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)
Ethan Hunte TARDZ	Posted - 2008.09.05 14:19:00 - [1] 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. the only recon ship in game with a definitive electronic warfare that (since the boost) works 100%. whine whine whine
Fuglife Celestial Apocalypse	Posted - 2008.09.05 14:22:00 - [2] I see your in the right corp.
Evanade Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.09.05 14:25:00 - [3] You're doing it wrong. 6 racials on a falcon nets a total of 80-odd jam strength which isn't even cumulative so your chances of being jammed are only about 60% with that strength. So one ship has a 60% chance every 20 seconds of taking the other out of the fight, and to do so has to dedicate its entire fit to it, while having bubblewrap for protection. Sounds quite good to me. Fail troll is fail. --------------------------- sok alt - main got banzored
Akuma Tsukai Amarr	Posted - 2008.09.05 14:32:00 - [4] i demand racial modules for all ewar, u hear me CCP? i want my anti caldari web which stops them right there, a TP which will make them planetsizzed, and TD... ermmm scratch that RSD to make them whimper with 5 km targeting range. and I WANT IT NOW ---- Drones eat everything. Trust me.
Kaeten Hybrid Syndicate	Posted - 2008.09.05 14:32:00 - [5] Originally by: Fuglife I see your in the right corp. ________________________ I'M POOR
Akuma Tsukai Amarr	Posted - 2008.09.05 14:34:00 - [6] i demand racial modules for all ewar, u hear me CCP? i want my anti caldari web which stops them right there, a TP which will make them planetsizzed, and TD... ermmm scratch that RSD to make them whimper with 5 km targeting range. and I WANT IT NOW ---- Drones eat everything. Trust me.
Kano Sekor Amarr Burning Steel Inc.	Posted - 2008.09.05 14:35:00 - [7] Originally by: Akuma Tsukai i demand racial modules for all ewar, u hear me CCP? i want my anti caldari web which stops them right there, a TP which will make them planetsizzed, and TD... ermmm scratch that RSD to make them whimper with 5 km targeting range. and I WANT IT NOW WTB Caldari Racial TD best module in game :D ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Akuma Tsukai Amarr	Posted - 2008.09.05 14:47:00 - [8] Edited by: Akuma Tsukai on 05/09/2008 14:48:08 man triple post? some lag today. ---- Drones eat everything. Trust me.
Cautet Precision Engineering	Posted - 2008.09.05 15:18:00 - [9] Edited by: Cautet on 05/09/2008 15:20:45 Edited by: Cautet on 05/09/2008 15:19:44 Originally by: Akuma Tsukai i demand racial modules for all ewar, u hear me CCP? i want my anti caldari web which stops them right there, a TP which will make them planetsizzed, and TD... ermmm scratch that RSD to make them whimper with 5 km targeting range. and I WANT IT NOW You want webs that only work on 1/4 of ships so you need to dedicate 4 midslots to using webs to guarentee you have the races all coverered, plus another midslot for galenti because they are very common. Plus all the lowslots to making the midslots work. Plus all the rigs to making the midslots work. I HAVE THE SOLUTION FOR YOU: THE 'SPECIAL' 5 STEP PLAN FOR RACIAL WEBBIFIER 1. Buy a set of coloured crayons. 2. Open you ship fitting window, make active a ship with as many midpoints as you can find. I suggest the Pilgrim because of it's cloaking bonus. Fill the mids with webs and don't forget a cloak. Don't bother with other fittings, unless you want to jam some short range weapons on it for giggles. 3. Drink a bottle of vodka. 4. Make sure you have only active modules visable and undock. 5. Setup your new 'special' webs by colouring in the racials on your screen Away you go!!!!! Don't forget to log in to vent and x up for some once in a lifetime pew pew Edit: don't be discouraged if you die a few times, as it can be quite a steep learning experience.
Mr Ignitious Gallente R.E.C.O.N.	Posted - 2008.09.05 15:27:00 - [10] falcons are fine, eccm needs some modifying, arazu/lach need strength boost to 7.5% or 10%... then its all cake.
supr3m3justic3 Caldari ACE'S OVER 8'S	Posted - 2008.09.05 16:58:00 - [11] Originally by: Fuglife I see your in the right corp. ha ah aha ha aha ha ah ah aha __________________________________________________
BiggestT Caldari Space Oddysey Pupule 'Ohana	Posted - 2008.09.05 17:05:00 - [12] I see this- Originally by: Ethan Hunte whine whine whine And this- Originally by: Ethan Hunte falcaon waa And this- TARDZ and i lol Proudly annoying FC's since 2007 Remove m for manditory in mwd!
