EVE Search - Random collection of thoughts- buff Minmatar BS / ECCM change etc.

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Random collection of thoughts- buff Minmatar BS / ECCM change etc.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2008.07.30 11:18:00 - [1] Minmatar BS need to have way less mass. Period. I don't like any ships to be useless, regardless of race (heck, I fly all four). The Min BS need to be buffed. Particularly the Tempest. Typhoon needs it's shield/armor HP flipped. Come on Devs, this has been an issue for YEARS. It's a simple database edit. Fix it!!! Phoon has 8 highs, 4 gun/4 launcher slots. Why not give it 6 gun slots and 6 launcher slots? That way you could go all guns or all launchers and never know what you're getting when you go up against a Phoon. You're giving up using an entire ship bonus when you only go with one weapon system over another. IMO it's completely fair to make it 6/6. If you want max firepower out of it you still have the same number of weapons. Now you can just weight it further towards guns or missiles. Sensor boosters and ECCM: why not just add in an ECCM script to sensor boosters? +100% sensor strength. Lock time, lock range or ECCM. And you could still keep dedicated ECCM mods, and they'd have +200% sensor strength. ECCM needs a huge buff. Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y COLLECTION Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Lt Angus Caldari Lt Angus Corp	Posted - 2008.07.30 11:55:00 - [2] Me like Shhhh, Im hunting Badgers
Typhado3 Minmatar Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium Axiom Empire	Posted - 2008.07.30 14:16:00 - [3] /signed on all issues as for typhoon it's currently a split (triple actually) weapon ship which means you are meant to use both sets of weapons at the same times. The problem with these sort of ships is that they are weaker than an all 1 weapon type ship due to only 1 bonus and lack of damage mods to fit. The changes you propose would allow it to do what it can now but also allow it be a truly versatile ship (the reason I love the phoon).
Euriti Gallente SniggWaffe	Posted - 2008.07.30 14:27:00 - [4] Good suggestions.
Amandin Adouin	Posted - 2008.07.30 14:31:00 - [5] I agree - good suggestions. Thanks
TZeer BURN EDEN	Posted - 2008.07.30 14:35:00 - [6] Yes, lets add a module that fits all your needs, so you dont have to think about fitting sensorbooster or ECCM. This way you can get a cookie cutter setup that work in almost all encounters \o/. At the same time, give me hardeners with scripts so you can change resist types, or jammers with scripts so you can change racial type, and even fit damp scripts in it \o/ YES!!
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2008.07.30 15:02:00 - [7] Originally by: Typhado3 /signed on all issues as for typhoon it's currently a split (triple actually) weapon ship which means you are meant to use both sets of weapons at the same times. The problem with these sort of ships is that they are weaker than an all 1 weapon type ship due to only 1 bonus and lack of damage mods to fit. The changes you propose would allow it to do what it can now but also allow it be a truly versatile ship (the reason I love the phoon). while I love the idea of 6/6 it's funny because you would other than weapon upgrades be wasting the bonus just as much :P but yeah the thyphoon is great because you'll fight a ship say a unlucky pligrim or curse, and they will be tanking exp, so you change to termal. Or they have 3 TDs on you and your guns can't hit shit, but your 4 missles and and your drones can still hit. on the other hands if defenders ever got boosted then your guns would still hit while your missles get shot down. In others words the thyphoon is impossible to fit against 100% something it has will always be hitting you, how awesome is that. Originally by: Dapanman1 Terrible idea, you're an idiot
Ravil Thon	Posted - 2008.07.30 15:02:00 - [8] I agree with most of the above. I have concerns though that mentioning the phoon will get the last decent matari ship somehow nerfed to pieces.
Linas IV	Posted - 2008.07.30 17:15:00 - [9] A bunch of nice ideas here! i hope a Dev reads it.
