EVE Search - ECM-changes on Sisi: The scorpion

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

ECM-changes on Sisi: The scorpion

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Benn Helmsman Caldari Dark Prophecy Inc.	Posted - 2007.11.12 08:28:00 - [1] Edited by: Benn Helmsman on 12/11/2007 08:28:26 Changes on Sisi: Blackbird 15% ECM strength/lvl:ok Falcon 20% ECM strength/lvl:ok Scorpion 20% ECM strength/lvl:not ok, because it will take the role of the Rook entirely. It will deal more damage, have at least same ECM capabilities and tank far better. I think a 15% bonus/lvl would be far more reasonable for the scorpion.
Alex Harumichi Gallente Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2007.11.12 08:32:00 - [2] Originally by: Benn Helmsman Edited by: Benn Helmsman on 12/11/2007 08:28:26 Changes on Sisi: Blackbird 15% ECM strength/lvl:ok Falcon 20% ECM strength/lvl:ok Scorpion 20% ECM strength/lvl:not ok, because it will take the role of the Rook entirely. It will deal more damage, have at least same ECM capabilities and tank far better. I think a 15% bonus/lvl would be far more reasonable for the scorpion. That's just crazy talk, the problem is actually the opposite: there's still very little reason to fly Scorp over the Rook except price. If you're doing ECM you won't be tanking the Rook or the Scorp in any meaningful way, and the damage is in the peanut gallery class. The superior maneuverability and smaller sig of the Rook make it (still) better than the Scorp. At least the diff isn't as huge as it used to be.
Redback911 Malevolent Intentions	Posted - 2007.11.12 08:34:00 - [3] Thats not enough of a reason for this change - I see no reason now to fly a rook at all. Scorp far easier to skill / falcon far more useful.
Benn Helmsman Caldari Dark Prophecy Inc.	Posted - 2007.11.12 08:47:00 - [4] Scorp is far cheaper than a rook, has a damn lot more hitpoints and everybody will eventually have BS lvl 5, while Recon lvl 5 is just a huge timesink.
Grytok KL0NKRIEGER	Posted - 2007.11.12 09:15:00 - [5] Scorpion is insurable, easier to train for, tanking far longer then a Rook etc. So this change is way over tbh. By the way... can I have the bonus on the Celestis/Arazu/Lachesis/Arbitrator/Curse/Pilgrim upped to 10% effectiveness now? .
Life Machine Caldari Damned Legion	Posted - 2007.11.12 09:15:00 - [6] Being a Recon level 5 Rook pilot, as well as having Battleship level 5, I can honestly say (if I've understood these changes correctly) that I may never fly a Rook again. But not in favour of the Scorpion...no, instead in favour of the Falcon. Don't these changes mean that the falcon is now essentially a Rook with less DPS? The falcon will escape more gate camps than a rook due to the covert ops cloaking nature of the ship, and will now have the same strength as a rook as the same ranges... I ain't complaining though...I'm sitting in hostile space flying a falcon right now, haha.
Shadowsword COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2007.11.12 09:57:00 - [7] Rooks and Falcons will still have their place in light/medium roaming gangs, where BS are slowing their gangs. And don't dismiss the Recon's relative immunity to EW, either... ------------------------------------------ What is Oomph? It the sound Amarr players makes when they get kicked in the ribs.
Nemtar Nataal	Posted - 2007.11.12 10:03:00 - [8] The change to the BlackBird rocks...good work. But i will agree on the scorp, its going to make it way to powerfull cause way to many people have Caldari BS lvl5 but not a lot of people are willing to train Recon lvl5. Atleast not right now. We might see a revolition with the new BlackOps stuff going into play, maybe make Recon skill more of a pre requisit of doing this black ops things. Im not quait sure about the 20% ECM bost for the Falscon ither. Effectly it will make the falcon a far supperior ECM boat (3 low slots) compared to the Rook. However Rook is still combat based... I would like to see the changes in action and see if people would start to show up at a fleet battle in Falcons cause they could wait with uncloaking till primorys wore called. With rigs they could sit at 200km and start jamming away, and be really god at it. Might actually be a very interesting change, and thies changes mean that EW will be even more common on the battlefield. As you need the jammers, then you need anti jammers (damps) and tactical forces to take out the hostiles EW. Only problem here is well...lag...could really kill this new diversity in the game.
