EVE Search - Falcon Not overpowered?

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Falcon Not overpowered?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.09.08 10:06:00 - [61] Originally by: Rajere target painters are fine, and rapiers/huginns will start fitting atleast 1 after the nanonerf. It really depends on where everything shakes out regarding relative speeds if dual webs will be needed anymore, so they may even fit 2. Seems a lot of people missed the news on target painters. 1/ Target painters do not suck. They're an awesome counter to nano ships. 2/ Since tracking computers got reduced in capability, allowing tracking _or_ optimal, the target painter is comparable - boosts only tracking, and is range constrained, but does so for your whole gang. 3/ With webs getting reduced to 50%, that's actually going to make fitting a painter even more worthy - as it's a comparable tracking boost, but one that goes out to more range than a web does. Leave torp ravens out of it, they're an excellent ancillary module for turret ships too, especially the ones that you're fighting outside web range. -- Crane needs more grid 249km locking?
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2008.09.08 10:38:00 - [62] A pretty good way to find out if someone has a clue about Eve mechanics is to ask them to compare and contrast Target Painters and Tracking Computers.
Cpt Branko Surge.	Posted - 2008.09.08 11:34:00 - [63] Originally by: James Lyrus 1/ Target painters do not suck. They're an awesome counter to nano ships. Well, yes, but - they won't help BS much, but they'll help BCs/HACs shooting nano ships a lot - however, BCs and HACs do a very fine job shooting nanos right now if they have the range to do so ;) Originally by: James Lyrus 2/ Since tracking computers got reduced in capability, allowing tracking _or_ optimal, the target painter is comparable - boosts only tracking, and is range constrained, but does so for your whole gang. True. If you're fitting TCs to get tracking, you can comfortably use a TP too. Originally by: James Lyrus 3/ With webs getting reduced to 50%, that's actually going to make fitting a painter even more worthy - as it's a comparable tracking boost, but one that goes out to more range than a web does. It's not comparable within webrange. A 50% web is a 2x tracking boost. A 60% web, 2.5x. This is much better then TPs. In addition to the fact webs enable you to control range, of course ;) So, basically - if you're fighting out of webrange TPs are good, but within webrange they pale in comparison with webs (of course, if you have that many ships, it's allright - as anything over 4 webs is overkill). I highly doubt Rapiers/Huggins will fit them, ever. It's stupid to do so. Unbonused TP is just fine, wasting a webrange bonus (which is a huge deal, both tracking wise and tackle wise) in favour of using a TP bonus on a Huggin/Rapier would be just stupid. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Cpt Branko Surge.	Posted - 2008.09.08 11:38:00 - [64] Originally by: Atsuko Ratu Because a RR BS gang can't fit 1 TP per ship. Ya, that would be unthinkable. They can't. They need the slots for ECCM. If you've still got a spare midslot or so, then you're fitting a web or disruptor (so you can actually tackle stuff in a no-bubble environment). You're not remote repping (or firing) when jammed. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Ruciza Minmatar The Feminists	Posted - 2008.09.08 13:11:00 - [65] Edited by: Ruciza on 08/09/2008 13:12:26 Originally by: Cpt Branko So, basically - if you're fighting out of webrange TPs are good, but within webrange they pale in comparison with webs (of course, if you have that many ships, it's allright - as anything over 4 webs is overkill). I highly doubt Rapiers/Huggins will fit them, ever. It's stupid to do so. Unbonused TP is just fine, wasting a webrange bonus (which is a huge deal, both tracking wise and tackle wise) in favour of using a TP bonus on a Huggin/Rapier would be just stupid. Branko makes me physically ill. How can he not see? How can he not see? That he is utterly totally WRONG!