Lilith Velkor Minmatar Oyster Colors	Posted - 2008.07.30 17:21:00 - [10] Bump because the man speaks the truth.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2008.07.30 21:16:00 - [11] Originally by: TZeer Yes, lets add a module that fits all your needs, so you dont have to think about fitting sensorbooster or ECCM. This way you can get a cookie cutter setup that work in almost all encounters \o/. At the same time, give me hardeners with scripts so you can change resist types, or jammers with scripts so you can change racial type, and even fit damp scripts in it \o/ YES!! Are you just ignoring the part where I said buff regular ECCM to 200% and allow sensor boosters to be used as a 'half strength' 100% ECCM? Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y COLLECTION Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Captator Universal Securities	Posted - 2008.07.30 21:27:00 - [12] If you made it 6/6 a typhoon could outdamage a torp raven by quite a large margin (same damage bonus and launcher number but +50m3 bandwidth, and another 2 bonused turrets potentially). Perhaps 5/5? I agree with HP change, and the mass stuff is stupid atm. I agree with ECCM boost too, it is a better alternative than nerfing falcons/ecm in general, as it allows you to fit for some resistance to them (assuming you do actually choose what ship/fit to fly due to prevailing tactical conditions, and aren't just an OMG I HAVE 10 PEOPLE YOU HAVE 5 THEREFORE I WIN pillock), or to dedicate your fit for near complete resistance to them. It also punishes those who think they don't need to change loadout based on experience and so on.
August Guns Minmatar Infinite ISK	Posted - 2008.07.31 01:31:00 - [13] Originally by: TZeer Yes, lets add a module that fits all your needs, so you dont have to think about fitting sensorbooster or ECCM. This way you can get a cookie cutter setup that work in almost all encounters \o/. At the same time, give me hardeners with scripts so you can change resist types, or jammers with scripts so you can change racial type, and even fit damp scripts in it \o/ YES!! I'll reiterate what TZeer said, minus the sarcasm. Don't be so in love with scripts that you take bonuses from one set of modules and bring them to others; the OP's idea isn't to really boost ECCM, but boost sensor boosters. No matter what the percentage of sensor strength boost is, ECCM will only be used in very specialized circumstances and not in common PVP. This is because ECCM will only ever boost one statistic that is defensive in nature; if you do not encounter ECM then you've wasted a midlot. Rather than include a script for sensor boosters, I would rather have ECCM boosted to include a resistance to other forms of EWAR: - bonus to sensor strength, as exists now - resistance to effects of sensor damps - resistance to effects of target painters - resistance to effects of turret disruptors Those four effects would, in my opinion, make ECCM appealing enough to have pilots consider the inclusion of a true ECCM module. I will leave it up to others to debate the merits of including other resistances (like webs, neutralizers, etc.) August Guns
Pattern Clarc Invicta.	Posted - 2008.07.31 01:35:00 - [14] Bellum Eternus please run for CSM next time around.
Lilith Velkor Minmatar Oyster Colors	Posted - 2008.07.31 01:42:00 - [15] Originally by: August Guns Rather than include a script for sensor boosters, I would rather have ECCM boosted to include a resistance to other forms of EWAR: - bonus to sensor strength, as exists now - resistance to effects of sensor damps - resistance to effects of target painters - resistance to effects of turret disruptors Wow, thats actually a pretty nice idea. I like it.
