war frigs but focused on the shorter secondary e-war which includes more survivability and some actual attack would be nice think mini recons in every sense of the word .. frigs shouldn't be range based they are meant to be short range... Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please.
ArmyOfMe Teddybears. Nocturnal Legion 179	Posted - 2013.10.08 16:49:00 - [314] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Can you convince me that they are? The most popular Recon sees less airtime than a Stabber. I'm sure that won't sound sufficient but I'm not sure how it could be proven. 1. Stabber has less skill reqs then a recon 2. I think more ppl fly t3's with the ew subs these days.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 404	Posted - 2013.10.08 16:53:00 - [315] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Can you convince me that they are? The most popular Recon sees less airtime than a Stabber. I'm sure that won't sound sufficient but I'm not sure how it could be proven. Covops cloaks, 58km disruptor range, 52km web range, bonused ecm? I don't know where to start, can someone help me out.
Michael Harari Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED 684	Posted - 2013.10.08 17:05:00 - [316] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Can you convince me that they are? The most popular Recon sees less airtime than a Stabber. I'm sure that won't sound sufficient but I'm not sure how it could be proven. I bet you pre-nerf titans also saw less airtime than pre-buff stabber. Its not a good comparison, and doesnt mean titans hitting cruisers wasnt overpowered. Rise, I know you have done your share of small gang pvp. In how many situations is a recon that has just warped in or decloaked not called immediate primary? Do you think this is done because recons are more or less threatening than every other ship on the field? The comms in a typical engagement will be like "ok, raven is primary, put dps on raven, someone get me point" "point raven" "ok its going down, next primary will be that thorax burning in" "rapier!" "rapier primary all dps on rapier" And the decision to disenage a small gang? "Ok they have 2 falcons 2 scimis and a huginn, i think its time to leave" not "ok guys they have too many tempests, time to go home"
Altrue Exploration Frontier inc 619	Posted - 2013.10.08 17:09:00 - [317] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Can you convince me that they are? The most popular Recon sees less airtime than a Stabber. I'm sure that won't sound sufficient but I'm not sure how it could be proven. Quote: that sounds like a shrug off and a dismissal of our views like I feel like acknowledging this type of thing may not be smart but if it isn't obvious from my interaction here on the forums I can say it very straight forwardly - I would never intentionally dismiss the input of players, no matter how much I might disagree. Eventually if there is a problem, it lies within ECM mechanics but Fozzie has already acknowledged that. E-war ships are like CC in every game : They are annoying by nature (SWTOR even introduced this famous immunity bar to controls), but a crucial part of game mechanics. G££ <= Me

CCP Rise C C P C C P Alliance 2968	Posted - 2013.10.08 17:09:00 - [318] - Quote I can change Stabber to Cerberus and it's still true, and training time is similar. I'm not saying this is a perfect way of identifying power, just saying that screaming recons are OP isn't either and I'm not sure how we're going to get anywhere.

Michael Harari Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED 684	Posted - 2013.10.08 17:15:00 - [319] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: I can change Stabber to Cerberus and it's still true, and training time is similar. I'm not saying this is a perfect way of identifying power, just saying that screaming recons are OP isn't either and I'm not sure how we're going to get anywhere. If they are not already the most dangerous ship in the game (without frigate mobility), why are they almost always primary for any small gang? Ive seen gangs drop webs on a 2 bil tengu in order to clear a rapier off the field faster, and pretty much any small gang would do the same. A single uncontrolled recon kills entire gangs.
ArmyOfMe Teddybears. Nocturnal Legion 179	Posted - 2013.10.08 17:16:00 - [320] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: I can change Stabber to Cerberus and it's still true, and training time is similar. I'm not saying this is a perfect way of identifying power, just saying that screaming recons are OP isn't either and I'm not sure how we're going to get anywhere. and yet once again you neglected to look at t3 ew stats

