EVE Search - Amarr Recon

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Amarr Recon - Current state

» 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 40 .. 40 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Alekseyev Karrde Noir.	Posted - 2008.04.11 13:38:00 - [781] I think the real tragedy is these should be good, cool, useful, etc ships by all rights. But they're just wastes at the moment because they are underpowered, expensive, and fragile. Zombie Apocalypse Guitar-Wielding Superteam
Wardeneo Gallente	Posted - 2008.04.11 13:52:00 - [782] this thread got big eh! wardeneo If brute force doesn't work..... your not using enough :)
Madla Mafia The Dead Man's Hand	Posted - 2008.04.11 14:05:00 - [783] And is still going, haven't seen a fix yet. ------------------------------------------ Amarr - getting screwed since 2005.
PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik Gallente aurorae pacificas	Posted - 2008.04.11 14:45:00 - [784] I dont fly the amarr recons and I know im weighing in quite late in this thread but the problems discussed also effect the Gallente recons with the damp nerf, particularly the arazu. In saying that, ive fought quite a few curse's in both TQ and sisi. The nano/neut setup is still quite viable, and tbh is very effective. The problem I see is that this is THE ONLY viable setup ive seen for this ship. I think both the amarr and gallentee recons need to be reassessed. The Caldari and Minnie recons are both fine ships (I also fly falcons and rooks often) so I dont think they need any further buffs, but it would be nice to see the lach's and curse starting to refill specialist roles in small and med sized gangs. I dont think the answer is complete immunity to the nos nerf but I really cant provide an alternative to that atm. Aussie TZ pvp corp AuPac is recruiting
Brother Welcome Amarr Icarus' Wings Brutally Clever Empire	Posted - 2008.04.11 14:52:00 - [785] Edited by: Brother Welcome on 11/04/2008 14:56:25 Originally by: PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik I dont think the answer is complete immunity to the nos nerf but I really cant provide an alternative to that atm. Now that I've driven a Curse (flown one, whatever) a bit, my feeling is that the Nos nerf is a poor fix. The first issue I have with Nos in general is that you get very little feedback and nothing to indicate what you are doing to your opponent. Guns at least creep the little red bar. My second issue is that having to run your cap close to zero so your Noses work means you have to have a booster or risk the odd moment sitting dead in space. With the Curse being a fragile sort of ship, those dead moments can (as I discovered) prove fatal. Now the issue with a booster is that they're heavy and make the Curse a difficult fit. It's kind of hard to get your head around the idea that a ship set up for sucking cap from its opponent must fit a cap booster! I'm not arguing for or against Noses needing nerfing, but only the implementation. It's too dicey. It might be fixed by giving feedback, perhaps a little green light when the unit is usefully sucking or perhaps a cap bar for the enemy ship... -vk
Depp Knight Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.04.12 01:01:00 - [786] Originally by: Brother Welcome Edited by: Brother Welcome on 11/04/2008 15:00:06 Edited by: Brother Welcome on 11/04/2008 14:56:25 Originally by: PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik I dont think the answer is complete immunity to the nos nerf but I really cant provide an alternative to that atm. Now the issue with a booster is that they're heavy and make the Curse a difficult fit. It's kind of hard to get your head around the idea that a ship set up for sucking cap from its opponent must fit a cap booster! Exactly
Lil Mule	Posted - 2008.04.12 01:44:00 - [787] Edited by: Lil Mule on 19/03/2008 17:57:47 I agree the curse does need some love, it is partially broken. My curse can perma run its 2 Neuts and the MWD doing 2.9 KM/s. This isnt super fast, and I could use some additional sp's in the navigation department so Im not going to blame that on the ship. In order to get it to run the 2 Neuts and MWD perma (1 Medium NOS and 2 Heavy Missile launchers round out my high's), I do have to put in 3 Cap recharger 2's in the Mids. This effectively limits any additional Ewar such as web or scram in the mids. This means that this ship has to team up with others in order to have any chance at killing anything. IMO it should run just fine with 2 Cap Recharger II's in the