Benn Helmsman Caldari Dark Prophecy Inc.	Posted - 2007.11.12 10:12:00 - [9] The rook will lose a high and gain a low slot, so it will have 3 lows as well.
Hoshi Blackguard Brigade Aftermath Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.12 11:47:00 - [10] Originally by: Life Machine Don't these changes mean that the falcon is now essentially a Rook with less DPS? But can't the same be said for the other races recons as well? An Arazu is a Lachesis with less dps, a Rapier is a Huginn with less dps. For Amarr it's a bit different as the lost bonus is not dps but nos/neut range. Pre change the falcon had both less dps and less ew capabilities, to bring it inline they needed to increase one of them. And increasing the dps wouldn't have made much sense would it? ---------------------------------------- A Guide to Scan Probing in Revelations
Solbright altalt	Posted - 2007.11.12 12:24:00 - [11] The Rook is very effective with no sensor booster at all. That is going to count for quite a lot more now. It'll still deliver the most at dedicated long range jamming.
Lady Beauvoir Slutty Witches	Posted - 2007.11.12 12:52:00 - [12] Originally by: Life Machine Being a Recon level 5 Rook pilot, as well as having Battleship level 5, I can honestly say (if I've understood these changes correctly) that I may never fly a Rook again. But not in favour of the Scorpion...no, instead in favour of the Falcon. Don't these changes mean that the falcon is now essentially a Rook with less DPS? The falcon will escape more gate camps than a rook due to the covert ops cloaking nature of the ship, and will now have the same strength as a rook as the same ranges... I ain't complaining though...I'm sitting in hostile space flying a falcon right now, haha. This. I'm a caldari ECM pilot too. I fly both scorp, rook and a falcon. I can't really see why I would use a rook again instead of flying a falcon: the ability to fit three more lauchers doesn't really increase the DPS of the gang much but the covops cloak adds an insane amount of survivability to the falcon. Then again, with the sensorbooster nerf, the scorpion is less attractive than a rook/falcon. It lacks range, scan resolution and targeting range. In addition to that it's slow. Then again, it can fit BS sized weapons and is fully insurable, thus, a good throwaway ship. So I can see there would be different roles for the scorp and the falcon/rook. But the rook will surely gather dust in my hangar once the falcon is boosted like this. "Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connaet point." -Blaise Pascal, PensTes, 4, 277
Nemtar Nataal	Posted - 2007.11.12 14:59:00 - [13] Originally by: Lady Beauvoir Originally by: Life Machine Being a Recon level 5 Rook pilot, as well as having Battleship level 5, I can honestly say (if I've understood these changes correctly) that I may never fly a Rook again. But not in favour of the Scorpion...no, instead in favour of the Falcon. Don't these changes mean that the falcon is now essentially a Rook with less DPS? The falcon will escape more gate camps than a rook due to the covert ops cloaking nature of the ship, and will now have the same strength as a rook as the same ranges... I ain't complaining though...I'm sitting in hostile space flying a falcon right now, haha. This. I'm a caldari ECM pilot too. I fly both scorp, rook and a falcon. I can't really see why I would use a rook again instead of flying a falcon: the ability to fit three more lauchers doesn't really increase the DPS of the gang much but the covops cloak adds an insane amount of survivability to the falcon. Then again, with the sensorbooster nerf, the scorpion is less attractive than a rook/falcon. It lacks range, scan resolution and targeting range. In addition to that it's slow. Then again, it can fit BS sized weapons and is fully insurable, thus, a good throwaway ship. So I can see there would be different roles for the scorp and the falcon/rook. But the rook will surely gather dust in my hangar once the falcon is boosted like this. True to be perfectly honest, i would properly change the Falcon bonus to 15%. It would still give the Rook an advantage over the Falcon cause of equal ammount of low slots. And well i use Rook for one thing and Falcon for another. The Rook is more of an up close and personal ship, here as the Falcon is the skeeky bastard (hobit - Gollum > they tricked us those filthy little Caldaris (wops...hobbitses)). So depending on how i feel like flying i might chose one over the other ship. Just for fun. But for game potential well the Covert ops Cloak is the biggest pro for chosing the Falcon, as it goes with the over all theam of the electronic wafare. You get into position and when you are ready you start jamming away.