Cpt Branko Surge.	Posted - 2008.09.08 13:19:00 - [66] Originally by: Ruciza Edited by: Ruciza on 08/09/2008 13:12:26 Originally by: Cpt Branko So, basically - if you're fighting out of webrange TPs are good, but within webrange they pale in comparison with webs (of course, if you have that many ships, it's allright - as anything over 4 webs is overkill). I highly doubt Rapiers/Huggins will fit them, ever. It's stupid to do so. Unbonused TP is just fine, wasting a webrange bonus (which is a huge deal, both tracking wise and tackle wise) in favour of using a TP bonus on a Huggin/Rapier would be just stupid. Branko makes me physically ill. How can he not see? How can he not see? That he is utterly totally WRONG! I'm not wrong by any means. Wasting a Rapier's mid on a TP is stupid. You're way better off with using Rapiers for webbing and have someone else deal with target painting. Webrange bonus >> TP bonus. It's not that complicated really. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Klangdah Republic Military School	Posted - 2008.09.08 15:17:00 - [67] Well, theres another ECM (and general ewar) post. My two cents on the subject is YES ECM is overpowered ! Not because you get permajammed too easily, not because counter is inneficient but because not only does ECM jam you but it makes you loose all locked targets. Meaning you have to re-find in the (can be messy) overview, re-lock your targets and wait for the lock to achieve, re-activate proper modules on each targets (weapons, RR, ewar ....). Some times you can't even relock your target before the next ECM cycle. If the ECM got changed to only jam you modules so they stopped working but without loosing the locks and without loosing on wich target wich module was active I believe that would fix most problems/whines/unbalance ...
Borat Sangdiev	Posted - 2008.09.08 15:40:00 - [68] Originally by: Klangdah Well, theres another ECM (and general ewar) post. My two cents on the subject is YES ECM is overpowered ! Not because you get permajammed too easily, not because counter is inneficient but because not only does ECM jam you but it makes you loose all locked targets. Meaning you have to re-find in the (can be messy) overview, re-lock your targets and wait for the lock to achieve, re-activate proper modules on each targets (weapons, RR, ewar ....). Some times you can't even relock your target before the next ECM cycle. If the ECM got changed to only jam you modules so they stopped working but without loosing the locks and without loosing on wich target wich module was active I believe that would fix most problems/whines/unbalance ... this.... except loose = lose. i hate that spelling error.
Cpt Branko Surge.	Posted - 2008.09.08 16:04:00 - [69] Originally by: Klangdah Well, theres another ECM (and general ewar) post. My two cents on the subject is YES ECM is overpowered ! Not because you get permajammed too easily, not because counter is inneficient but because not only does ECM jam you but it makes you loose all locked targets. Meaning you have to re-find in the (can be messy) overview, re-lock your targets and wait for the lock to achieve, re-activate proper modules on each targets (weapons, RR, ewar ....). Some times you can't even relock your target before the next ECM cycle. If the ECM got changed to only jam you modules so they stopped working but without loosing the locks and without loosing on wich target wich module was active I believe that would fix most problems/whines/unbalance ... This would go a long way. Relock rate increases some 50% jam rate on a BS to basically being out for 80% of the fight or so (module activation times, cycle times, etc). Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Presidio Hug Nutz	Posted - 2008.09.08 16:08:00 - [70] The way I see it. If your gang gets owned because the opponent had ECM and you didn't. Who's problem is that? ECM has always been powerful. We used to bring 26 EWAR scorps to the fleet battles, and let me tell you they owned. If they nerf EWAR than the game becomes the boring match of who can kill faster and who can RR better. EWAR is fine, learn to use it to your advantage. BTW if CCP fixes the widow less people will complain about falcon. -
Cpt Branko Surge.	Posted - 2008.09.08 16:11:00 - [71] Originally by: Presidio The way I see it. If your gang gets owned because the opponent had ECM and you didn't. Who's the problem in that? Well, think about this (and the implication of applying that statement to not just ECM) for a moment Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Nikunai	Posted - 2008.09.08 16:52:00 - [72] Wait a sec... Cadari ewar is better than all the other ewar? Impossible. For gods sake they're the only race with a dedicated ewar bs. When a falcon can solo, tank, and do damage, then go ahead and nerf it cause it's too powerful. I mean seriously everyone thinks that Caldari are crap in pvp but the one pvp role they really excel in (and rightfully so) you want nerfed. Our ships are comparatively the slowest, lowest dps ships out there. Not to mention you gotta wait for your missiles to get there... if they get there due to smartbombs or speed. The one bone ccp threw at Caldari for pvp over the other races and you want it nerfed. It's bordering on childish cruelty at this point.
