EVE Search - [ISSUE] Falcons

All Channels

Assembly Hall

[ISSUE] Falcons

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Cpt Branko Surge. NIght's Dawn	Posted - 2008.06.05 00:06:00 - [91] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 05/06/2008 00:06:27 Originally by: Farrqua So it looks like it has a role and the only time you can actually use the damn thing is for a gang. The other three can work independently or in a gang. The falcon/rook can not. So let's remove the Falcon's jamming range bonus for a 5% rof per level and jamming strenght bonus by 5% damage per level, give it 40m3 dronebay, and it's fine and balanced, because it's got the same EW capability of a Arazu now with roughly the same DPS? Yeah, sure, OK. I guess Falcon pilots would love that And, yeah, Rook is underpowered for solo, needs the same bonuses. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Farrqua Turbo Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.06.05 00:47:00 - [92] Originally by: Akiba Penrose So if the Falcon had 2 of its bonuses changed to 20% missile dmg- and 5% shield res per lvl, and a dronebay, you would be happy? In case you havent read the whole thread,, im discussing the scenario where 200km Falcons is used as ECM cover for small gangs in low sec. It has nothing to do with "ME" being happy. I am just looking at this from a distance comparing whats out there. Especially if this is supposed to be balanced for the player base in general. That's fine about the Lo-sec issue but how does that effect 0.0? If you change the effect of the Falcon because of the lo-sec issues, how does that impact the other part of the player base in 0.0? Is it a good thing or bad? You and Capt. Blanko seemed to get on your respective ears about it, and I am not sure why. I am just bringing out a point for discussion. What makes these "issue" threads useless is when we have multiple players with a single minded focus and the unwillingness to compromise.
Shaemell Buttleson Darwin With Attitude oooh Shiny	Posted - 2008.06.05 09:07:00 - [93] Falcon is as it should be. If anything the Rook should be buffed as there is no reason to use them over a Falcon these days. Maybe give it the firepower of a Cerb to bring it into line with the Hugin having alot more dps than a Rapier.
Sworn Absent GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.05 09:30:00 - [94] Originally by: Shaemell Buttleson Falcon is as it should be. If anything the Rook should be buffed as there is no reason to use them over a Falcon these days. Maybe give it the firepower of a Cerb to bring it into line with the Hugin having alot more dps than a Rapier. While I agree the Rook needs a small buff to give it a purpose that isn't already done by the falcon, give it too much missile firepower would make it not worth flying a Cerberus. Right now a Rook with 5 HML II's and no damage mods does ~120-150DPS, I can see that being upped would be nice, but not too much.
Mengan Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.05 11:43:00 - [95] Edited by: Mengan on 05/06/2008 11:45:51 Originally by: Akiba Penrose When it comes to the ôpaper thinötank it is so because you chose to fit it that way. Falcons have the same option to fit a tank as the rest of the force recons. It is because of the offensive capabilities it has that it is called primary, not its lack of tank. I don't think it means instadeath if it looses a cycle either. All the other recons have to stay within 100km, and they seem to somewhat manage. WTF, if you fit it anyway else, you might aswell bring another kind of ship. All other recons don't get primaried every single time they appear on the battlefield. IF you want to nerf the Falcon in lowsec, PLEASE come up with a way that DOES NOT make it totally useless in 0.0. Until that day, don't you dare touch it. ------------------------