Pattern Clarc Invicta.	Posted - 2008.07.31 02:17:00 - [16] After burners need to accelerate you to max speed much quicker than now to make them more viable. Utility midslot modules need to be made more appealing - there needs to be more mid slot competition and tweaks to a few close range ships left in the mud.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2008.07.31 03:52:00 - [17] Originally by: Pattern Clarc Bellum Eternus please run for CSM next time around. Dood, I would have the first time, but like most idiot Americans, I didn't have my passport ready in time lol. But thanks for the support! Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y COLLECTION Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Tixxie Lix Outer Heaven	Posted - 2008.07.31 04:03:00 - [18] I wholeheartedly agree with the Typhoon fix. Not completely sure about your ECCM/Sensor Booster solution though. I do agree ECCM is not effective enough in most situations and needs a small boost. My Falcon can still jam ships pretty easily that have an ECCM and now that speed has become an issue I can spend even more time afk jamming in an aligned Falcon lol. Sure it's sounds nice but that's going to be really boring. I like August's idea a lot though.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2008.07.31 04:11:00 - [19] Edited by: Bellum Eternus on 31/07/2008 04:13:35 Originally by: August Guns Originally by: TZeer Yes, lets add a module that fits all your needs, so you dont have to think about fitting sensorbooster or ECCM. This way you can get a cookie cutter setup that work in almost all encounters \o/. At the same time, give me hardeners with scripts so you can change resist types, or jammers with scripts so you can change racial type, and even fit damp scripts in it \o/ YES!! I'll reiterate what TZeer said, minus the sarcasm. Don't be so in love with scripts that you take bonuses from one set of modules and bring them to others; the OP's idea isn't to really boost ECCM, but boost sensor boosters. No matter what the percentage of sensor strength boost is, ECCM will only be used in very specialized circumstances and not in common PVP. This is because ECCM will only ever boost one statistic that is defensive in nature; if you do not encounter ECM then you've wasted a midlot. Rather than include a script for sensor boosters, I would rather have ECCM boosted to include a resistance to other forms of EWAR: - bonus to sensor strength, as exists now - resistance to effects of sensor damps - resistance to effects of target painters - resistance to effects of turret disruptors Those four effects would, in my opinion, make ECCM appealing enough to have pilots consider the inclusion of a true ECCM module. I will leave it up to others to debate the merits of including other resistances (like webs, neutralizers, etc.) ECCM with scripts to reduce damp effects? WTF are sensor boosters for? Talk about not taking your own advice... FFS. People are whining about dual-use Sensor Boosters (by my suggesting that they can be scripted to ECCM) and yet Sensor Boosters ARE dual use already: they defend you against sensor damps, which is a form of EW. The only people who have issues with this concept are the noob Falcon pilots that are worried that their pet ship might see a few more ECCM equipped targets. Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y COLLECTION Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Lilith Velkor Minmatar Oyster Colors	Posted - 2008.07.31 04:15:00 - [20] Originally by: Bellum Eternus ECCM with scripts to reduce damp effects? WTF are sensor boosters for? Talk about not taking your own advice... Sensor boosters differ a bit, since you benefit if you're not damped, while his ECCM would only help you if someone actually uses ewar on you.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2008.07.31 04:33:00 - [21] Originally by: Lilith Velkor Edited by: Lilith Velkor on 31/07/2008 04:18:05 Edited by: Lilith Velkor on 31/07/2008 04:16:21 Originally by: Bellum Eternus ECCM with scripts to reduce damp effects? WTF are sensor boosters for? Talk about not taking your own advice... Sensor boosters differ a bit, since you benefit if you're not damped, while his ECCM would only help you if someone actually uses ewar on you. I think the intention is to keep ECCM a defensive only module, while SBs can be considered offensive modules. Would be a bit too powerful if you can enjoy your extended lockrange or resolution, and just switch to ECCM function if it becomes necessary. I think I wasn't being completely clear. Right now there are all kinds of modules that provide dual use capability: Sensor boosters protect against Damps, and when not doing that, they are very useful. Tracking Computers and Tracking Enhancers protect against TDs. When not doing that, they do something useful. ECCM doesn't do anything when it's not doing it's job, and even then it's crap at doing it's intended job. So I'm proposing that Sensor boosters get a +100% sensor strength script to add that functionality into an already popular module, and true ECCM modules be buffed even more than that, so that they actually work half the time. Damps are useless the majority of the time not only because of their poor initial performance but also because Sensor Boosters are very prolific and popular. To summarise: there isn't enough effective ECCM in the game. There needs to be tons more of it. Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y COLLECTION Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Lilith Velkor Minmatar Oyster Colors	Posted - 2008.07.31 04:44:00 - [22] Edited by: Lilith Velkor on 31/07/2008 04:45:34 Ah ok, I get you now. Still the thing is, as you said, SBs are already a very popular module in pvp, it might be just a tad bit too much to hand another joker card so to speak. I'd really prefer the variant the other guy posted, but without scripts, give ECCM all effects at the same time, make them the anti-ewar module the name already suggests. TDs and stuff are listed under electronic countermeasures, so it would be more consistent that way. TCs, TEs and SBs on the other hand are listed under weapon upgrades / sensor upgrades, and btw TC/TE still do nothing for AC users if you are optimal-range disrupted.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2008.07.31 08:07:00 - [23] Originally by: Lilith Velkor Edited by: Lilith Velkor on 31/07/2008 04:45:34 Ah ok, I get you now. Still the thing is, as you said, SBs are already a very popular module in pvp, it might be just a tad bit too much to hand another joker card so to speak. I'd really prefer the variant the other guy posted, but without scripts, give ECCM all effects at the same time, make them the anti-ewar module the name already suggests. TDs and stuff are listed under electronic countermeasures, so it would be more consistent that way. TCs, TEs and SBs on the other hand are listed under weapon upgrades / sensor upgrades, and btw TC/TE still do nothing for AC users if you are optimal-range disrupted. Uhh, AC users opt range disrupted? You mean falloff disrupted? TBH I think there should be a mod for boosting falloff just like a TE, only for falloff only. Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y COLLECTION Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Lilith Velkor Minmatar Oyster Colors	Posted - 2008.07.31 08:30:00 - [24] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Uhh, AC users opt range disrupted? You mean falloff disrupted? TBH I think there should be a mod for boosting falloff just like a TE, only for falloff only. Yes, the script is called 'optimal range disruption', but thats what I meant. I'd like to have TCs affect falloff the same way like they affect optimal, since its the counter module for a TD, but really anything to defend against TD would be more than welcome.
Andreya Direct Intent	Posted - 2008.07.31 11:08:00 - [25] also, give artilery (or just the tempest) a 100% damage bonus... BUT! increase its rate of fire so it shoots twice as slow... this will at least give it its alpha strike back (maybe not 100%, but you get my point) also, give the claw 4 guns.. wolf 5. jaguar 4. stiletto 3. and so on.... WE DONT WANT ONE MISSILE _________________________________________________________ Only once you've lost everything, are you free to do anything. Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes -Navigator ([email protected])
Pohbis Neo T.E.C.H.	Posted - 2008.07.31 11:14:00 - [26] Edited by: Pohbis on 31/07/2008 11:15:30 I'd like to support this, then we can finally make all other EW chance-based like jamming, and have the other EW counters render the EW 100% useless when it misses
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2008.07.31 11:55:00 - [27] Originally by: Pohbis Edited by: Pohbis on 31/07/2008 11:15:30 I'd like to support this, then we can finally make all other EW chance-based like jamming, and have the other EW counters render the EW 100% useless when it misses I was trying to follow along with your post but then I glanced over and saw that you are Caldari. They hand out stupid pills when people pick Caldari as a race? Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y COLLECTION Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Cpt Branko Surge. NIght's Dawn	Posted - 2008.07.31 11:57:00 - [28] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 31/07/2008 11:57:42 Edited by: Cpt Branko on 31/07/2008 11:57:11 Originally by: Pohbis Edited by: Pohbis on 31/07/2008 11:15:30 I'd like to support this, then we can finally make all other EW chance-based like jamming, and have the other EW counters render the EW 100% useless when it misses Want to trade certainly 100% reliable target painter on a bellicose for chance-based ECM of a simple blackbird? Seriously now, going 'waaah chance-based' when talking about ECM is silly. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Gavin Darklighter THE FINAL STAND	Posted - 2008.07.31 12:22:00 - [29] Originally by: Pohbis Edited by: Pohbis on 31/07/2008 11:15:30 I'd like to support this, then we can finally make all other EW chance-based like jamming, and have the other EW counters render the EW 100% useless when it misses To complete this, you would also need to make ECM 90% useless when it HITS!
Pohbis Neo T.E.C.H.	Posted - 2008.07.31 12:23:00 - [30] Originally by: Cpt Branko Want to trade certainly 100% reliable target painter on a bellicose for chance-based ECM of a simple blackbird? Seriously now, going 'waaah chance-based' when talking about ECM is silly. Yes, comparing ECM to TP isn't silly. I can't do much about the hit/miss mechanic of ECM, but I do know that if damps,, neuts/nos, webs, scrams and TD suddenly became chance-based people wouldn't think that was funny.