Trevor Warps	Posted - 2008.09.05 19:31:00 - [13] Originally by: Evanade You're doing it wrong. 6 racials on a falcon nets a total of 80-odd jam strength which isn't even cumulative so your chances of being jammed are only about 60% with that strength. So one ship has a 60% chance every 20 seconds of taking the other out of the fight, and to do so has to dedicate its entire fit to it, while having bubblewrap for protection. Sounds quite good to me. Fail troll is fail. Maybe you failed to notice that even a ships that fits defences agaisnt it is still screwed ? Any ship with 2 sensor boosters wont get hit quite hard by a Lachesis. Any ship with 2 cap boosters wont get cap drained too badly by a curse. Any ship with 2 ECCM will still get jammed by a falcon .... Any ships can get webbed by rapiers but thats about to be changed, so.
Liang Nuren Perkone	Posted - 2008.09.05 19:47:00 - [14] Originally by: Trevor Warps Maybe you failed to notice that even a ships that fits defences agaisnt it is still screwed ? Any ship with 2 sensor boosters wont get hit quite hard by a Lachesis. Any ship with 2 cap boosters wont get cap drained too badly by a curse. Any ship with 2 ECCM will still get jammed by a falcon .... Any ships can get webbed by rapiers but thats about to be changed, so. The thing about it is that no ewar counter eliminates that ewar's effect. It is reasonble to be jammed by a falcon if you fit an eccm. This is especially true as you consider that a Falcon devotes alot more raw slottage to ewar than an Arazu/Lachesis. Now, all of this isn't to say that the Arazu/Lachesis are fine (they're not), but is to say that ECCM should probably be boosted some before we start considering an all out nerf of ecm/ewar. Also, you neglect the effect that TD's have against Minnie ships. Falloff based ships (projectiles, really) are 100% screwed and without any counter whatsoever to tracking disruptors. -Liang -- I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Cpt Cosmic	Posted - 2008.09.05 20:08:00 - [15] Edited by: Cpt Cosmic on 05/09/2008 20:10:04 Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Trevor Warps Maybe you failed to notice that even a ships that fits defences agaisnt it is still screwed ? Any ship with 2 sensor boosters wont get hit quite hard by a Lachesis. Any ship with 2 cap boosters wont get cap drained too badly by a curse. Any ship with 2 ECCM will still get jammed by a falcon .... Any ships can get webbed by rapiers but thats about to be changed, so. The thing about it is that no ewar counter eliminates that ewar's effect. It is reasonble to be jammed by a falcon if you fit an eccm. This is especially true as you consider that a Falcon devotes alot more raw slottage to ewar than an Arazu/Lachesis. Now, all of this isn't to say that the Arazu/Lachesis are fine (they're not), but is to say that ECCM should probably be boosted some before we start considering an all out nerf of ecm/ewar. Also, you neglect the effect that TD's have against Minnie ships. Falloff based ships (projectiles, really) are 100% screwed and without any counter whatsoever to tracking disruptors. -Liang you can fly closer against damps or pilot manually against TDs, you can put your drones on that curse or minmatar recon, you cant do anything against being jammed by a falcon but prey your eccm or mate saves you, that is the difference and that makes ECM somehow too strong. luck should not determine the result of a fight and especially flying a falcon has nothing to do with skill, you warp in @150km and start jamming and when they tune speed down with the patch they will be even stronger (it will be next to impossible to force one off effectively or get one, its a useless attempt now too because they just warp @150km on the other side)
Rajere No Trademark Obsidian Empire	Posted - 2008.09.05 20:11:00 - [16] Quote: Also, you neglect the effect that TD's have against turret ships. turret based ships are 100% screwed and without any counter whatsoever to tracking disruptors. fixed for ya. NOTR How to Fail at Eve
Liang Nuren Perkone	Posted - 2008.09.05 20:20:00 - [17] Originally by: Cpt Cosmic you can fly closer against damps or pilot manually against TDs Flying manually doesn't generally work due to the recons being much smaller than you are. Flying closer generally isn't an option. Quote: you can put your drones on that curse or minmatar recon, you cant do anything against being jammed by a falcon but prey your eccm or mate saves you, that is the difference and that makes ECM somehow too strong. Put your drones on the falcon? Wait, he's a long way away. Did you bring anything to the fight to counter range? No? I'm crying for you - really. Quote: luck should not determine the result of a fight and especially flying a falcon has nothing to do with skill, you warp in @150km and start jamming and when they tune speed down with the patch they will be even stronger (it will be next to impossible to force one off effectively or get one, its a useless attempt now too because they just warp @150km on the other side) If you assume that a Falcon is only 150km away, the counters are legion. Fit or fly one. -Liang -- I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Methesda	Posted - 2008.09.05 20:23:00 - [18] If ECM got a nerf, no-one would use it, imho. sorry, but !/signed. Originally by: northwesten troll? learn what a troll is moron!