Endless Subversion Club Bear	Posted - 2008.06.05 13:19:00 - [96] Originally by: Mengan WTF, if you fit it anyway else, you might aswell bring another kind of ship. All other recons don't get primaried every single time they appear on the battlefield. IF you want to nerf the Falcon in lowsec, PLEASE come up with a way that DOES NOT make it totally useless in 0.0. Until that day, don't you dare touch it. Ah, I did. Originally by: endless subversion Seriosuly, adding stacking penalties and possibly removing off-race jam strength on racial jammers isn't going to weaken the falcon very much at all EXCEPT in small gang environments where its targets also have ECCM. That's perfect, balance it where it's overpowered and leave it alone where it isn't!. If the jam targets don't bring ECCM they're still SOL. One racial jammer has a 86% chance to jam my geddon if it isn't ECCM'd. Even with stacking penalties, you're still going to perma jam a BS that doesn't bring ECCM. It will just be that, now, if a small gang has ECCM, one falcon won't still be able to perma jam everyone just because there are only 2-3 total targets. Hurray balance! Self Destruct & LogOffs
Akiba Penrose PAK	Posted - 2008.06.05 13:26:00 - [97] Edited by: Akiba Penrose on 05/06/2008 13:55:11 Edited by: Akiba Penrose on 05/06/2008 13:26:51 Originally by: Mengan WTF, if you fit it anyway else, you might aswell bring another kind of ship. All other recons don't get primaried every single time they appear on the battlefield. IF you want to nerf the Falcon in lowsec, PLEASE come up with a way that DOES NOT make it totally useless in 0.0. Until that day, don't you dare touch it. I fly a Rapier and when we run into nano gangs im pretty much primary. Its not easy staying alive in those fights, pretty darn hard tbh, and sometimes its impossible to make it out alive. Still i don't use the argument that the Rapier should have 200km range because i cant fit a tank because i need 6 webifiers to stay alive. "Falcons cant have a tank because they need full rack of ECM because they cant fit a tank... etc". I think this is circular argument and it does not validate its need for extreme range. I understand that the Falcon might not be the fastest and most agile ship. But it shouldn't be a impossible task to fix it so it would be able to operate within 100km range as the rest of the recons. The arguments you are using for the 200km range sounds to me like ôour falcons is so dangerous for the opposing gang that they will instantly primary it, therefore we must be allowed to move it out of the combat areaö. I would have understood it if you said you needed it for sniper fleets, but then again wouldn't a Rook do that job just as good? - - Falcons
Yuki Santara Yurai-Tenshin Zaibatsu Celestial Imperative	Posted - 2008.06.05 14:24:00 - [98] Originally by: Akiba Penrose I fly a Rapier and when we run into nano gangs im pretty much primary. Its not easy staying alive in those fights, pretty darn hard tbh, and sometimes its impossible to make it out alive. Still i don't use the argument that the Rapier should have 200km range because i cant fit a tank because i need 6 webifiers to stay alive. "Falcons cant have a tank because they need full rack of ECM because they cant fit a tank... etc". I think this is circular argument and it does not validate its need for extreme range. I understand that the Falcon might not be the fastest and most agile ship. But it shouldn't be a impossible task to fix it so it would be able to operate within 100km range as the rest of the recons. The arguments you are using for the 200km range sounds to me like ôour falcons is so dangerous for the opposing gang that they will instantly primary it, therefore we must be allowed to move it out of the combat areaö. I would have understood it if you said you needed it for sniper fleets, but then again wouldn't a Rook do that job just as good? There is one difference, with your Rapier you remove a ships defensive capabilities (at least in case of a Nano ship) and help get it killed quickly. A falcon only removes a ships offensive capabilities, so if the Falcon pilot dies early, it hasn't done a whole lot of good. ECM ships are pretty much all-or-nothing, they may be overpowered if they work, but if they don't they are just useless. I don't need a range of 200km as that's not the way I would fly it, but this is also not its natural range. I am just afraid that if you gimp its range too much (it's already limited in locking range compared to a Rook), you would make range rigs and sensor boosters almost essential to stay at a reasonable range (~100km with a buffer of 50km or so). I probably wouldn't mind a reduction of the ECM range bonus to 15% or even 10%, if the jamming strength stays as is. With regards to fleet warfare, it might be arguable that it wouldn't be harmful if the Falcon would be the ECM recon of choice for small gangs and the Rook the ECM recon of choice for fleets.