Pohbis Neo T.E.C.H.	Posted - 2008.07.31 12:26:00 - [31] Originally by: Gavin Darklighter To complete this, you would also need to make ECM 90% useless when it HITS! And create specific racial modules for all other EW as well, even better. Keep it up, between you and me we'll have this fixed in no time
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2008.07.31 12:57:00 - [32] Originally by: Pohbis Originally by: Gavin Darklighter To complete this, you would also need to make ECM 90% useless when it HITS! And create specific racial modules for all other EW as well, even better. Keep it up, between you and me we'll have this fixed in no time This is why I try and avoid discussing anything with Caldari pilots. FFS, I fly a Falcon all the time. I had to cross-train to do it, but I fly Caldari ships. It's just that I'm not actually a Caldari character, and for some reason that's the line. Everyone who starts off as Caldari seems to check their brain at the door and start spewing nonsense. If ECCM is soooo effective, then why does fitting an ECCM do shit all to protect my ship when faced with a Falcon? I have to fit 3-4 max strength ECCM in order to reasonably protect my ship from being jammed. IMO once the sensor strength of a ship is triple the jam strength of an ECM module there should be a zero chance of jamming that ship. Period. And why do you Caldari ******s always bring up this 'chance' based thing? It's not chance when you have a 99% chance of jamming someone. Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y COLLECTION Inveniam viam aut faciam.*
MenanceWhite Amarr Red Light Navy	Posted - 2008.07.31 13:18:00 - [33] Pest needs boost, Arty needs moar alpha --- Originally by: Torfi There's alot. That can be done. With.. corpses Originally by: Oveur
Cpt Branko Surge. NIght's Dawn	Posted - 2008.07.31 13:42:00 - [34] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 31/07/2008 13:42:54 Originally by: Pohbis Originally by: Cpt Branko Want to trade certainly 100% reliable target painter on a bellicose for chance-based ECM of a simple blackbird? Seriously now, going 'waaah chance-based' when talking about ECM is silly. Yes, comparing ECM to TP isn't silly. I can't do much about the hit/miss mechanic of ECM, but I do know that if damps,, neuts/nos, webs, scrams and TD suddenly became chance-based people wouldn't think that was funny. Well, yeah, then a chance based neut should mean "100% cap kill", chance-based web hitting "100% speed loss", chance-based TD "turrets turned OFF" and chance-based painter meaning "Hello, your interceptor has 1000.000.000 sig radius now, have a nice day" and chance-based damps meaning "Hello, your lock range is 500m (or, alternatively, your signature resolution is 1). Balanced totally. And ECM would STILL be the best of the bunch. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Pohbis Neo T.E.C.H.	Posted - 2008.07.31 14:07:00 - [35] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Everyone who starts off as Caldari seems to check their brain at the door and start spewing nonsense. Quote: And why do you Caldari ******s always bring up this 'chance' based thing? It's not chance when you have a 99% chance of jamming someone. More personal attacks aside; "...start spewing nonsense."* "It's not chance when you have a 99% chance of jamming someone" In order to jam your Phoon 99% of the time I need to fill my lows with distortion amps, have all lvl 5 skills and point 4 Ladar II's at your battleship. If you had those 4 ECCMs, the chance would be 30%. That's if I'm set up for Ladar jamming. No scripts for jammers to change race you remember? And you still have FoFs. If that Falcon is hit with the same amount of Damp EW, it's range is down to 20KM. So it's not jamming anything. And those damps work 100% and on all other race ships. "IMO once the sensor strength of a ship is triple the jam strength of an ECM module there should be a zero chance of jamming that ship. Period." Jammers don't stack, they cycle independently. Your Phoon with 1 ECCM would have a sensor strength of 35,3 and Tech II jammers with 3 distortion amps have a strenght og 11.7, which equals less than 1/3 of 35,3 ( 35,1 ). So 1 ECCM mod should make you immune to racial tech II jammers, no matter how many you get on your ass? I'm also curious to see that scale for ecm vs. sensor strenght with your suggestion. If 35,1 is no chance to jam on your scale, the non-ECCM strength on a Phoon, 18, is 50% chance or what? Who's spouting nonsense here?