Andreya Murder-Death-Kill	Posted - 2007.11.12 15:08:00 - [14] i agree, do not fly these ships, but find them attractive, and have crunched the numbers on them many many times. let the rook have its fun over the scorp, the scorp is slower, but can accomplish more (tanking, lame dps and such) the rooks sole purpose in eve is to jam, let it be the best at it _________________________________________________________ Only once you've lost everything, are you free to do anything.
Adunh Slavy KIA Corp KIA Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.12 17:10:00 - [15] Making the scorp more useful isnÆt a bad thing, as it gives more options to moderate aged players, that 6-7 month old retention rate thing again. Granted it impacts the viability of the T2 ships, so perhaps they need a buff in some other area, such as DPS potential, HPs, +warp scram ability like a transport ship, or any other nifty ideas. -AS The Real Space Initiative (Forum Link)
Rogerano Minmatar Einherjar Rising	Posted - 2007.11.13 00:17:00 - [16] Sigh... FFS. Comparing the rook or any other cruiser class hull to the scorpion is stupid. The scorpion is a... wait for it... battleship. It's big, slow, heavy, and powerful. It's a battleship. The rook and falcon are enhanced blackbirds; cruisers. Cruisers aren't battleships, in case you were wondering. Whining about these changes is like whining about the megathron being a gank-ship when the demios is supposed to have that role. Stupid. Apples and oranges. --- Not happy with something in EVE? An emo whine will doubtless help your cause.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates	Posted - 2007.11.13 09:02:00 - [17] Edited by: James Lyrus on 13/11/2007 09:05:33 This change, IMO was needed on the Scorpion. There was quite literally no reason to be flying them. I’m serious. I’ve seen virtually none at all since the ECM ‘nerf’. The problem being that of ‘fleet niche’ – the scorp _used_ to be able to tank a bit, with 4 slots worth. So you’d see rooks and scorps, because one jammed better, but one didn’t instapop. Now? Scorps just melt in no time, if you’re rigged to jam. And because of your higher mass, it still takes you longer to get clear. IMO the change to the Rook is fine (high -> low). Much needed. The change to the Scorpion is still fine – I’ll continue flying my Rook for roaming, and back into a Scorp for fleeting. The Rook is lighter and more mobile. The Scorp is insurable, and has more EHPs. That’s good in my book. Reasons to fly either. Except… with the change to the falcon? No way will I ever be leaving that ship, in favour of a Rook. No one flies a Rook for the damage output, anyway. Jamming range is 0-180km, and your missiles go half that. This change makes the Falcon overpowered. Not that I won’t use it, and vastly wuv my recon ships 5, but … if this goes in as is, it’ll be the only recon where the ‘ew’ bit is as effective on force, as combat – all the other ‘force’ recons are down on mids. (Well, apart from the Rapier/Huginn, but you don’t lock people down with target painters, so who cares). BB change? Well, I thought they were fine, but this change is probably ok. They’re still only 6 mids/2 lows, so they’re still a ‘poor mans scorpion/rook/falcon’. Bit better at doing that, I don’t see as a bad thing. Whilst we’re on ECMs: Kitsune is overpowered. That 20%/level of frigate makes it an uber ewar frigate, and unusual in being the only frigate gaining ‘ECM power’ from it’s ‘prereq’ not it’s ‘T2 skill’. At the very least, it needs to be switched around a little, so it’s EAS that gives you 20%/level, meaning it’s the ‘specialists’ who train it to 5 who get ‘full awesome’. And... actually I rather think the 4 no bonused cruise launchers on a scorp, don't actually out damage 5 bonused heavies on the rook :). You can get about 250 dps (no damage mods) with a neutron-siege scorp, but ... well, you need fittings mods to even _fit_ that, let alone anything useful like a MWD. (And I don't think I've ever seen anyone considering doing a high speed blaster boat in a scorp. The very idea amuses me though) -- Crane needs more grid 249km locking? GMP and TNP
Incantare Caldari Kernel of War Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2007.11.13 09:46:00 - [18] Originally by: Lady Beauvoir scan resolution Very important point right there. With its scan resolution a dual sensor boosted scorpion still cannot lock a celestis or other light e-war ship before being locked itself. In one particular fight a gang I was in which had a rook engaged another more heavily armed gang with a scorp. The enemy scorp never jammed a thing, our rook got first lock and it was promptly jammed and killed along with most of the other ships there. The exact same thing would hold true with the increased bonus on the scorp.