Liang Nuren Perkone	Posted - 2008.09.05 20:26:00 - [19] Originally by: Methesda If ECM got a nerf, no-one would use it, imho. sorry, but !/signed. That's really one of the problems with Eve. Either CCP overboosts something else (and thus there's no real point in flying ECM) or they overnerf it (and there's no real point in flying ECM). That said, I think the thing that kills people about ECM is that you can't target for 20 seconds. Maybe we should just change the cycle time/duration on ECM to ~5s. -Liang -- I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Atsuko Ratu Caldari VSP Corp.	Posted - 2008.09.05 20:30:00 - [20] Originally by: Liang Nuren That said, I think the thing that kills people about ECM is that you can't target for 20 seconds. Maybe we should just change the cycle time/duration on ECM to ~5s. -Liang 5 seconds? Even a 50% jam chance would literally perma jam a bs 10 seconds maybe, but it's not like 20 seconds is that long. It's also how long the ECM is useless if it misses a cycle, and that much longer to change to the interceptor that's suiciding toward you
Liang Nuren Perkone	Posted - 2008.09.05 20:39:00 - [21] Originally by: Atsuko Ratu 5 seconds? Even a 50% jam chance would literally perma jam a bs 10 seconds maybe, but it's not like 20 seconds is that long. It's also how long the ECM is useless if it misses a cycle, and that much longer to change to the interceptor that's suiciding toward you Thou shalt not block my stealth boost! At any rate, people's frustration with ECM entirely stems from the appearance that they're just "sitting there" any more than if another form of ewar is on them. -Liang -- I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Borat Sangdiev	Posted - 2008.09.05 20:40:00 - [22] Originally by: Atsuko Ratu Originally by: Liang Nuren That said, I think the thing that kills people about ECM is that you can't target for 20 seconds. Maybe we should just change the cycle time/duration on ECM to ~5s. -Liang 5 seconds? Even a 50% jam chance would literally perma jam a bs 10 seconds maybe, but it's not like 20 seconds is that long. It's also how long the ECM is useless if it misses a cycle, and that much longer to change to the interceptor that's suiciding toward you another problem is its not only the 20 seconds that you are jammed, its another 5+ seconds to re-lock your target and have the modules activate depending on your targets signature radius. ECM is totally superior to all other forms of ewar, there is no rival.
Borat Sangdiev	Posted - 2008.09.05 20:42:00 - [23] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Atsuko Ratu 5 seconds? Even a 50% jam chance would literally perma jam a bs 10 seconds maybe, but it's not like 20 seconds is that long. It's also how long the ECM is useless if it misses a cycle, and that much longer to change to the interceptor that's suiciding toward you Thou shalt not block my stealth boost! At any rate, people's frustration with ECM entirely stems from the appearance that they're just "sitting there" any more than if another form of ewar is on them. -Liang I think its more than appearance liang, in effect a victim of ecm is made no more useful than a shuttle in a fight, less useless perhaps depending on your mass.
Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2008.09.05 20:45:00 - [24] Originally by: Atsuko Ratu Originally by: Liang Nuren That said, I think the thing that kills people about ECM is that you can't target for 20 seconds. Maybe we should just change the cycle time/duration on ECM to ~5s. -Liang 5 seconds? Even a 50% jam chance would literally perma jam a bs 10 seconds maybe, but it's not like 20 seconds is that long. It's also how long the ECM is useless if it misses a cycle, and that much longer to change to the interceptor that's suiciding toward you I would go with 5-10 seconds of jam, and a 20 second cycle timer hmmm or maybe make it ecm strength/sensor strength -> % of jam cycle time you are jammed.