mids, instead of 3. Sure I could but in 2 NOS's in the high to balance out the 2 Neuts, but the problem with that is as other posters have indicated, it creates a situation where when your opponent is out of CAP, so are you. What good is that? The point of the weapon shouldnt be to drain my cap and yours too making us both crippled, that isnt a weapon. Thats like designing a gun that shoots my ship as well as shooting the opponent at the same time. Throttling the Neut at the end to ensure that you have some cap to finish off your opponent also isnt feasible. There is no indicator, its all guestimate as to whether your Neut module is working. Other Ewar mods get an indication that they are working, and what the status of the enemy is, but Neutralizers dont. Thats a second handi-cap against the curse. The ship isnt entirely broken, its just...incapacitated. Its like a person missing both of their legs. In this analogy, I currently have mine running a sweet electric wheelchair setup, and ya its sure fun to do some wheelies in it, but lets face it, its not as cool as having 2 legs. ----------------------------------------------- People enjoy flying Amarr for the same reason they like being tied up in leather, whipped and called names
Alekseyev Karrde Noir.	Posted - 2008.04.12 01:49:00 - [788] One possibility could be diverging the bonus for neuts and NOS. For NOS, decrease the amount bonus or scrap it. For neuts, change bonus from amount to activation cost. For both, a duration bonus. That way it would be easier to manage the neutralizers and the nos would suck more frequently to prevent long gaps at near 0 cap. Wouldnt fix the one-viable-set-up problem but it would be something. Zombie Apocalypse Guitar-Wielding Superteam
Lili Lu Victory Not Vengeance	Posted - 2008.04.12 04:23:00 - [789] Originally by: Depp Knight Trying to fit the curse. Was flying a good setup but still didnt like it. Wasnt bringing enough to the gang. But it got me thinking. People who say the curse isnt broken is totally wrong. Yes it can still be dangerous but you name another recon that has to fit a cap injector or cap battery so it can be flown, and I will agree with you. It will still lose in a cap war. Nos nerf sucks. And on top of that I would like to say that the nos nerf didnt need to happen. People who complain for the nerf were not whining about nos in general but Heavy nos. You didnt hear. 'omg med nos so overpowered.' Ok thats the end of my rant. Yes, it all goes back to the nos nerf. The stupidest solution was what CCP chose. Why couldn't they have created limited nos hardpoints instead. Or more precisely, only amarr recons could have fit more than one (or maybe two) nos. This would have got rid of the nos domi, etc, and allowed the amarr recons to actually engage in cap warfare with battleships. But but it would have kept them too powerful . . . blah blah. If you want to see overpowered recons look no further than what Caldari recons have become with that recent unneeded over the top ecm re-buff. One curse or pilgrim might have capped out one battleship, but Caldari recons can neuter/remove MULTIPLE battleships from a fight and at extreme range. I still think the Pilgrim should have a range bonus instead of an amount bonus, and with other ships limited to one energy emission module hardpoint the pilgrim would still be viable with range instead of amount. Nosferatu is now a rediculous mod. Energy "Vampire" my a**. What self-respecting vampire would stop sucking when his blood amount equalled his victim's. CCP, your solution "sucked"
Depp Knight Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.04.12 05:53:00 - [790] The problem with the range bonus over the amount bonus is the pilgrim wont be able to nuke anyoneÆs cap. Another option would be scripts. Remove large and small nos/neuts from the game, and only have 1 size, and increase their amount drain for both. The nos should have a range of 12km standard, neuts the range of 24km. For nos insert two scripts; range script at the cost of amount drained, and amount script at the cost of range. For neuts insert two scripts; cap reduction script at the cost of amount drained, and amount script at the cost of cap and range. Just an estimate. Neglecting nos nerf. Best named Nos. 175pg, 25 cpu. 12 sec cycle time. Nos standard. 80 cap drained 12km range Range scrip. 40 cap drained 24km range Amount. 160 cap drained 6 km range Best Named. Neuts 200pg, 25 cpu, 12 sec cycle time. Neuts standard. 250 cap drained, 24km range, 200 cap usage Cap Script. 