RuleoftheBone Ataraxia.	Posted - 2008.06.05 16:05:00 - [99] Disagree re: Falcon overpowered. OP forgot additional solution....damps. They work. The Falcon parked at 150km+ won't be jamming much with a pair of damps from virtually any ship capable of targetting to that range. You just need to lock them first . A script of some sort would NOT be out of line. "Lead Me..Follow Me..Or get the **** out of my way" General George Patton USA
Hardin Praetoria Technologies	Posted - 2008.06.05 16:26:00 - [100] I do not agree with Falcons being overpowered. CVA faces Falcons on a regular basis and there are several good counters 1) Sniping Apocs with ECCM - can hit out to 230km and kill jamming Falcons very quickly 2) ECCM generally significantly reduces Falcons effectiveness 3) A good nano-ship can reach a Falcon at 200km in under 30 seconds. The Falcon then has a choice run and warp back in (if he has another prepared sniper spot) or try and keep the nano permajammed. In most cases the Falcon will run or die... There really is no need to nerf Falcons... ----- Alliance Creation/Corp Expansion Services Advert
Akiba Penrose PAK	Posted - 2008.06.05 16:33:00 - [101] Originally by: RuleoftheBone OP forgot additional solution....damps. They work. The Falcon parked at 150km+ won't be jamming much with a pair of damps from virtually any ship capable of targetting to that range. RSD with max skills: optimal 45km falloff: 90km With 2 sensor boosters, 1 RSD and 3 particle dispersion rigs on a BS you have 50% chance of dampening a Falcon at 161km. if it stays out at 200km youll have around 25% chanse. Thats when you have used all 3 rigslots and 3 medslots. Id rather fly my Vaga then,, - - Falcons
Akiba Penrose PAK	Posted - 2008.06.05 16:39:00 - [102] Originally by: Hardin I do not agree with Falcons being overpowered. CVA faces Falcons on a regular basis and there are several good counters 1) Sniping Apocs with ECCM - can hit out to 230km and kill jamming Falcons very quickly 2) ECCM generally significantly reduces Falcons effectiveness 3) A good nano-ship can reach a Falcon at 200km in under 30 seconds. The Falcon then has a choice run and warp back in (if he has another prepared sniper spot) or try and keep the nano permajammed. In most cases the Falcon will run or die... There really is no need to nerf Falcons... Nice to see a response from a CSM member,, although im a bit surprised you didnt take the time to read the thread before you replied. - - Falcons
Farrqua Turbo Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.06.05 16:49:00 - [103] Originally by: Akiba Penrose Originally by: RuleoftheBone OP forgot additional solution....damps. They work. The Falcon parked at 150km+ won't be jamming much with a pair of damps from virtually any ship capable of targetting to that range. RSD with max skills: optimal 45km falloff: 90km With 2 sensor boosters, 1 RSD and 3 particle dispersion rigs on a BS you have 50% chance of dampening a Falcon at 161km. if it stays out at 200km youll have around 25% chanse. Thats when you have used all 3 rigslots and 3 medslots. Id rather fly my Vaga then,, AS useless as the Arazu's are, wouldn't that be a better counter than having you BS's fit RSD's? I mean if you are going to actually take the time to reconfig all your BS's, would it not make more sense in asking for A Celestes,Arazu or a Keres even in your support group? Think about the gang you are going to put together. Obviously the gang with the falcon thought about it.
Akiba Penrose PAK	Posted - 2008.06.05 17:07:00 - [104] Originally by: Farrqua AS useless as the Arazu's are, wouldn't that be a better counter than having you BS's fit RSD's? I mean if you are going to actually take the time to reconfig all your BS's, would it not make more sense in asking for A Celestes,Arazu or a Keres even in your support group? There is no ship with a RSD range bonus, so they will all have the same chance for dampening the Falcon,, the t2 ships will actually be even worse since they can only fit 2 rigs. Originally by: Farrqua Think about the gang you are going to put together. Obviously the gang with the falcon thought about it. I dont have any problems with composing gangs, and thats not the issue either. - - Falcons
Hardin Praetoria Technologies	Posted - 2008.06.05 18:00:00 - [105] Edited by: Hardin on 05/06/2008 18:06:00 Originally by: Akiba Penrose Nice to see a response from a CSM member,, although im a bit surprised you didnt take the time to read the thread before you replied. I read the thread but do not agree with you that the counters are useless. Probably shouldn't have bothered repeating them though - which is due to me reading the thread in the morning and then replying to it in the afternoon and focusing on some of the responses rather than the original post. Sorry! Despite that my view stands. I do not think Falcons are overpowered... Edit: I would just like to add that I do accept that Falcons can tip the balance if employed properly against unprepared opponents and they are certainly being used much more frequently than before - but they are by no means a 'win' button. ----- Alliance Creation/Corp Expansion Services Advert
Jason Edwards	Posted - 2008.06.05 18:28:00 - [106] I'm personally happy with where falcons are. The other recons need to be significantly boosted. However CCP=nerf. So thusly Falcons need scripts. Either you get a strong strength and a short jam length. Or weak strength and long jam length. Easily fixed. ------------------------ "There was this bright flash of light - and now this egg shaped thing is on my screen - did I level up?"