Vengal Seyhan Sten Industries	Posted - 2008.07.31 14:51:00 - [36] Originally by: TZeer Yes, lets add a module that fits all your needs, so you dont have to think about fitting sensorbooster or ECCM. This way you can get a cookie cutter setup that work in almost all encounters \o/. At the same time, give me hardeners with scripts so you can change resist types, or jammers with scripts so you can change racial type, and even fit damp scripts in it \o/ YES!! Troll.
Vengal Seyhan Sten Industries	Posted - 2008.07.31 14:56:00 - [37] Originally by: Captator If you made it 6/6 a typhoon could outdamage a torp raven by quite a large margin (same damage bonus and launcher number but +50m3 bandwidth, and another 2 bonused turrets potentially). Perhaps 5/5? I agree with HP change, and the mass stuff is stupid atm. I agree with ECCM boost too, it is a better alternative than nerfing falcons/ecm in general, as it allows you to fit for some resistance to them (assuming you do actually choose what ship/fit to fly due to prevailing tactical conditions, and aren't just an OMG I HAVE 10 PEOPLE YOU HAVE 5 THEREFORE I WIN pillock), or to dedicate your fit for near complete resistance to them. It also punishes those who think they don't need to change loadout based on experience and so on. I don't have EFT or anything, so I'm going to take a risk and maybe look stupid. Launchers tend to use a lot of CPU, so perhaps a 6 torp Phoon wouldn't work without compromises in ohter areas (like lowslots used for Coprocs, etc)? I like the idea as well - no opinion on the ECCM, since I haven't used it enough, but otherwise, giving the Phoon more flexibility in weapon choice would stop some of the complaining about it being the most stupidly skill-intensive ship in the game to fly.
pyyKtas	Posted - 2008.07.31 17:20:00 - [38] /signed
Trojanman190 D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.07.31 19:04:00 - [39] Edited by: Trojanman190 on 31/07/2008 19:04:05 If they wanted to counter nanos without nerfing anything they could have added some scripts... For example, a tracking script that: -65% speed. -25% rof -25% damage. +50% optimal +50% falloff + 250% tracking. So you wouldnt be instapopping nanoships but you would certainly be hitting them. EDIT: prolly only use one at a time. And also, for hictors: Their bubble could get a script that ups the radius to 40km and prevents microwarp drives from functioning inside this radius, it cannot overlap with another bubble. Does not prevent warping. OR Their focused point could have a script added that works out to 40 ot 50km that simply deactivates microwarp drives for a certain period of time. Does NOT prevent warping. OR The warp scrambler could have a script that changes it from the short range +2 scramble strength to + 300% optimal and shuts down mwds, but does not scramble. There are SOOOOOO many ideas out there that don't have anything to do with insane nerfs and aren't actually completely off the wall. Why does ccp turn to nerfs first without looking at the options tehy provided to the game in first place. Wasn't stuff like this the entire purpose of scripts???? Also, typhoon with 6/6 is overpowered. 5/5 is better. The module you describe with eccm and sensor boosting properties is a little bit over powered. Those two modules have nothing to do with each other and should stay seperate. However, I do agree that losing a mid to ECCM is kind of a bummer.
Ath Amon	Posted - 2008.07.31 23:54:00 - [40] phoon 6/6 (actually 6/2 as no one will fit guns) is probably a bit op due to large dronebay personally i'd go with 5m/3g (ok even 6m/2g :P) and instead of the gun rof a bonus to tp or to something else maybe even tank (some time ago i'd say speed now with the crap mass it got...) Originally by: Diana Merris Unfortunately, rather than address the slot layout/tanking issues for Minmatar the Devs have simple declared that it makes us "versitile".