125 cap drained, 24km range, 50 cap usage. Amount. 750 cap drained, 6km range, 600 cap usage. The idea is that there is only one size. Some may disagree but cap warfare is ew. Without cap the target cannot do much. It disables their abilities. So in saying that, have one size but add scripts. The nos 80 cap drain without nos nerf maybe to steep but remember its only 12km with a 12 sec cycle time. Not the 24km, 120 cap drained for heavy nos. For neuts, it still be recognised as the offensive cap warfare module. The range bonus over nos and amount drained is evident of that. The downside is cap usage and pg. (Ok this may not effect bs or capitals however Bs should be more potent.) This will allow cap ships and bs to still be able to defend themselves from support. Lower the range at 6km and you can seriously do some dmg to hostiles capacitor. This will be handy for capital warfare, (if you wish to get in web/smartbomb range), or for close range BS. This isnÆt ideal for standard capitals or bs, but just an option. The cap reduction cost is idle for cruisers. For nos itÆs not ideal for fleet BSÆs or capitals. The 12km range is evident of that, and the range script is pointless unless you want to drain 40 cap with 12sec cycle time. If a bs wishes to use nos it would be best advised to use the amount script. Get in close under 6km. A bs would be better off fitting neuts, as it only drains a small amount of cap from its huge capacitor with a much better range on the module. So Nos is for mission runners and cruisers, with the flexibility to choose your range. A cruiser might want to get in close and fuel its tank, or he might be speed fitted so it increases the range and fuel its mwd. The curse would become viable in fleet battles, being able to neut at around 75km. As for the sentinel. Take away the range bonus and give it pg/cpu bonus for fitting neuts and nos. Now obviously itÆs a bit late to nuke the nos nerf that so many people love and add a simular idea to this. But its fun to come up with interesting ideas. These numbers are just estimates. Comments?
Lili Lu Victory Not Vengeance	Posted - 2008.04.12 13:52:00 - [791] Originally by: Depp Knight elegant suggestions Excellent suggestions, and yeah the numbers could be tweaked. However, that alone might put us back to nos domis. But combining that solution with limited nos/neut hardpoints (or possibly energy emission hardpoints) for all ships might fix the whole messed up situation. Obviously amarr recons (and if energy emission - caldari/amarr logistics) would have the ability to fit all or almost all high slots with them. The sentinel would still be sort of distant cousin to the caldari EAF, but frankly they all are pretty weak except the caldari one because the range and effectiveness of ecm is so much more powerful than the other ew types. If they fix amarr recons thru something like this we shouldn't forget what they've done with the extreme damp nerf to the gallente recons. But that is another thread, amarr's been waiting longer.
Angelonico Series of Tubes	Posted - 2008.04.13 07:06:00 - [792] Bumping this because the pilgrim is still ******* garbage. Pick a suggestion. ANY SUGGESTION. Just make the damn ship flyable. Thanks :)
Hydrogen Art of War	Posted - 2008.04.13 11:41:00 - [793] Just someone suggest on why CCP does not acknowledge (dev blog) or post in here for clarification? Alternatives: 1. They know its bad but are not willing to do it since they believe it would have a huge impact on other stuff too. 2. Someone in CCP has a "Super-Uber" grand plan, which will solve it automatically thus they dont do anything. Only that grand plan got delayed by more than a year... Well go figure... 3. They did some testing and cant see a problem. 4. One CCP member posted on an alt in here for clarification but got flamed away due to his lack of knowledge (I suspect several posters in here). 5. They got no clue. 1,2,3,4 or 5 - what is it? __ - click here -
Kingwood Amarr The Greater Goon GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.04.13 12:59:00 - [794] Edited by: Kingwood on 13/04/2008 13:00:22 Would increasing the cap recharge of the Pilgrim (and Curse) to simulate at least 1 medium bonused NOS running be a good idea? I'm still trying to find a valid solo setup for my Pilgrim, the ship's not impressing me at the moment. I'm still skilling for the Pilgrim (and by extension, the Curse; 30 days for Recon 5, yay), because I hope they will get a sensible boost soon. Knowing CCP's track record, I am probably betting on a dead and beaten horse.