Liang Nuren Perkone	Posted - 2008.09.05 20:53:00 - [25] Originally by: Borat Sangdiev I think its more than appearance liang, in effect a victim of ecm is made no more useful than a shuttle in a fight, less useless perhaps depending on your mass. Drones aren't useless, FOFs aren't useless, smartbombs, you can still be remote repped and sponge damage/Ewar, etc. You are not useless. -Liang -- I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Liang Nuren Perkone	Posted - 2008.09.05 20:54:00 - [26] Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton I would go with 5-10 seconds of jam, and a 20 second cycle timer hmmm or maybe make it ecm strength/sensor strength -> % of jam cycle time you are jammed. The problem with that is that it leaves Falcons 100% vulnerable to fast moving interceptors. They literally could not jam them. -Liang -- I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2008.09.05 21:21:00 - [27] Edited by: Chainsaw Plankton on 05/09/2008 21:22:43 Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton I would go with 5-10 seconds of jam, and a 20 second cycle timer hmmm or maybe make it ecm strength/sensor strength -> % of jam cycle time you are jammed. The problem with that is that it leaves Falcons 100% vulnerable to fast moving interceptors. They literally could not jam them. -Liang in the first case 14 strength on a falcon / 12 sensor strength on a crow -> 100% chance to jam, gets jammed for n seconds, falcon warps out/cloaks 14 strength on a falcon / 12 sensor strength on a crow -> 100% chance to jam and 14/12>1 so I guess it would truncate to a 1, aka the full 20 second jam cycle, same as it was (hmm or would it get extra jam time ) now on a carrier you won't jam it very often (as it is now, unless he say fits all racials just to get a <carrier type>) but when you do jam it you would only have it jammed for a few seconds, plus it would give arazus a bit of a role with scan res scripts to keep them shut down while the falcon is cycling for another jam
Liang Nuren Perkone	Posted - 2008.09.05 21:23:00 - [28] Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton in the first case 14 strength on a falcon / 12 sensor strength on a crow -> 100% chance to jam, gets jammed for n seconds, falcon warps out/cloaks 14 strength on a falcon / 12 sensor strength on a crow -> 100% chance to jam and 14/12>1 so I guess it would truncate to a 1, aka the full 20 second jam cycle, same as it was now on a carrier you won't jam it very often (as it is now, unless he say fits all racials just to get a <carrier type>) but when you do jam it you would only have it jammed for a few seconds, plus it would give arazus a bit of a role with scan res scripts to keep them shut down while the falcon is cycling for another jam Eh, it might work. I'd have to play with it before knowing really. -Liang -- I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Liang Nuren Perkone	Posted - 2008.09.05 21:40:00 - [29] Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton right, just in the idea phase, haven't gotten around to number crunching, and tbh I'm a wee bit lazy to do that then there is the issue of if it misses a jam and gets hit it is dead after 2 hits from just about anything, and it barely survives the first. falcons are also rather situational, as gang size goes up they seem to get less useful. but in them 3 man pirate gangs they are almost too good. Heh, really if damps on specialized ships were as useful as they really should be you wouldn't see so many Falcons in pirate gangs. -Liang -- I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises	Posted - 2008.09.05 22:12:00 - [30] I can't beleive we see peopel whining about ecm beign weak or dampeners beign weak. I have only 2 words for those. TARGET PAINTERS! ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Liang Nuren Perkone	Posted - 2008.09.05 22:16:00 - [31] Originally by: Kagura Nikon I can't beleive we see peopel whining about ecm beign weak or dampeners beign weak. I have only 2 words for those. TARGET PAINTERS! Torp Raven? I think a better word, though, is web after the web nerf. Minnie recons are going to suuuuck. -Liang -- I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Corstaad Minmatar Vardr ok Lidskjalv Pirate Coalition	Posted - 2008.09.06 00:47:00 - [32] EW=CC for the WoW bg crowd. Ways to counter CC is CC or just get rid of them. Sense EvE is also the EFT game people choose DPS over a balanced setup. I just solved everyones problems with Nano/EW/Bigger Ships.
Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2008.09.06 05:36:00 - [33] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton right, just in the idea phase, haven't gotten around to number crunching, and tbh I'm a wee bit lazy to do that then there is the issue of if it misses a jam and gets hit it is dead after 2 hits from just about anything, and it barely survives the first. falcons are also rather situational, as gang size goes up they seem to get less useful. but in them 3 man pirate gangs they are almost too good. Heh, really if damps on specialized ships were as useful as they really should be you wouldn't see so many Falcons in pirate gangs. -Liang maybe, but heh sitting in gategun range in a recon is hurty, or is that what you meant by useful
Gabriel Virtus	Posted - 2008.09.06 05:48:00 - [34] Edited by: Gabriel Virtus on 06/09/2008 05:49:21 No dude, having a recon that can disable 5 targets from 200km away isn't overpowered at all. Every other race can disable MAYBE 2 ships. Minmatar really disable ships, just pin them down. Flame on -GV
Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2008.09.06 05:58:00 - [35] Originally by: Gabriel Virtus Edited by: Gabriel Virtus on 06/09/2008 05:49:21 No dude, having a recon that can disable 5 targets from 200km away isn't overpowered at all. Every other race can disable MAYBE 2 ships. Minmatar really disable ships, just pin them down. Flame on -GV maybe if you are fighting a frigate fleet. realistically it will disable 2, mess with 1, and fling poo at another, against battleships I wish I had that magic falcon that could perma jam 5 ships
BiggestT Caldari Space Oddysey Pupule 'Ohana	Posted - 2008.09.06 06:16:00 - [36] Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton Originally by: Atsuko Ratu Originally by: Liang Nuren That said, I think the thing that kills people about ECM is that you can't target for 20 seconds. Maybe we should just change the cycle time/duration on ECM to ~5s. -Liang 5 seconds? Even a 50% jam chance would literally perma jam a bs 10 seconds maybe, but it's not like 20 seconds is that long. It's also how long the ECM is useless if it misses a cycle, and that much longer to change to the interceptor that's suiciding toward you I would go with 5-10 seconds of jam, and a 20 second cycle timer hmmm or maybe make it ecm strength/sensor strength -> % of jam cycle time you are jammed. hmm, no i think that 15 seconds on jam and 20 second cycle wld be better, then ppl still have a chance but falcon isnt completely vulenrable. Otherwise just leave it as is, it aint that bad Proudly annoying FC's since 2007
Satura Most Wanted INC	Posted - 2008.09.06 07:29:00 - [37] I wanted to post something, but Liang already said that. Only thing left for me to say is: "Less forum ****ing please, more pew pew!" Just play the game. There are ways of dealing with everything, stop crying for nerfs every time you get owned. Wondering if you ever thing that the problem is yourself and not some insanely imbalanced mod/ship? You will die anyway, even when everything is nerfed.
SoftRevolution	Posted - 2008.09.06 13:49:00 - [38] Edited by: SoftRevolution on 06/09/2008 13:51:35 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. the only recon ship in game with a definitive electronic warfare that (since the boost) works 100%. whine whine whine lolwhat 101 sensor strength? That's like a 12% chance to jam per best named jammer Caldari. Statistically neither a Falcon nor a Rook could literally permajam you even if they brought a full rack of best named Caldari jammers (unlikely). Did I just get trolled? As for "5 targets permajammed from 200km away", I wish EVE RELATED CONTENT
Atsuko Ratu Caldari VSP Corp.	Posted - 2008.09.06 14:06:00 - [39] Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton I would go with 5-10 seconds of jam, and a 20 second cycle timer Ya, this would effectively destroy ECM
Akuma Tsukai Amarr	Posted - 2008.09.06 16:23:00 - [40] well that is the purpose of this tipic, is it not ---- Drones eat everything. Trust me.
Evanade Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.09.06 16:30:00 - [41] Originally by: Gabriel Virtus Edited by: Gabriel Virtus on 06/09/2008 05:49:21 No dude, having a recon that can disable 5 targets from 200km away isn't overpowered at all. Every other race can disable MAYBE 2 ships. Minmatar really disable ships, just pin them down. Flame on -GV your tears of incompetence, they are delicious --------------------------- sok alt - main got banzored
Rajere No Trademark Obsidian Empire	Posted - 2008.09.07 01:12:00 - [42] I fly a falcon pretty much exclusively now. I'll be the first to admit they're pretty overpowered in small gang warfare in general, though they're less effective as your gang sizes get up towards fleet sized. eccm mods are due for a buff. The falcon could probably make do with a 10%/lvl str bonus rather than 20%, in exchange for the covert cloak. This gives the rook a reason to exist, though i'd bet the falcon would still be favored 9/10 (rather than the 10/10). Combination of slightly weaker jam str on falcons and buffing ECCM mods to where they should have been all along would go a long way towards fixing the "falcon" problem. For ECCM, they need a flat str increase per mod fitted (mid/lows), stacking penalized normally, instead of a % increase. Generally speaking, as you move up in ship classes from frigs to caps, the number of overall module slots increases as well as their sensor strengths. This means an inty that sacrifices one of its only 3 mid slots gets jack from using an eccm while a BS or carrier with 11-15 mid/low slots available gets huge increases from fitting them. NOTR How to Fail at Eve
Merin Ryskin Peregrine Industries	Posted - 2008.09.07 01:25:00 - [43] Originally by: Rajere eccm mods are due for a buff. The falcon could probably make do with a 10%/lvl str bonus rather than 20%, in exchange for the covert cloak. This gives the rook a reason to exist, though i'd bet the falcon would still be favored 9/10 (rather than the 10/10). Fine, just as soon as the Rapier gets half its web range bonus removed, the Arazu loses half its scram range bonus (or all of its damp bonus), and the Pilgrim... well, the Pilgrim already had its cargo size bonus removed for useless NOS and TD bonuses, so I guess we don't really need to nerf it. The Rook/Falcon "problem" is no more of a problem than any of the other useless combat recons. As for ECM cycle time reduction: this is a Falcon BOOST. While you might not be frustrated by 20 second jamming, you now have two problems: 1) Re-locking becomes a more significant problem. For example, with the 5 seconds proposed, a Falcon's ECM would be twice as effective. Since the target will spend virtually all of 5 seconds trying to re-lock something, the Falcon could alternate jamming on two sets of targets, effectively taking them all out of the fight. 2) Missing a jam cycle or picking the wrong target is no longer a big problem. With 20 second jam cycles, a Falcon that misses a cycle or gets surprised by another target will face a long wait before it can jam again. With 5 second cycle times, there's effectively no wait. And jam time less than cycle time? HELL NO. This would completely break the Falcon and make it absolutely useless. It would be suicide to fly the ship, as even a successful jam will still give the target 5 seconds to shoot the Falcon (unless the Falcon saves half its jammers to cover that 5 second window). As I've said before, the Falcon is fine. Stop trying to fit for max EFT damage and you'll have no problems with them.