Drek Grapper Minmatar	Posted - 2008.08.01 00:15:00 - [41] Love the ideas. Will they listen...? ... ... Probably not. --------- If the Thorax was a car it would look like this
faeko	Posted - 2008.08.01 11:52:00 - [42] Agreed with the OP, minmatar battleships need to be reworked, considering all 3 of them, with the maelstrom being the easiest to fit cos of the ship bonii, still has way too much mass for a minmatar ship, its even slower to align from a raven :) Tempest needs a mass boost certainly, and yeah the phoon, jeez it does take a wizard to notice that the ship needs loving.
Maeltstome Minmatar Suicidal Office Clerks	Posted - 2008.08.01 23:56:00 - [43] these are all pheasible idea's, i support this. ------- [12:07] w33Daz: a trained 1 skill fur 24 mins n it took 2 days aff drones lvl 5 [12:07] w33Daz: A WIS LIKE WTF
Nicholas DW Infusion.	Posted - 2008.08.02 01:07:00 - [44] I like the idea of making sensor boosters script-able to protect against ECM, but the best counters for ECM are already mid slot mods (Projected and local ECCM); what do you think about the current strength of low slot ECCM? Keep them as is? I also like the 'phoon ideas, shield/armor ratios at the very least should get looked at.
Matsif	Posted - 2008.08.02 02:07:00 - [45] /signed
dolmant	Posted - 2008.08.02 07:55:00 - [46] Originally by: Pohbis Edited by: Pohbis on 31/07/2008 15:07:00 Originally by: Bellum Eternus Everyone who starts off as Caldari seems to check their brain at the door and start spewing nonsense. Quote: And why do you Caldari ******s always bring up this 'chance' based thing? It's not chance when you have a 99% chance of jamming someone. More personal attacks aside; "...start spewing nonsense."* "It's not chance when you have a 99% chance of jamming someone" In order to jam your Phoon 99% of the time I need to fill my lows with distortion amps, have all lvl 5 skills and point 4 Ladar II's at your battleship. If you had those 4 ECCMs, the chance would be 30%. That's if I'm set up for Ladar jamming. No scripts for jammers to change race you remember? And you still have FoFs. If that Falcon is hit with the same amount of Damp EW, its range is down to 20KM. So it's not jamming anything. And those damps work 100% and on all other race ships. "IMO once the sensor strength of a ship is triple the jam strength of an ECM module there should be a zero chance of jamming that ship. Period." Jammers don't stack, they cycle independently. Your Phoon with 1 ECCM would have a sensor strength of 35,3 and Tech II jammers with 3 distortion amps have a strenght og 11.7, which equals less than 1/3 of 35,3 ( 35,1 ). So 1 ECCM mod should make you immune to racial tech II jammers, no matter how many you get on your ass? I'm also curious to see that scale for ecm vs. sensor strenght with your suggestion. If 35,1 is no chance to jam on your scale, the non-ECCM strength on a Phoon, 18, is 50% chance or what? Who's spouting nonsense here? First, the phoon should get decent bonuses. pest also needs a change. Hps need switching. in short i agree. But to this guy above, if you are damped within 20km, you can get away, and can jam anything that tries to kill you (20km is basically warp scram range) so your only useless if your 100km away (and hence untouchable by fof's anyway) and if you fit on your falcon 4 SB's, you would have 80-90 km lock range, enough to jam people at. and, not only does EVERY falcon fill their lows with signal distortion amps, but no phoon fits 4 ECCM. And my buddy can perma jam my rapier in his falcon. I cant escape, i dont even have 20km lock range. But tbh, the immune thing wont work. its not a great idea. its like: if your ship goes below 100m/s it should be immune to webs.