Depp Knight Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.04.13 14:21:00 - [795] just cannot give up. There are some great ideas in this thread and some interesting ideas as well. I will say this again. Nos was not an issue, Heavy nos was though.
Dristra Amarr Shadows of the Dead Vae Victis.	Posted - 2008.04.13 15:24:00 - [796] At least the amarr recons are cheap :P Support the introduction of well thought out Amarr solutions! I believe rats should avoid you if you have high standing with them.
Brother Welcome Amarr Icarus' Wings Brutally Clever Empire	Posted - 2008.04.13 17:47:00 - [797] Edited by: Brother Welcome on 13/04/2008 17:47:30 Originally by: Depp Knight There are some great ideas in this thread and some interesting ideas as well. The OP was right in observing the Curse is short 100pg or so, but the issue is the Nos/Cap situation. Amarr recons fit their ewar in weapon slots, so what about that? What other ewar asks you to jam yourself before you jam your enemy? If we're giving up weapons for ewar, would it be a crime to give us a cap bar on our enemies so we know we're doing something? Fix Nos. If necessary make 'em like cov-op cloaks, or make 'em take turret slots to stop them being de rigeur on every fit. -vk
Alekseyev Karrde Noir. Tread Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.14 11:46:00 - [798] So against my better judgement, I gave the Curse another chance tonight. Lost to 2 Vagabonds. Yep. The Curse is too slow to compete in the nano world, too fragile to tank properly, not enough cap to deny the enemy cap without shutting itself down, and despite the patch the tracking disrupters still arnt enough to compensate for all of the other problems. It's really rather depressing... Zombie Apocalypse Guitar-Wielding Superteam
Depp Knight Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.04.14 12:29:00 - [799] Well in all honesty, you were facing two hacs. Ok yeh a falcon could flee but not kill them. Thats a different issue. Mainly ECM over any other ew.
Kingwood Amarr The Greater Goon GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.04.15 11:41:00 - [800] Have the devs even acknowledged this thread exists? All I know is CCP Zulu mentioning that "the curse is fine, the Pilgrim might need some love". If this love involves screwing every other ship in the game again (haha resist change), please don't. Please increase cap recharge rate of the Curse and Pilgrim, or give them a role bonus so that medium NOS works like before. And please, for the love of god, forget the idea to make the Pilgrim a gang ship. It's a solo roamer, not a damn gang ship.
Hydrogen Art of War	Posted - 2008.04.15 13:04:00 - [801] Originally by: Kingwood Have the devs even acknowledged this thread exists? All I know is CCP Zulu mentioning that "the curse is fine, the Pilgrim might need some love". <snip> Curse is Khanid and as such should be an armor tanker too. Yet again the Nano-Curse is considered the only viable setup. Or what do you think, when suddenly (a few month ago) a CCP employee stepped up and told us that Curse is fine? __ - click here -
Lyria Skydancer Amarr Home 0f Bored Occultists	Posted - 2008.04.15 13:05:00 - [802] I like this new sig Hydro. OT: Fix curse and pilgrim. YES curse also needs a fix. -------------------------------------- [Video]Skirmish Warfare II
Kingwood Amarr The Greater Goon GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.04.15 13:07:00 - [803] I don't agree with Zulu's assessment of the Curse, maybe you misunderstood me. Especially with the incoming nano nerf, you gotta wonder how much the price of the Curse will drop.