Derek Sigres	Posted - 2008.09.08 18:35:00 - [73] Originally by: Cpt Branko Originally by: Presidio The way I see it. If your gang gets owned because the opponent had ECM and you didn't. Who's the problem in that? Well, think about this (and the implication of applying that statement to not just ECM) for a moment I agree with the sentiment. In the grand scheme of eve you're looking to gain firepower superiority. ECM aids in that struggle immensely. As far as ECM countermeasures, there are lots of methods to choose from. You could for example make ECCM a SB function and make the ECCM module a "backup array". If you get jammed it only jams your primary sensors and you retain a secondary set of sensors that require a second jammer to overcome. Thus, SB's add general EWAR resistance wherease ECCM actually overcomes the problem entirely, required a slot for slot dedication of ECCM to ECM to work.
Cpt Branko Surge.	Posted - 2008.09.08 19:12:00 - [74] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 08/09/2008 19:15:03 Originally by: Merin Ryskin As I've said before, the Falcon is fine. Stop trying to fly in small gangs and you'll have no problems with them. That's what you're saying really. I won't even bring up the point of its counterparts and their EW power compared to the Falcon's EW power, or its covert ops cloak. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Cpt Branko Surge.	Posted - 2008.09.08 19:13:00 - [75] Originally by: Derek Sigres Originally by: Cpt Branko Originally by: Presidio The way I see it. If your gang gets owned because the opponent had ECM and you didn't. Who's the problem in that? Well, think about this (and the implication of applying that statement to not just ECM) for a moment I agree with the sentiment. In the grand scheme of eve you're looking to gain firepower superiority. ECM aids in that struggle immensely. As far as ECM countermeasures, there are lots of methods to choose from. You could for example make ECCM a SB function and make the ECCM module a "backup array". If you get jammed it only jams your primary sensors and you retain a secondary set of sensors that require a second jammer to overcome. Thus, SB's add general EWAR resistance wherease ECCM actually overcomes the problem entirely, required a slot for slot dedication of ECCM to ECM to work. I immensely like these ideas Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Trevor Warps	Posted - 2008.09.08 19:15:00 - [76] Of course its overpowered. The proof is : You can find every letter of its name in overpowered.
Presidio Hug Nutz	Posted - 2008.09.08 19:23:00 - [77] Originally by: Cpt Branko Originally by: Presidio The way I see it. If your gang gets owned because the opponent had ECM and you didn't. Who's the problem in that? Well, think about this (and the implication of applying that statement to not just ECM) for a moment ok: - If your gang gets owned because the opponent had DPS and you didn't. (bring more DPS) - If your gang gets owned because the opponent had RR and you didn't. (bring more RR) - If your gang gets owned because the opponent had a better FC and you didn't. (get a better FC). Did I miss your point or did you miss mine? -
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.09.08 20:18:00 - [78] Originally by: Presidio Originally by: Cpt Branko Originally by: Presidio The way I see it. If your gang gets owned because the opponent had ECM and you didn't. Who's the problem in that? Well, think about this (and the implication of applying that statement to not just ECM) for a moment ok: - If your gang gets owned because the opponent had DPS and you didn't. (bring more DPS) - If your gang gets owned because the opponent had RR and you didn't. (bring more RR) - If your gang gets owned because the opponent had a better FC and you didn't. (get a better FC). Did I miss your point or did you miss mine? Hey, I get people warping off it I don't tackle them too. That really sucks. They must be cheating or something. -- Crane needs more grid 249km locking?
