EVE Search - The Rook and Falcon

All Channels

Ships and Modules

The Rook and Falcon

» 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)
Captain N8Hellyea	Posted - 2008.01.18 14:11:00 - [1] So, by now everyone has had a chance to fiddle with the rook and Falcon ,what ya all still think about them? Myself, im wanting to add some damp skill into my bird,,but overall im very pleased with them. and plz by all means other race's comments are welcome also... ECM FTW !
Derek Sigres	Posted - 2008.01.18 14:31:00 - [2] In a gang situation, adding damp into some VERY powerful ECM ships may be a silly idea. Better to let the gallente recons and whatnot do that job, especially after the Nerf.
Haradgrim The Wild Bunch INTERDICTION	Posted - 2008.01.18 15:34:00 - [3] agreed. don't waste a mid on damps, ECM is very effective these days; make sure that you are using it in the most effective fashion. Originally by: CCP Oveur ...every forum whine feels like a baby pony is getting killed
Scrubologist	Posted - 2008.01.18 15:43:00 - [4] Don't know anything about rooks. Is it anything like a "Rokh"?
Khalish Mo'Tashi	Posted - 2008.01.18 15:47:00 - [5] It's like the Rokh in the aspect that they're both Caldari ships... but that is pretty much the only similarity.
Ban Shui Eve University	Posted - 2008.01.18 15:54:00 - [6] The rook is a Caldri recon cruiser which has ECM (and a missile damage) bonuses. The rokh is a Caldari battleship which has hybrid range/damage bonuses and resistance bonuses.
Haradgrim The Wild Bunch INTERDICTION	Posted - 2008.01.18 16:08:00 - [7] They both use range to their advantage and are very different but excellent compliments to each other. Originally by: CCP Oveur ...every forum whine feels like a baby pony is getting killed
Ishina Fel Caldari Synergy. Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2008.01.18 17:23:00 - [8] And they're among the very few viable Caldari solo ships... well, the Falcon not so much, because its damage output is so low that it in fact heals the targets it tries to shoot. But the Rook definitely. Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!
Ess Erbe Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2008.01.18 18:29:00 - [9] Am I the only one that thinks the Falcon should have the BB's 15% strength per level instead of 20% like the Rook? It sort of intrudes on the Rook's role (minus damage and range, but gains cloaking). I am expecting a more experienced player to shoot down this suggestion with some excellent points that I totally missed momentarily.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Enuma Elish.	Posted - 2008.01.18 18:33:00 - [10] Originally by: Ess Erbe Am I the only one that thinks the Falcon should have the BB's 15% strength per level instead of 20% like the Rook? It sort of intrudes on the Rook's role (minus damage and range, but gains cloaking). I am expecting a more experienced player to shoot down this suggestion with some excellent points that I totally missed momentarily. I'm an experienced player and a Falcon pilot, I don't think the Falcon needed an increase from 10% to 20%. I'm really loving it, but ... well, frankly I never flew my rook for the damage output, ever :) -- Crane needs more grid 249km locking?
LeCiel	Posted - 2008.01.18 18:34:00 - [11] Originally by: Haradgrim agreed. don't waste a mid on damps, ECM is very effective these days; make sure that you are using it in the most effective fashion. You mind sharing your little secret with us?
Ulstan	Posted - 2008.01.18 18:54:00 - [12] Quote: It sort of intrudes on the Rook's role (minus damage and range, but gains cloaking). As the rooks role is to be an ECM ship with some combat ability, I don't think the Falcon intrudes on that, given its total lack of DPS.
Grimpak Gallente Trinity Nova	Posted - 2008.01.18 18:58:00 - [13] Originally by: LeCiel Originally by: Haradgrim agreed. don't waste a mid on damps, ECM is very effective these days; make sure that you are using it in the most effective fashion. You mind sharing your little secret with us? fit ECM modules on the ship. there --- planetary interaction idea!
LeCiel	Posted - 2008.01.19 01:10:00 - [14] Originally by: Grimpak Originally by: LeCiel Originally by: Haradgrim agreed. don't waste a mid on damps, ECM is very effective these days; make sure that you are using it in the most effective fashion. You mind sharing your little secret with us? fit ECM modules on the ship. there the way he said it convinced me that there is a trick with ECMs like the trick with ECM drones-which can help you get more jams. P.S. I am sure about this method with ECM drones i heard it from somewhere i don't remember.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue Sex Panthers	Posted - 2008.01.19 01:22:00 - [15] Originally by: Ulstan Quote: It sort of intrudes on the Rook's role (minus damage and range, but gains cloaking). As the rooks role is to be an ECM ship with some combat ability, I don't think the Falcon intrudes on that, given its total lack of DPS. The Falcon has completely and utterly obsoleted the Rook, and any other ECM ship in the game. Period. The Scorpion has a role, but only in fleet fights, where you need enough longevity to warp out. Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y I I