Brother Welcome Amarr Icarus' Wings Brutally Clever Empire	Posted - 2008.04.15 13:07:00 - [804] Originally by: Kingwood Please increase cap recharge rate of the Curse and Pilgrim, or give them a role bonus so that medium NOS works like before. And please, for the love of god, forget the idea to make the Pilgrim a gang ship. It's a solo roamer, not a damn gang ship. Fix the Nos. Fix the Curse. Suggestions Undo the previous nerf, then make cap gained less than amount drained. That will address the issue described in notes to build 36191. The algorithm for cap gained should incorporate relative capacitor regain rates of the ships over one another, times the cap drained. The idea is to use that rather lovely and mysterious cap recharge curve so that when their capacitor is recharging more strongly than your own (at around 2/3rds depletion) it is much harder for you to gain cap from it, and in any case you can't gain more than you drain. Note that we don't care about the actual numerical amount recharge per tick, but the %age recharge, so as not to penalise small ships over large. A Curse at 1/3rd cap would therefore gain near to 1:1 of drain from their target. Make noses deactivate whenever they drain exactly zero cap. That will only happen where you are both at 100%, or they are at 0%, giving the minimum feedback needed to work these modules correctly. It will make fitting one Nos alongside Neuts a helpful way to measure their capacitor in 6-second dip-tests. Are these any good? Worth posting to the dev ideas forum? -vk
Umar Khattab Amarr Clown Punchers. Clown Punchers Syndicate	Posted - 2008.04.15 13:11:00 - [805] Edited by: Umar Khattab on 15/04/2008 13:11:39 Originally by: Depp Knight Well in all honesty, you were facing two hacs. Ok yeh a falcon could flee but not kill them. Thats a different issue. Mainly ECM over any other ew. Yeah, falcons are just fa*ggy ships, let's face it. DUDEISM.COM
Hydrogen Art of War	Posted - 2008.04.15 13:13:00 - [806] Edited by: Hydrogen on 15/04/2008 13:14:06 Originally by: Lyria Skydancer I like this new sig Hydro. Standard to most A-WAR members and as such not my idea but Timaios's. Since CCP prohibits the excessive use of blood and gore, we had to do something completly different to deliver the message ... __ - click here -
Lyria Skydancer Amarr Home 0f Bored Occultists	Posted - 2008.04.15 13:30:00 - [807] Originally by: Umar Khattab Yeah, falcons are just fa*ggy ships, let's face it. QFT. -------------------------------------- [Video]Skirmish Warfare II
Hydrogen Art of War	Posted - 2008.04.15 16:19:00 - [808] Edited by: Hydrogen on 15/04/2008 16:20:25 Originally by: Kingwood I don't agree with Zulu's assessment of the Curse, maybe you misunderstood me. Especially with the incoming nano nerf, you gotta wonder how much the price of the Curse will drop. Scrolling back in thread I realize that I already hinted at an incoming Nano-Curse nerf. Apart from that this shows that a previous point is a major drawback for Amarr Recons: lack of versatility. There are simply no alternate setups. Thus the NOS-nerf did a horrible thing, which the Devs were not aware of and which most did not realize. A full range of different playstyles has been eliminated (or should I say obliterated?). Mark me: viable and balanced playstyles those were. In the end it leaves us with a bitter taste: Amarr Recons slowly nerfed to hell. Zulu's remark about "taking something away from players afterwards is no option" or "fun in the game" does indeed sound like mockery in this context geared towards the Amarr Recon community. __ - click here -
Horny girl1	Posted - 2008.04.16 11:33:00 - [809] haha, after nano nerf... curse will be only good in station.... Amar recons are really bad LOL
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.04.16 12:48:00 - [810] Well it depends on the nature of the nano-nerf. If smaller ships are still able to move quickly in relation to larger ships and their ability to track and hit smaller vessels, whilst preventing larger heavier ships from doing so it wont be an issue - but Im not holding my breath. C. New Scanner Idea!

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 40 :: 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.