Cpt Branko Surge.	Posted - 2008.09.08 21:22:00 - [79] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 08/09/2008 21:25:50 Edited by: Cpt Branko on 08/09/2008 21:24:52 Originally by: Presidio Originally by: Cpt Branko Originally by: Presidio The way I see it. If your gang gets owned because the opponent had ECM and you didn't. Who's the problem in that? Well, think about this (and the implication of applying that statement to not just ECM) for a moment ok: - If your gang gets owned because the opponent had DPS and you didn't. (bring more DPS) Now imagine if one ship of one race completely dominated when it came to bringing DPS on a small gang battlefield (ala 8 heatsink geddon without stacking nerf) and could cloak on top. Surely you're to blame if you just don't bring these ships yourself, and all is well? Imagine scouting and going 'oh shit, they've got two geddons', while the response to any other ship is 'ok, we can fight that'. That's the situation we're talking about when we discuss Falcons. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Wannabehero Caldari Absolutely No Retreat	Posted - 2008.09.08 21:51:00 - [80] I seriously dislike these discussions, as personally I do not feel the falcon is that overpowered (only the uncloak, jam, warp/recloak capability is broken IMO). What I do think is that the alternatives to the falcon, other recons EW, are just underpowered. As far as force multipliers go ECM is awesome. Damps, TD's, and TP's on the other recons need to be brought up-to-snuff. I would love it if more things in PVP worked on a chance based mechanic (other than just ECM and turret fire). So now I am going to throw my suggestion into the ring, just to feel out other's opinions on it. What if jamming didn't break ships' locks, only suppressed them for the 20sec duration? That is, ship A locks ship B then gets jammed. After 20 sec if the next jam attempt fails/doesn't occur, ship A re-estabilishes lock onto ship B instantaneously so long as no event occurs that would break the lock otherwise (warp-out, cloak, leaving targeting range, ship destruction). Personally I am not sure how to encode this but it might be possible. This negates the one-two punch of the ECMs' lock-breaking + relock time. This also differentiates ECM burst from projected ECM more, and weakens the power of ECM drones considerably (something I read complaints about alot). -- Don't harsh my mellow
Cpt Branko Surge.	Posted - 2008.09.08 22:20:00 - [81] Originally by: Wannabehero So now I am going to throw my suggestion into the ring, just to feel out other's opinions on it. What if jamming didn't break ships' locks, only suppressed them for the 20sec duration? That is, ship A locks ship B then gets jammed. After 20 sec if the next jam attempt fails/doesn't occur, ship A re-estabilishes lock onto ship B instantaneously so long as no event occurs that would break the lock otherwise (warp-out, cloak, leaving targeting range, ship destruction). Personally I am not sure how to encode this but it might be possible. This would help a lot. Currently having a 50% jam chance on a BS puts it out of the fight for significantly more then 50% of the time - thanks to relock time, to cycle times, activation delays and so on. Basically, it's more effective then it's on paper jam chance. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Corstaad Minmatar Vardr ok Lidskjalv Pirate Coalition	Posted - 2008.09.08 22:22:00 - [82] They should just move target painters to a high slot since its a very offensive EW device. Also would help with the minny utility slots .