Dakisha Mining Bytes Inc. Insurgency	Posted - 2008.06.05 19:01:00 - [107] Read a bunch of points; most of them absolute rubbish. Rook for fleet; for reasons that if you can't figure out then you don't know how to fit for fleet. Falcon for gang; for all the obvious reasons. I can see how the falcon could be more of an issue in low-sec, demanding you bring counters with you - but it's no different than having to bring rapiers/huginns or neut/rr bs to stop nano. In the end this is nothing more than a 'I don't like having to bring a counter to X' thread. Disclaimer: This point of view brought to you by 0.0; big gang influence may be present. Falcon is perfectly balanced for 0.0.
Dinique The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.06.05 19:15:00 - [108] Originally by: Mengan All other recons don't get primaried every single time they appear on the battlefield. Tell that to Huginn and Rapier pilots, they have to get to 30-40km to do their job. Same went for the Arazu before it sucked. The Curse doesn't exactly find itself at the bottom of the list when it comes to priority targets either. Get real. While I am against a Falcon nerf, your statement is ignorant and speaks to a lack of experience. _____ The species has amused itself to death
Arkady Sadik Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.06.05 19:51:00 - [109] Originally by: Hardin 1) Sniping Apocs with ECCM - can hit out to 230km and kill jamming Falcons very quickly Any sniper works nicely, but it's not an option in low-sec, which was the problem described above. The problem here is that Falcons do not scale downwards. They work nicely in 0.0 fleets and have the appropriate effects, but they get more and more powerful the smaller the fleet becomes. Especially the Falcon at 200km is almost impossible to deal with for small fleets: They can not bring a sniper bs, because that would lower their dps by a good third, usually. Quote: 2) ECCM generally significantly reduces Falcons effectiveness Fitting ECCM works nicely, if you have mid slots to spare. It reduces the jam chance by (a bit below) 50%. If all ships in your fleet fit ECCM, a Falcon will be able to only jam 1 ship more or less permanently, possibly a second one at times, instead of 2-3, and you have reduced the effectiveness of your ships against the other opponents. But yes, ECCM is a good counter to Falcons. We recently had an engagement in low-sec, 2x bs, 1x bc on our side vs. 1x bs, 1x hac, 1x falcon on the other; we got the bs because both of our bs were Tempests with 2x best named ECCM in the mids. We had to bump the enemy bs to keep it from warping, because at one point, we were both jammed. Quote: 3) A good nano-ship can reach a Falcon at 200km in under 30 seconds. The normal, non-inty nano ships I fly with reach speeds of 4-5km/s, pushing this more to 45-55 seconds. In engagements with 2-3 bs on each side, you usually have already lost 33% of your dps (one bs) by that time. And the Falcon can still jam the incoming nano ship and warp off, leaving you with no Falcon kill, and a whole bs kill to catch up. And your nano ship at this point has done nothing but to scare off a Falcon. On the other hand, the Falcon has caused you to lose a bs without much you could have done, and taken out a nano cruiser of the main engagement. Quote: There really is no need to nerf Falcons... I still think the Falcon needs some balancing. Not to be made useless, not to reduce his jam efficiency, or anything like that. There have been nice ideas in this thread that keep the effectiveness of Falcons for 0.0 fleet fights intact just as it is right now, but balances the small gang / low-sec combat.