Roime Quantum Cats Syndicate Samurai Pizza Cats 3577	Posted - 2013.10.08 17:24:00 - [321] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: I can change Stabber to Cerberus and it's still true, and training time is similar. I'm not saying this is a perfect way of identifying power, just saying that screaming recons are OP isn't either and I'm not sure how we're going to get anywhere. Reasons recons aren't as OP or popular as the suggested EAFs: 1) price 2) SP 3) mobility 4) sig 5) all of the above in relation to tank, or rather the lack of it EAFs are just better in all these aspects except the last one, but their mobility combined with the long range EWAR negates the need for any sort of tank, and on top of that they have frigate scan res. Notify-á-á You cannot do that while warping.
Michael Harari Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED 684	Posted - 2013.10.08 17:30:00 - [322] - Quote fwiw, my idea for the EAFs is to turn them into massively toned down versions of the AT frigates. Basically strip out the resist bonuses, a gun, a tank slot and a damage bonus or something, and give them a good chunk of mass.
Bouh Revetoile TIPIAKS 386	Posted - 2013.10.08 17:36:00 - [323] - Quote Michael Harari wrote: If they are not already the most dangerous ship in the game (without frigate mobility), why are they almost always primary for any small gang? Ive seen gangs drop webs on a 2 bil tengu in order to clear a rapier off the field faster, and pretty much any small gang would do the same. A single uncontrolled recon kills entire gangs. Ive been in fights where the entire engagement is us testing the tank of a huginn with reps on it, deciding we cant break it before we are all dead, and just warp out after like 20s. They are primaried because they are less resilient than logistic ships, but exactly like logi they are forces multipliers, hence valuable targets. Also, it's rather pointless to primary a ship when the ennemy have dozens of them whereas EWAR ships are most of the time in very limited numbers ; in fact, they are most of the time the most limited number of ship in a fleet. And in fact, the "single uncontrolled recon" never kills gangs by itself, he only allows his buddies to do so. Maybe you would prefer a game were ships can't help eachother without killing the ennemy faster ? I guess this is a secret dream for a lot of solo-pvper considering how EWAR will ruin their day.
Zarnak Wulf In Exile. Imperial Outlaws. 1369	Posted - 2013.10.08 17:41:00 - [324] - Quote Any e-war range taken away from these ships needs to be given back in the form of hit points, signature radius, speed, or even DPS. The first iteration of EAS was done in the Nano age and balanced around nano age speeds. As such the nano nerf in 2009 killed them. It bothers me that we are looking at a future T3 rebalance and OGB removal and yet are trying to balance these ships around links. It reeks of d+¬j+á vu. There has to be a base that is functional. 20km webs on the Hyena, for example, doesn't cut it. You are trying to kite in the 15-20km range with a small tank and significant signature radius. The ship is too close to scram range. And many ships will destroy it just by looking at it.
Garviel Tarrant Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 1496	Posted - 2013.10.08 17:49:00 - [325] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: I can change Stabber to Cerberus and it's still true, and training time is similar. I'm not saying this is a perfect way of identifying power, just saying that screaming recons are OP isn't either and I'm not sure how we're going to get anywhere. Recons are force multipliers.. You can't expect them to be used in the same quantity as DPS Don't quote meaningless metrics Also you are still ignoring the fact that recon metrics will be ****** over by the fact that t3's do the same thing as recons. Just.. In general.. Metrics are not good for anything but slight reference. BYDI recruitment closed-ish
SMT008 SnaiLs aNd FroGs Verge of Collapse 687	Posted - 2013.10.08 18:05:00 - [326] - Quote Roime wrote: Reasons recons aren't as OP or popular as the suggested EAFs: 1) price 2) SP 3) mobility 4) sig 5) all of the above in relation to tank, or rather the lack of it EAFs are just better in all these aspects except the last one, but their mobility combined with the long range EWAR negates the need for any sort of tank, and on top of that they have frigate scan res. 1) Price doesn't count much. If something is powerful, I'll buy it. 2) SP, seriously ? I mean, the guy who's got Recon V in my gang gets to fly the recon and we all try to fly the ship we have the most skills for. Simple as that. SP does counts but not really all that much. We're not talking about T2 BS/Caps. 3) Mobility, yes indeed, that counts a lot. 4) Sig counts too, that's for sure. But everyone seems to forget that not everyone flies 10MN AB, linked and snaked Hyenas. The HYDRA guy truthfully points out that Hyenas can get ridiculous if you add the proper amount of gear on it. That's true. Let me just tell you something. The Hyena is the EAS that has the lowest signature radius thanks to its bonus. With a MSE and 2 shield rigs, it's still at 285m. All the other EAS have more than that. The Keres has 300m for example. Is that REALLY small ? No it's not. It's DEFINETLY not "Interceptor" small. Of course it's not as big as a Rapier, but don't make it sound like nothing can hit them. 5) The tank on the EAFs is RIDICULOUSLY low. It's almost interceptor-low. None of them exceed 6.5k EHP with regular fits (ie with T2 tank without bonuses, we're not talking about 3xMSE + Tengu boost tanks). Which means that an inty like a Crusader or any somewhat long-range platform can kill them in a few shots. Unless, of course, you're really outnumbered and neither you nor your fleetmates can shake off the EAFs ewar in time. Are EAFs powerful ? I think so. Are they unbeatable ? Not at all.
Michael Harari Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED 684	Posted - 2013.10.08 18:08:00 - [327] - Quote SMT008 wrote: 5) The tank on the EAFs is RIDICULOUSLY low. It's almost interceptor-low. None of them exceed 6.5k EHP with regular fits (ie with T2 tank without bonuses, we're not talking about 3xMSE + Tengu boost tanks). Which means that an inty like a Crusader or any somewhat long-range platform can kill them in a few shots. What is signature and tracking? You can get a hyena to the point that a tracking bonused frigate with a web still has trouble hitting it. And that hyena can have an MSE and a masb.
Michael Harari Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED 684	Posted - 2013.10.08 18:17:00 - [328] - Quote Rise, if you are insistent on keeping the EAFs as they are, at the very least they should have nerfs to their fitting, mass and lock range. The fits im mentioning just shouldnt be possible. Just like interceptors need a sebo to make use of a linked, faction point, the EAFs should need lock range mods to make sure of linked faction webs and points.
Zarnak Wulf In Exile. Imperial Outlaws. 1369	Posted - 2013.10.08 18:41:00 - [329] - Quote Michael Harari wrote: SMT008 wrote: 5) The tank on the EAFs is RIDICULOUSLY low. It's almost interceptor-low. None of them exceed 6.5k EHP with regular fits (ie with T2 tank without bonuses, we're not talking about 3xMSE + Tengu boost tanks). Which means that an inty like a Crusader or any somewhat long-range platform can kill them in a few shots. What is signature and tracking? You can get a hyena to the point that a tracking bonused frigate with a web still has trouble hitting it. And that hyena can have an MSE and a masb. Good argument for nerfing links Moar. Keeping EAS gimped? Not so much.
Vladimir Norkoff Income Redistribution Service 269	Posted - 2013.10.08 19:17:00 - [330] - Quote Garviel Tarrant wrote: Just.. In general.. Metrics are not good for anything but slight reference. What should they use instead? Gut instinct? Personal preferences? Come on man. Metrics are useful. Stop knee-jerking just because your playstyle is being threatened.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: 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.