Cpt Branko Surge.	Posted - 2008.09.08 22:24:00 - [83] Originally by: Corstaad They should just move target painters to a high slot since its a very offensive EW device. QFT. It offends me every time I use it. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Presidio Hug Nutz	Posted - 2008.09.09 00:13:00 - [84] Edited by: Presidio on 09/09/2008 00:16:12 Originally by: Cpt Branko Edited by: Cpt Branko on 08/09/2008 21:25:50 Edited by: Cpt Branko on 08/09/2008 21:24:52 Originally by: Presidio Originally by: Cpt Branko Originally by: Presidio The way I see it. If your gang gets owned because the opponent had ECM and you didn't. Who's the problem in that? Well, think about this (and the implication of applying that statement to not just ECM) for a moment ok: - If your gang gets owned because the opponent had DPS and you didn't. (bring more DPS) Now imagine if one ship of one race completely dominated when it came to bringing DPS on a small gang battlefield (ala 8 heatsink geddon without stacking nerf) and could cloak on top. Surely you're to blame if you just don't bring these ships yourself, and all is well? Imagine scouting and going 'oh shit, they've got two geddons', while the response to any other ship is 'ok, we can fight that'. That's the situation we're talking about when we discuss Falcons. I see your point. I am more worried about CCP nerfing ECM in general and dulling the game play. That's why I think falcon is fine. I do agree that other races should have comparable ships on the other hand. But training caldari frigate to IV and cruiser to V should not take more then a week and a half provided you already have the covert ops skills. Geddon example is a very exaggerated analogy though. There would be no reason to fly anything else if such ship existed. Falcon can literally get insta popped should the ECM fail. Falcon is a one trick pony. -
Atsuko Ratu Caldari VSP Corp.	Posted - 2008.09.09 00:44:00 - [85] Originally by: Kagura Nikon Maybe you want to type in portuguese, german, or russian then. I can speak those languages as well. Any of them you feel confortable typing in then? Nope, I'd probably be on those types of forums if I could. Originally by: Kagura Nikon Second. Limited mindset ftl you have. An interceptor can be at 20 40 even 150 km rom you and stil be doign its job, by beign at 20 km from another ship! Or you never ever saw how ECM ships operate? Disablign tacklers from far 100 km away? Good thing all my BS have a TP like I said. I also probably wouldn't be 150km from my fellow snipers Also, TP range is 45 optimal 90 fall off with max skills. Gotta admit, non bonus TP effectiveness smacks non bonus ECM effectiveness around like it's nothing. You seem to have the limited mindset. A TP helps against any target with turrets and smaller targets with missiles. ECM takes enemies out of fights (a decrease in incoming DPS), while a TP increases tracking and target size (an increase in outgoing DPS). Obviously, the TP is harder to notice, which is why it is largely underrated. I use missile ships, so honestly they tend to be useless for me in anything but a torp raven. On that note, I would always pick a t2 TP over a T2 ECM in anything but a ECM ship, no contest. Non-bonus ECM is pretty much useless. TP are not.
Jayzee	Posted - 2008.09.09 01:36:00 - [86] It needs a nerf, falcon and rook can disable any targets from up to 250k+ range while no other similiar ship can do. Correct me if IM wrong but that is very handy in lowsec outside of sentrie ranges.
Atsuko Ratu Caldari VSP Corp.	Posted - 2008.09.09 01:51:00 - [87] Originally by: Jayzee It needs a nerf, falcon and rook can disable any targets from up to 250k+ range while no other similiar ship can do. Correct me if IM wrong but that is very handy in lowsec outside of sentrie ranges. Not any! Not above 250km! No other ship has those bonuses, so it makes sense that no other ship can do that! x3
Nikunai	Posted - 2008.09.09 02:16:00 - [88] Originally by: Ethan Hunte Think again. Sensor stength of 101 with two tech 2 eccms on a combat recon ship and still get perma jammed. Yeah chance based my ass. Fly a falcon and watch how many jams you miss when someone has eccm. Stop throwing around the phrase perma jammed you weren't perma jammed. If you were you're either incredibly unlucky or a plain liar. Proof or stfu as they say. Only way that is even remotely possible is if the jammer had a full rack of racials matching your ship which then pretty much makes the falcon ineffective against anyone else. Sounds balanced to me. Funny how the same two or three people keep post whoring in the nerf the falcon threads. cough Borat and Branko cough
Myra2007 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.09.09 04:55:00 - [89] Originally by: Presidio But training caldari frigate to IV and cruiser to V should not take more then a week and a half provided you already have the covert ops skills. Where can i buy these magic implants? I am achura and i needed much longer.
Presidio Hug Nutz	Posted - 2008.09.09 05:06:00 - [90] Originally by: Myra2007 Originally by: Presidio But training caldari frigate to IV and cruiser to V should not take more then a week and a half provided you already have the covert ops skills. Where can i buy these magic implants? I am achura and i needed much longer. oops sorry, I totally messed up my math on that one. my bad -

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: 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.