Spaztick Canadian Imperial Armaments EVESpace	Posted - 2008.09.07 03:15:00 - [44] As for nano nerf: this is a Vagabond BOOST. While you might not be frustrated by 20 dps, you now have two problems: 1) Avoiding damage becomes a more significant problem. For example, with the nano nerf, a Vagabond's MWD would be twice as effective. Since the target will spend virtually all of 5 minutes trying to kill something, the Vagabond could alternate tackling on two sets of targets, effectively taking them all out of the fight. 2) Missing a MWD cycle or picking the wrong target is no longer a big problem. With nos/neut changes, a Vagabond that misses a cycle or gets surprised by another target will face a long wait before it can MWD again. With instant kill of MWD cycle times, there's effectively no wait. And MWD speed than missile speed? HELL NO. This would completely break the Vagabond and make it absolutely useless. It would be suicide to fly the ship, as even a successful tackle will still give the target 2 seconds to shoot the Vagabond (unless the Vagabond saves half its cap to cover that warp-away window). As I've said before, the Vagabond is fine. Stop trying to fit for max EFT damage and you'll have no problems with them. lolwut But seriously, more people should have some type of spacer in their sigs to show it's not part of the post.
Merin Ryskin Peregrine Industries	Posted - 2008.09.07 04:05:00 - [45] Can I have some of what you're smoking?
Kiki Arnolds Caldari	Posted - 2008.09.07 04:30:00 - [46] The biggest problem with balancing the falcon is that 100% of its combat ability is devoted to its ECM... It has effectively no dps, no drones, no tackle, no logistics, and at most a 1600 plate for a tank (many don't even fit that). The vast majority of other ships contribute in more than one way, dps + tackle, ewar + dps, dps + logistics, and almost all have real tanks whether speed or damage tanks... Sure the falcon does have some turret/launcher slots, good luck surviving close enough to use em... ç¦
Angelina Arwen	Posted - 2008.09.07 07:21:00 - [47] ^ That is true and spot on what you just said. However the caldari recons are just way to good for their role, which is a good thing. They do what they are suppose to do. Ecm strength isn't really the problem here, its the range. Disabling up to 5 targets 200km away is overpowered because other ships cannot do that. Other recons can only disable one or two targets, and they do that at a much closer range, and some of them are not good enough to even do that. Thats the point, Caldari recons are overpowered because other recons are imbalanced.
Merin Ryskin Peregrine Industries	Posted - 2008.09.07 07:50:00 - [48] Originally by: Angelina Arwen ^ That is true and spot on what you just said. However the caldari recons are just way to good for their role, which is a good thing. They do what they are suppose to do. Ecm strength isn't really the problem here, its the range. Disabling up to 5 targets 200km away is overpowered because other ships cannot do that. Other recons can only disable one or two targets, and they do that at a much closer range, and some of them are not good enough to even do that. Thats the point, Caldari recons are overpowered because other recons are imbalanced. And I will repeat what I've said far too many times already: quit whining that the other recons are not as good at being a Falcon as the Falcon is. This is not their job. Once you look at what they are actually supposed to do, the difference is a lot less (though the Arazu could use a damp strength increase). The Rapier is an offensive recon. Why disable a target when you can make everyone in your gang hit it for full damage and insta-pop it? While the Rapier may or may not take a hit from the nano nerf, balancing the Rapier is a problem independent of the Falcon, the two ships just have completely different roles. The Arazu is an ewar/tackler hybrid with some dps on the side. Unlike the Falcon, its job is to disable the target AND warp scramble it. Complaining that the dedicated ewar ship is better at the job than the hybrid is just stupid and completely misses the point of what the two ships are meant to do. Fix the damage done by the script nerf, and the Arazu goes back to being better than the Falcon for solo/small-gang fights. The Pilgrim is an awesome covert ops hauler, something the Falcon and its pathetic three low slots (all of them required for SDAs) can not do. The fact that it sucks at doing anything else has nothing to do with the Falcon. Delete every Falcon and you STILL won't have a Pilgrim setup that doesn't involve cargo expanders. The combat recons are just sucky versions of their cloaking counterparts, and are therefore irrelevant.