Pohbis Neo T.E.C.H.	Posted - 2008.08.02 09:53:00 - [47] Originally by: dolmant But to this guy above, if you are damped within 20km, you can get away, and can jam anything that tries to kill you (20km is basically warp scram range) so your only useless if your 100km away (and hence untouchable by fof's anyway) Falcons sit more than 100KM away ( just like you point out that they fill their lows with distortion amps ). Originally by: dolmant and if you fit on your falcon 4 SB's, you would have 80-90 km lock range, enough to jam people at. and, not only does EVERY falcon fill their lows with signal distortion amps, but no phoon fits 4 ECCM. And my buddy can perma jam my rapier in his falcon. I cant escape, i dont even have 20km lock range. Just like no Phoon fits 4 ECCM, no Falcon fits 4 SBs. With 4 SBs that Phoon would have no problem countering with one ECCM module. Gallente recons do fit 4 sensor damps tho. I'm not claiming that the mods I used are realistic in a normal encounter, but I was replying to a post were a guy claimed that 99% chance to jam isn't "chance" at all. I was just pointing out the obvious bias in his numbers, what would be needed for such a scenario to take place, and how easy it would be to counter.
Gnulpie Minmatar Miner Tech	Posted - 2008.08.02 15:03:00 - [48] Originally by: August Guns Rather than include a script for sensor boosters, I would rather have ECCM boosted to include a resistance to other forms of EWAR: - bonus to sensor strength, as exists now - resistance to effects of sensor damps - resistance to effects of target painters - resistance to effects of turret disruptors Those four effects would, in my opinion, make ECCM appealing enough to have pilots consider the inclusion of a true ECCM module. I will leave it up to others to debate the merits of including other resistances (like webs, neutralizers, etc.) I think this is a very good idea.
Cornette Gallente Black Screen of Death HUZZAH FEDERATION	Posted - 2008.09.07 08:48:00 - [49] Nice thread, me like. So here is a friendly bump.
Typhado3 Minmatar Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium Axiom Empire	Posted - 2008.09.07 09:16:00 - [50] Originally by: Cornette Nice thread, me like. So here is a friendly bump. hmm necromancy.... hot. as for more on topic stuff. A large fear of giving minmatar a decent missile ship has been nano missile launchers. With stacking nerf I see this as being less of a problem. as for typhoon outdamaging a raven, raven can use lows for bcu's while phoon needs em for tank so I don't think it's gonna be the death of the raven.
Kalintos Tyl Minmatar	Posted - 2008.09.07 11:04:00 - [51] Originally by: Pohbis Edited by: Pohbis on 31/07/2008 15:07:00 Originally by: Bellum Eternus Everyone who starts off as Caldari seems to check their brain at the door and start spewing nonsense. Quote: And why do you Caldari ******s always bring up this 'chance' based thing? It's not chance when you have a 99% chance of jamming someone. More personal attacks aside; "...start spewing nonsense."* "It's not chance when you have a 99% chance of jamming someone" In order to jam your Phoon 99% of the time I need to fill my lows with distortion amps, have all lvl 5 skills and point 4 Ladar II's at your battleship. If you had those 4 ECCMs, the chance would be 30%. That's if I'm set up for Ladar jamming. No scripts for jammers to change race you remember? And you still have FoFs. If that Falcon is hit with the same amount of Damp EW, its range is down to 20KM. So it's not jamming anything. And those damps work 100% and on all other race ships. "IMO once the sensor strength of a ship is triple the jam strength of an ECM module there should be a zero chance of jamming that ship. Period." Jammers don't stack, they cycle independently. Your Phoon with 1 ECCM would have a sensor strength of 35,3 and Tech II jammers with 3 distortion amps have a strenght og 11.7, which equals less than 1/3 of 35,3 ( 35,1 ). So 1 ECCM mod should make you immune to racial tech II jammers, no matter how many you get on your ass? I'm also curious to see that scale for ecm vs. sensor strenght with your suggestion. If 35,1 is no chance to jam on your scale, the non-ECCM strength on a Phoon, 18, is 50% chance or what? Who's spouting nonsense here? had 2 overloaded eccm 78 sensor strenght and could shoot 2 rounds in minute. Arent ecm imba ?:D
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises	Posted - 2008.09.08 10:14:00 - [52] I really think ECM shoudl be solved with an TP boost. MAke target painted ship be lockable even by ECM jammed ships. That would improve a lot the TP usefullness and create a viable coutner to ECM that is less frustratign than putting an ECCM and stil get jammed 2 in 3 times. THis chage woudl only help teams, so needs organization and promoted better gameplay. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough

Pages: 1 2 :: [one 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.