Akiba Penrose PAK	Posted - 2008.06.05 20:16:00 - [110] Originally by: Yuki Santara There is one difference, with your Rapier you remove a ships defensive capabilities (at least in case of a Nano ship) and help get it killed quickly. A falcon only removes a ships offensive capabilities, so if the Falcon pilot dies early, it hasn't done a whole lot of good. Yeah,, good point. Although Falcons is very good for breaking up spider tanks. Originally by: Yuki Santara I don't need a range of 200km as that's not the way I would fly it, but this is also not its natural range. In my experience this seems to be the new standar range (180-200km). - - Falcons
Farrqua Turbo Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.06.05 20:41:00 - [111] Originally by: Akiba Penrose Originally by: Yuki Santara There is one difference, with your Rapier you remove a ships defensive capabilities (at least in case of a Nano ship) and help get it killed quickly. A falcon only removes a ships offensive capabilities, so if the Falcon pilot dies early, it hasn't done a whole lot of good. Yeah,, good point. Although Falcons is very good for breaking up spider tanks. Originally by: Yuki Santara I don't need a range of 200km as that's not the way I would fly it, but this is also not its natural range. In my experience this seems to be the new standar range (180-200km). Its not really a new standard. It is flown normally at this range. The ones that don't or feel its not natural will fit multi-specs instead of racials. Actually you can squeeze out 20 or 30km more optimal if you focus your skills. If you specialize and with good skills, t1 rigs, and racials you can target out to about 240km with 0ne SBII with target range script, about a 250 scan res, 228+41km range on your racials. 152+27 with multi specs. That might be why Yuki sees that 200+km in not natural for the Falcon, because she might be flying with multi-specs.
Yuki Santara Yurai-Tenshin Zaibatsu Celestial Imperative	Posted - 2008.06.05 23:55:00 - [112] Bad wording perhaps, I merely meant the range of a Falcon without range rigs and mods. Personally I don't need more range than the standard 150km at the moment because I rarely camp, but if this range would be drastically reduced, I would pretty much have to fit for range, too (not complaining, just saying).
Mengan Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.06 20:40:00 - [113] Originally by: Dinique Tell that to Huginn and Rapier pilots, they have to get to 30-40km to do their job. Same went for the Arazu before it sucked. The Curse doesn't exactly find itself at the bottom of the list when it comes to priority targets either. Get real. While I am against a Falcon nerf, your statement is ignorant and speaks to a lack of experience. a) If you were FC and there was 1 recon of each race, who would you primary first? b) Both gallente and minmatar recons can fit a buffertank and nano, so if they get targeted they can burn out and warp away. Falcons must dedicate all their midslots, lowslots and rigslots to be competitive. ------------------------
Lois Chenet	Posted - 2008.06.07 08:05:00 - [114]
Erotic Irony 0bsession	Posted - 2008.06.07 08:11:00 - [115] The corollary to "the falcon is fine" is "you're terrible." ___ Eve Players are not very smart. Support Killmail Overhaul
Akiba Penrose PAK	Posted - 2008.06.07 15:05:00 - [116] Edited by: Akiba Penrose on 07/06/2008 15:08:31 Originally by: Mengan b) Both gallente and minmatar recons can fit a buffertank and nano, so if they get targeted they can burn out and warp away. Falcons must dedicate all their midslots, lowslots and rigslots to be competitive. I don't believe this to be true. I would like you to provide some more numbers and arguments to back this up. A Falcon with 1 x sensor booster, 6 x racial jammers and 3 x SDA's and 2 x PDP rigs, jamming from 200km, will imo out perform any other recon. Even when fitted with only 4 x racial jammers and 1 x SDA it will jamm a 4 x BS gang 54% of the time on average. I would say that's competitive to any other recon. That leaves 3 mids, 2 lows and 2 rig slots for tank and speed mods. With 2 x polys and 2 x overdrives you will reach 2400mps. - - Falcons
Farrqua Turbo Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.06.07 15:42:00 - [117] Originally by: Akiba Penrose Edited by: Akiba Penrose on 07/06/2008 15:08:31 Originally by: Mengan b) Both gallente and minmatar recons can fit a buffertank and nano, so if they get targeted they can burn out and warp away. Falcons must dedicate all their midslots, lowslots and rigslots to be competitive. I don't believe this to be true. I would like you to provide some more numbers and arguments to back this up. A Falcon with 1 x sensor booster, 6 x racial jammers and 3 x SDA's and 2 x PDP rigs, jamming from 200km, will imo out perform any other recon. Even when fitted with only 4 x racial jammers and 1 x SDA it will jamm a 4 x BS gang 54% of the time on average. I would say that's competitive to any other recon. That leaves 3 mids, 2 lows and 2 rig slots for tank and speed mods. With 2 x polys and 2 x overdrives you will reach 2400mps. Yes with poly carbs and OD's you will hit 2400 m/s +. It also leaves you one mid slot for a tanking mod. Like one LSE2 or invuln2. (SB2,MWD2,LSE2, 4 racials) At all lvl 5 skills with this fitting you will have 10.8/3.6/3.6/3.6 on your Racial mods. Max range on your racials 162+41. (And still aligns like a pig in comparison.) Now if the enemy was so kind to bring one of each of the BS's yea that would be the case of locking down each one. But the % would not be as high as 54%. It would be a bit lower. The other three Force recons with the same kind of fit, Rapier will hit about 3500m/s, and the curse and Arazu will be around 3000 and 2500 m/s respectively. Each of the three ofc will have a higher DPS. The Rapier will be able to fit 2 LSE2's and pump out about 200DPS and move at about 3500 m/s. So the Falcon comes close to competing with the three but falls to the bottom of the list out of the four Force recons in this line of thinking of survival ability.