Rajere No Trademark Obsidian Empire	Posted - 2008.09.07 09:45:00 - [49] Quote: The biggest problem with balancing the falcon is that 100% of its combat ability is devoted to its ECM... It has effectively no dps, no drones, no tackle, no logistics, and at most a 1600 plate for a tank (many don't even fit that). The vast majority of other ships contribute in more than one way, dps + tackle, ewar + dps, dps + logistics, and almost all have real tanks whether speed or damage tanks... Sure the falcon does have some turret/launcher slots, good luck surviving close enough to use em... ç¦ stupidest argument ever. I had written up a 3 paragraph rant pointing out the idiocy of this line of thought, but the forums ate it. If you can't figure out why this 'argument' is ******ed by yourself, I may remember retype it all later. NOTR How to Fail at Eve
whysoserious	Posted - 2008.09.07 10:34:00 - [50] Originally by: Merin Ryskin The Rapier is an offensive recon. Why disable a target when you can make everyone in your gang hit it for full damage and insta-pop it? While the Rapier may or may not take a hit from the nano nerf, balancing the Rapier is a problem independent of the Falcon, the two ships just have completely different roles. The Arazu is an ewar/tackler hybrid with some dps on the side. Unlike the Falcon, its job is to disable the target AND warp scramble it. Complaining that the dedicated ewar ship is better at the job than the hybrid is just stupid and completely misses the point of what the two ships are meant to do. Fix the damage done by the script nerf, and the Arazu goes back to being better than the Falcon for solo/small-gang fights. The Pilgrim is an awesome covert ops hauler, something the Falcon and its pathetic three low slots (all of them required for SDAs) can not do. The fact that it sucks at doing anything else has nothing to do with the Falcon. Delete every Falcon and you STILL won't have a Pilgrim setup that doesn't involve cargo expanders. But rapiers are getting nerfed! And wow, the pilgrim is an awesome covert ops hauler, because thats the reason why I trained for that ship. (sarcasm) Cadari recons are awesome at what they do, they are the perfect ship for their role, they have a huge advantage and have their weaknesses, where as the rapier is balance (atm), arazu is underpowered, pilgrim is dog shit.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises	Posted - 2008.09.07 11:53:00 - [51] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Kagura Nikon I can't beleive we see peopel whining about ecm beign weak or dampeners beign weak. I have only 2 words for those. TARGET PAINTERS! Torp Raven? I think a better word, though, is web after the web nerf. Minnie recons are going to suuuuck. -Liang notice how broken that ewar is when the ship tah bennefits from it is from an enemy faction adn is the only ewar that have ZERO usefulness without another specific ship around. IF anything Target Painters Must be buffed. I still support the concept to make target painted ships be targeteable even by ships that are cm jammed. In other words Ships A B C D and E. Ship E Jamms ship C. Ship C cannot lock his enemies A and B. But if D target paints A, then C can lock A but still cannot lock B. That would balance ECM and give Target Painters a real usefulness. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Sexiest Beast Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2008.09.07 11:58:00 - [52] "1 in a million chances happen 9 times out of 10" I always found this quote relevant when thinking about ECM
Rajere No Trademark Obsidian Empire	Posted - 2008.09.07 12:02:00 - [53] 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. NOTR How to Fail at Eve
Alt altski	Posted - 2008.09.07 15:37:00 - [54] Tbh it does need a nerf. Especially if the speed changes come through, they are going to be extremely hard to get out to ... extremely hard to not get jammed by and just be plain op like now. And all them complaints about but its the falcons only job .. it insta pops if it gets shot at. Well erm arazu's insta pop when they get shot at .. only difference is if they get locked down they cant jam and gtfo. Maybe if falcons range was 40k optimal with max skills and 20k falloff you could at least fit a drone range unit and counter them IF you get a lock. And remember you can always fit a shield extender have a little tank ... just like the rapier has to do ... just like the curse .. and sometimes the arazu they have to sacrifice their ewar to survive under 50.