Cletus Graeme Caldari Bladerunners Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2008.01.19 05:56:00 - [16] Edited by: Cletus Graeme on 19/01/2008 06:01:33 The changes to the falcon were good - it needed to be be given a boost to the ecm - the cloak is bloody useful but it does practically zero dps so it really needs to be able to jam effectively and now it can. The Rook lost a hi-slot and gained a low-slot which makes it as good as the falcon (same mids and lows) for jamming. However the loss of the 6th hi-slot means it has no spare slot for a smartbomb (for drone defence). Also, it's low powergrid makes it impossible to fit even a minimal tank (e.g 1xLSE II) AND heavy launchers. It's better to just fit Assault launchers for inty/drone defence but these have only 40km range and do pitiful DPS. The problem with the Rook is similar to the problem with the drake. The 5% kinetic damage bonus per level is peanuts. Ideally, the recon damage bonus needs changing to a non damage type specifc bonus (e.g ROF or missile velocity). Missile velocity would be ideal since a rook currently can't hit anything from it's optimal jamming range because the max range of heavy missiles is about 70km without ship bonuses but ECM jammer optimals are 100km+ for both multispecs and racials. As a result any missile launchers which are fitted lack the range to actually hit a target being jammed and are only useful for self defence. Even with such a bonus it still won't match the dps of a Caracal (which is just fine - it shouldn't!) but this would at least make it worthwhile to fit heavy launchers, thereby giving the ship more of a damage dealing role in gangs. Currently, NEITHER ship does significant DPS so there is no reason to fly a rook over a falcon EXCEPT for it's superior lock range. This is marginally useful in fleet engagements but the falcon's cloaking ability compensates for this. The falcon is now much BETTER than the rook because it does exactly the same thing and also cloaks and makes cynos. Sadly CCP solved one problem but couldn't resist meddling with another ship and created another.
Arvald Caldari Devilish Intentinos	Posted - 2008.01.19 06:16:00 - [17] Originally by: LeCiel Originally by: Haradgrim agreed. don't waste a mid on damps, ECM is very effective these days; make sure that you are using it in the most effective fashion. You mind sharing your little secret with us? keep at range and make shuere you are one lucky sob --------------------------- Originally by: Brea Lafail Care to explain this jargon for those of us who have to call tech support to plug in a toaster?
Arvald Caldari Devilish Intentinos	Posted - 2008.01.19 06:17:00 - [18] Edited by: Arvald on 19/01/2008 06:17:23 Edited by: Arvald on 19/01/2008 06:17:04 Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: Ulstan Quote: It sort of intrudes on the Rook's role (minus damage and range, but gains cloaking). As the rooks role is to be an ECM ship with some combat ability, I don't think the Falcon intrudes on that, given its total lack of DPS. The Falcon has completely and utterly obsoleted the Rook, and any other ECM ship in the game. Period. The Scorpion has a role, but only in fleet fights, where you need enough longevity to warp out. kitsune for its speed and ease of deployment, griffin for its cheapness and avallibility, blackbird for its cheapness and ease of use, that is all --------------------------- Originally by: Brea Lafail Care to explain this jargon for those of us who have to call tech support to plug in a toaster?
Captain N8Hellyea	Posted - 2008.01.19 13:47:00 - [19] Originally by: Cletus Graeme Edited by: Cletus Graeme on 19/01/2008 06:01:33 The changes to the falcon were good - it needed to be be given a boost to the ecm - the cloak is bloody useful but it does practically zero dps so it really needs to be able to jam effectively and now it can. The Rook lost a hi-slot and gained a low-slot which makes it as good as the falcon (same mids and lows) for jamming. However the loss of the 6th hi-slot means it has no spare slot for a smartbomb (for drone defence). Also, it's low powergrid makes it impossible to fit even a minimal tank (e.g 1xLSE II) AND heavy launchers. It's better to just fit Assault launchers for inty/drone defence but these have only 40km range and do pitiful DPS. The problem with the Rook is similar to the problem with the drake. The 5% kinetic damage bonus per level is peanuts. Ideally, the recon damage bonus needs changing to a non damage type specifc bonus (e.g ROF or missile velocity). Missile velocity would be ideal since a rook currently can't hit anything from it's optimal jamming range because the max range of heavy missiles is about 70km without ship bonuses but ECM jammer optimals are 100km+ for both multispecs and racials. As a result any missile launchers which are fitted lack the range to actually hit a target being jammed and are only useful for self defence. Even with such a bonus it still won't match the dps of a