Akiba Penrose PAK	Posted - 2008.06.07 18:12:00 - [118] Originally by: Farrqua (And still aligns like a pig in comparison.) Compared to what? Rapier and Falcon alligns in 6.7sec. Arazu and Pilgrim alligns in 7.8sec (according to EFT) Originally by: Farrqua But the % would not be as high as 54%. It would be a bit lower. I used the tier 2 BS since they are the most common,, if you consider all BS it will be 51%. Originally by: Farrqua Each of the three ofc will have a higher DPS. The Rapier will be able to fit 2 LSE2's and pump out about 200DPS and move at about 3500 m/s. The Falcon is also able to fit 2 LSE's and it can deal dmg from 84km. Originally by: Farrqua So the Falcon comes close to competing with the three but falls to the bottom of the list out of the four Force recons in this line of thinking of survival ability. I dont see how the Falcon have it any harder then the Pilgrim or Arazu tbh. Anyway all of the Recons will die if they are primaried by a gang, none of them are fast enough to speed tank (without snakes). If the Falcons get called primary all the time its because they are considered the most dangerous ships, this is not an argument for giving it a 200km range. - - Falcons
RuleoftheBone Ataraxia.	Posted - 2008.06.07 22:16:00 - [119] Originally by: Akiba Penrose Originally by: RuleoftheBone OP forgot additional solution....damps. They work. The Falcon parked at 150km+ won't be jamming much with a pair of damps from virtually any ship capable of targetting to that range. RSD with max skills: optimal 45km falloff: 90km With 2 sensor boosters, 1 RSD and 3 particle dispersion rigs on a BS you have 50% chance of dampening a Falcon at 161km. if it stays out at 200km youll have around 25% chanse. Thats when you have used all 3 rigslots and 3 medslots. Id rather fly my Vaga then,, Possibly. If I expect Falcon's...I fly twin web/twin damp Rapier with leftover pre-balance damp rig. It works fine for me. In fact...I have flown that config against...PAK . While not commenting on nullsec pewpew my experience in losec has been Falcon's are manageable with a bit of thought. Simply the act of targetting them preventing cloak is enough to send them warping off in many cases. Or charging them in Rapier/Vagabond/whatever. Or having wingmen 2 volley them in Maelstroms. Losec small-medium fleet combat is generally up close, personal, and not always tied to gates or other celestials leaving the Falcon pilots frequently unable to show up in favorable 150km+ ranges. Which leaves them open to counters previously discussed. "Lead Me..Follow Me..Or get the **** out of my way" General George Patton USA
Akiba Penrose PAK	Posted - 2008.06.09 10:15:00 - [120] Originally by: RuleoftheBone While not commenting on nullsec pewpew my experience in losec has been Falcon's are manageable with a bit of thought. Simply the act of targetting them preventing cloak is enough to send them warping off in many cases. Or charging them in Rapier/Vagabond/whatever. Yes, imo nano ships is the only counter to 200km Falcons. Originally by: RuleoftheBone Or having wingmen 2 volley them in Maelstroms. Flying around in low sec in a small gang with a sniper fitted BS for killing Falcons isnt a good solution, id recomend nano ships instead tbh. Originally by: RuleoftheBone Losec small-medium fleet combat is generally up close, personal, and not always tied to gates or other celestials leaving the Falcon pilots frequently unable to show up in favorable 150km+ ranges. Which leaves them open to counters previously discussed. 90% of the fights in low sec is at the same gates and stations. - - Falcons

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: 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.