Atsuko Ratu Caldari VSP Corp.	Posted - 2008.09.07 15:43:00 - [55] Edited by: Atsuko Ratu on 07/09/2008 15:44:11 Originally by: Alt altski Maybe if falcons range was 40k optimal with max skills and 20k falloff you could at least fit a drone range unit and counter them IF you get a lock. Yep, we all need a drone range unit to use them out to 60km. But seriously, 60km? Falcons would become useless in anything higher than 3v3 And ya, target painters are stupid effective, tbh. 3 on an orbiting ceptor will pretty much destroy it
Alt altski	Posted - 2008.09.07 15:48:00 - [56] Originally by: Atsuko Ratu Edited by: Atsuko Ratu on 07/09/2008 15:44:11 Originally by: Alt altski Maybe if falcons range was 40k optimal with max skills and 20k falloff you could at least fit a drone range unit and counter them IF you get a lock. Yep, we all need a drone range unit to use them out to 60km. But seriously, 60km? Falcons would become useless in anything higher than 3v3 And ya, target painters are stupid effective, tbh. 3 on an orbiting ceptor will pretty much destroy it Yeah lets all fit 3 target painters to our ships ... they are so practical in EVERY situation just like jamming ? And no they wouldnt become useless ..... they would just need to fit a tank ... not have full jamming gear therefore not being super op.
Atsuko Ratu Caldari VSP Corp.	Posted - 2008.09.07 15:55:00 - [57] Edited by: Atsuko Ratu on 07/09/2008 15:55:05 Originally by: Alt altski Yeah lets all fit 3 target painters to our ships ... they are practical in EVERY situation just like jamming ? And no they wouldnt become useless ..... they would just need to fit a tank ... not have full jamming gear (5-7 mids, 3 lows, 2 rigs) therefore being pretty much useless. Fixed. And yes, TPs heavily increase damage and eliminate tracking issues. They are extremely useful to any ship using a weapon (more so for turrets; mainly because missiles are hardcapped on velocity/size, while an increase in size makes it easier for all turrets to track) Because a RR BS gang can't fit 1 TP per ship. Ya, that would be unthinkable.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises	Posted - 2008.09.07 23:03:00 - [58] Originally by: Atsuko Ratu Edited by: Atsuko Ratu on 07/09/2008 15:44:11 Originally by: Alt altski Maybe if falcons range was 40k optimal with max skills and 20k falloff you could at least fit a drone range unit and counter them IF you get a lock. Yep, we all need a drone range unit to use them out to 60km. But seriously, 60km? Falcons would become useless in anything higher than 3v3 And ya, target painters are stupid effective, tbh. 3 on an orbiting ceptor will pretty much destroy it this is among the most IDIOTIC things i ever read in this forums. How useful is a ceptors with 3 ECM on it? yeahh all yout theory down into drain. Target paitners are ALMSOT usefull ian very very limited situation. And don't forget they have 40 km range, a ceptor wil be out of range in 6 seconds. So Shut up! Anyoen that say Target painters are fine and with same parameters dare to say ECM don't need to benerfed should loose driver license due to BLINDNESS! ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Atsuko Ratu Caldari VSP Corp.	Posted - 2008.09.08 00:57:00 - [59] Edited by: Atsuko Ratu on 08/09/2008 00:58:37 Originally by: Kagura Nikon this is among the most IDIOTIC things i ever read in this forums. I may be an idiot, but at least I take the time to attempt to type in English. Originally by: Kagura Nikon How useful is a ceptors with 3 ECM on it? yeahh all yout theory down into drain. Target paitners are ALMSOT usefull ian very very limited situation. I can't take it! The ecm... it's... aaaah!! 'splode FOOOOOOOX!!! -50 dkp if you fail to catch the meaning, Originally by: Kagura Nikon And don't forget they have 40 km range, a ceptor wil be out of range in 6 seconds. So Shut up! Anyoen that say Target painters are fine and with same parameters dare to say ECM don't need to benerfed should loose driver license due to BLINDNESS! 40km? Why, that happens to be well within scram range! I dare say a 'ceptor outside 40km is probably not doing a good job of tackling you! Almost like it had the same effect as ECM, 'cept you know, the 'ceptors in structure and not just orbiting your falcon providing a warp in.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises	Posted - 2008.09.08 09:55:00 - [60] 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? 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? ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
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]

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.