Caracal (which is just fine - it shouldn't!) but this would at least make it worthwhile to fit heavy launchers, thereby giving the ship more of a damage dealing role in gangs. Currently, NEITHER ship does significant DPS so there is no reason to fly a rook over a falcon EXCEPT for it's superior lock range. This is marginally useful in fleet engagements but the falcon's cloaking ability compensates for this. The falcon is now much BETTER than the rook because it does exactly the same thing and also cloaks and makes cynos. Sadly CCP solved one problem but couldn't resist meddling with another ship and created another. very well put guy, but to start,,i hope that no one has bought this ship for the damage bonus,,its worthless,ya want dps ya got the wrong ship,,but for those who long for a remarkably great EW boat,,the rook is as its defined, the last word in electronic warfare, that dont mean its the solo pawn beast with damage,,it as with all ships has its role. rook over the falcon?,,cant say either is better,,depends on the task set forth by your squad,if ya running recon gang,sure falcon is perfect, ive even heard as a full blown warp scram tackler, tho theres better cheaper ships for that. i fly the rook for one purpose,,to lock down anyone who gets in my range, thats all. and my setup is my own, as is everyones,but i will say this, i cant kill much,,but i can lock down ANY tier 3 BS that wants to play..ohh and i dropped the damp,LOL thanks for the insite tho,,i liked it
Grimpak Gallente Trinity Nova	Posted - 2008.01.19 13:55:00 - [20] Originally by: Cletus Graeme Edited by: Cletus Graeme on 19/01/2008 06:01:33 The changes to the falcon were good - it needed to be be given a boost to the ecm - the cloak is bloody useful but it does practically zero dps so it really needs to be able to jam effectively and now it can. The Rook lost a hi-slot and gained a low-slot which makes it as good as the falcon (same mids and lows) for jamming. However the loss of the 6th hi-slot means it has no spare slot for a smartbomb (for drone defence). Also, it's low powergrid makes it impossible to fit even a minimal tank (e.g 1xLSE II) AND heavy launchers. It's better to just fit Assault launchers for inty/drone defence but these have only 40km range and do pitiful DPS. The problem with the Rook is similar to the problem with the drake. The 5% kinetic damage bonus per level is peanuts. Ideally, the recon damage bonus needs changing to a non damage type specifc bonus (e.g ROF or missile velocity). Missile velocity would be ideal since a rook currently can't hit anything from it's optimal jamming range because the max range of heavy missiles is about 70km without ship bonuses but ECM jammer optimals are 100km+ for both multispecs and racials. As a result any missile launchers which are fitted lack the range to actually hit a target being jammed and are only useful for self defence. Even with such a bonus it still won't match the dps of a Caracal (which is just fine - it shouldn't!) but this would at least make it worthwhile to fit heavy launchers, thereby giving the ship more of a damage dealing role in gangs. Currently, NEITHER ship does significant DPS so there is no reason to fly a rook over a falcon EXCEPT for it's superior lock range. This is marginally useful in fleet engagements but the falcon's cloaking ability compensates for this. The falcon is now much BETTER than the rook because it does exactly the same thing and also cloaks and makes cynos. Sadly CCP solved one problem but couldn't resist meddling with another ship and created another. meh.. it's a tradeoff: falcon and cov ops cloak rook and defense vs smaller targets. let's be honest: fitting a rook for damage is not that feasible. I would prefer to slap assault launchers and precision lights to deal with the small fries that might come near you. --- planetary interaction idea!
Phil Miller Ocean Dynamics Dark Matter Coalition	Posted - 2008.01.19 14:21:00 - [21] Originally by: Ess Erbe Am I the only one that thinks the Falcon should have the BB's 15% strength per level instead of 20% like the Rook? It sort of intrudes on the Rook's role (minus damage and range, but gains cloaking). I am expecting a more experienced player to shoot down this suggestion with some excellent points that I totally missed momentarily. I would certainly trade 20% ecm to 15% ecm strength on the rook for more dps, like 5% ROF or 10% damage instead of 5% damage. Owing to lack of Eve-related content, signature removed. If you would like to discuss this, please mail [email protected] - Mitnal
Serkis Caldari The Funkalistic SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.19 15:20:00 - [22] Rook has more lock range, better scan resolution, more ECM strenght, more dps, better resists, is faster and has less sig radius than the Falcon. The only reason to chose the falcon over Rook is the cloak, that can be very handy in small/medium size fights where you need the surprise factor and/or sneak in behind enemy lines. I would choose rook over falcon for 80% of the fights I¦m in ECM boat.

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.