Laechyd Eldgorn Caldari Karjala Inc. Onnenpyora	Posted - 2007.11.13 19:31:00 - [19] It makes no sense to compare a recon ship to battleship. I am not going to fly a phoon ever because vagabond is so much better oneoneoneone.
Ulstan Caldari	Posted - 2007.11.13 20:05:00 - [20] Quote: but can accomplish more (tanking, lame dps and such) the rooks sole purpose in eve is to jam, let it be the best at it The scorptions sole purpose is also to jam. You can't dps with it, you can't tank with it. Right now my scorp is just sitting in my hangar. This change may actually make me fly it again. Maybe. If I don't just fly a falcon instead. ;) These changes are good. Blackbird changes are also welcome. No one flies a blackbird in gangs anyway though, so I don't know how much this will help. The rook changes are also good. The falcon changes are good but possibly over the top: it's the falcon you need to worry about overshadowing the rook, not the scorpion. The rook is lighter and faster and locks quicker than the scorpion, plenty of reason to fly it over the scorp. Over the falcon? Not so much. Maybe 15% would be more appropriate. Also, it's silly to say that the rook should be the best jamming ship in the game. There is going to be a ship per class dedicated to e-war after the new t2 ships come in- they should all be good at it, and you would pick a different ship in a different class for different reasons. It's silly to compare an e-war cruiser to an e-war battleship and complain it's not as good: if it was as good, no one would ever fly the battleship now, would they? We should be comparing the rook and falcon to each other, not the scorpion.
Beowulf Scheafer Gallente	Posted - 2007.11.13 20:24:00 - [21] Originally by: Redback911 Thats not enough of a reason for this change - I see no reason now to fly a rook at all. Scorp far easier to skill / falcon far more useful. then why not just fly a cheap scorp and stfu? honestly the scorp was out of order for years now (believe me, there was a time the scorp was TEH noobpvpship, the first one making you strong), it really deserves to be good again. the scorpion was the first ship i engaged somebody in and survived it
Jasai Kameron Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2007.11.13 21:03:00 - [22] Uhm, this may be insane, but the problem appears to be that the Rook needs to be better than the Scorpion and the Falcon. So, uhm, couldn't you just boost the Rook? Boost one ship instead of nerfing two ships. Makes sense, you see?
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates	Posted - 2007.11.13 21:15:00 - [23] Originally by: Jasai Kameron Uhm, this may be insane, but the problem appears to be that the Rook needs to be better than the Scorpion and the Falcon. So, uhm, couldn't you just boost the Rook? Boost one ship instead of nerfing two ships. Makes sense, you see? I'm not convinced actually. I think the Rook should be better than the Falcon. However I think Scorpion and Rook should fill different 'niches' - ECM strength being less a factor than the rook being relatively smaller, faster and with better sensors, and the scorp being a bit more robust. -- Crane needs more grid 249km locking? GMP and TNP
Incantare Caldari Kernel of War Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2007.11.13 21:27:00 - [24] Originally by: Jasai Kameron Uhm, this may be insane, but the problem appears to be that the Rook needs to be better than the Scorpion and the Falcon. So, uhm, couldn't you just boost the Rook? Boost one ship instead of nerfing two ships. Makes sense, you see? I think the simple solution to differenciating the rook as a combat recon is to give it a drone bay. Giving it increased dps, or e-war potential (but only slightly). Rather than nerfing the falcon.
Max Mentor	Posted - 2007.11.14 00:29:00 - [25] Change is a welcome boost. Scorpion and Falcon needed this. Prediction: Scorp with T2 SEIGE + neuts + ECM + plate + ECM drones = FOTM. Cheap and Easy. Sweet. Run Vaga Run.
Ulstan Caldari	Posted - 2007.11.14 02:55:00 - [26] Quote: Uhm, this may be insane, but the problem appears to be that the Rook needs to be better than the Scorpion and the Falcon. The rook should not be 'better' at ECM than the scorpion. If anything the scorpion, being a larger ship and having more slots, should be better: however the rook is smaller, quicker, more agile, and targets faster. I would definitely fly a rook in a small gang over a scorpion. The rook also doesn't need to be 'better' in every respect than the falcon, both ships should be attractive and viable. The rook will do more damage than the falcon - perhaps it's damage needs to be upped somewhat.
Lady Beauvoir Slutty Witches	Posted - 2007.11.14 09:02:00 - [27] Originally by: Ulstan Quote: Uhm, this may be insane, but the problem appears to be that the Rook needs to be better than the Scorpion and the Falcon. The rook should not be 'better' at ECM than the scorpion. If anything the scorpion, being a larger ship and having more slots, should be better: however the rook is smaller, quicker, more agile, and targets faster. I would definitely fly a rook in a small gang over a scorpion. The rook also doesn't need to be 'better' in every respect than the falcon, both ships should be attractive and viable. The rook will do more damage than the falcon - perhaps it's damage needs to be upped somewhat. Perhaps; but the current change is that the rook loses one highslot for one lowslot. Besides, I feel that a very effective ECM combined with good damage is very close to being imbalanced. Yes, I fly all these ships. =) Personally, I feel that with the new changes, the rook and a scorpion could fill the same role (jammer in fleets, other being a bit crappy but insurable, other being a bit better but more fragile and more expensive to lose). But the falcon would well do with a smaller bonus to ECM strenght - it's a cloaking ship after all, which is a big merit. Originally by: Laechyd Eldgorn It makes no sense to compare a recon ship to battleship. I am not going to fly a phoon ever because vagabond is so much better oneoneoneone. It makes perfect sense when you compare ships that are supposed to fill the same role (here: ECM-jamming ship). If you nanofit both the phoon and the vaga, they fill the same role and you are left with a choice of which ship to take into each type of engagement. This is the same thing we are discussing here: when or why to take the scorpion instead of the rook/falcon and vice versa. "Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connaet point." -Blaise Pascal, PensTes, 4, 277
Nasair	Posted - 2007.11.14 09:09:00 - [28] To be honest I dont see a problem with a smaller ship being better at jamming than a larger one when it costs more, does worse DPS, takes longer to train for, has no HP to speak of and no drones.
Carniflex Caldari Fallout Research Fallout Project	Posted - 2007.11.16 11:19:00 - [29] Originally by: Benn Helmsman Changes on Sisi: Blackbird 15% ECM strength/lvl:ok Falcon 20% ECM strength/lvl:ok Scorpion 20% ECM strength/lvl:not ok, because it will take the role of the Rook entirely. It will deal more damage, have at least same ECM capabilities and tank far better. I think a 15% bonus/lvl would be far more reasonable for the scorpion. Currently on SiSi for Scorpion Special Ability: 15% bonus to ECM Target Jammer strength and 20% bonus to ECM Target Jammer optimal range per level. Pity. I really liked 20% but oh well, even less reason to fly scorp over falcon.

Pages: [1] :: 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.