EVE Search - Falcons: Better Than Ever

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Falcons: Better Than Ever

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.23 17:39:00 - [1] Edited by: maralt on 23/12/2008 17:41:49 Originally by: Straight Chillen 1. warp in inty at 100km, 2. right click member warp at 100km Bang instant 200km falcon/sniper spot. This is a farily standard procedure. I would not exactly call waiting for 2 consecutive warpins instant and this idea is also flawed if their are bubbles around as the inty gets pulled into it. Bombers with damps do work great as they can move quite fast cloaked while also being able to uncloak and lock/damp the falcon long before it has a chance to lock and jam the bomber.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.24 10:29:00 - [2] I could bring a bunch of arazus against a lot of the gang setups i see ppl claiming that falcons destroy on here and wipe them out, as most of them are close range fits that could be easily made impotent by damps. TBH i think falcons serve a purpose, now this may make them annoying against a solo ship or very small gang but thems the breaks when you pvp as a small squad has plenty of similarly sized gang that DO NOT include a falcon they would lose to....
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.24 10:41:00 - [3] Edited by: maralt on 24/12/2008 10:44:59 Originally by: Deva Blackfire Last i heard arazus dont damp that good at 200ish km. That is ok cos most of the ppl on here crying about falcons are flying short range setups anyway let alone carry multiple sensor booster with range scripts..... Falcons do not jam 100% guaranteed in their optimal range (or any range for that matter), while damps always reduce targeting range or speed in theirs..
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.24 11:09:00 - [4] Edited by: maralt on 24/12/2008 11:10:07 Originally by: Deva Blackfire 1. most falcons DO have 200km range fits (sensor + range rig(s)) I know, i never said they do not, learn how to read. Originally by: Deva Blackfire 2. at 200km your arazu wont do anything to them. I never said it would, learn how to read. Originally by: Deva Blackfire 3. using lock time reduction instead of lock range reduction on 200km falcon is ****ed I did not say anything about using lock time reduction against falcons at any range let alone 200km, learn how to read. Originally by:** Deva Blackfire 4. maybe your falcon cant permajam anything. Mine does use overheat..... You can perma-overheat? I think you and others need to look up what PERMA means and learn how to read.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.24 11:26:00 - [5] Edited by: maralt on 24/12/2008 11:26:57 Originally by: Deva Blackfire Learn to write so people can understand what you are trying to say. Putting words in random order doesnt make proper sentence out of it. 1. Learn how to read. Originally by: Deva Blackfire You 1st imply that falcons "not always" jam 2. They do not always jam. Originally by: Deva Blackfire then you imply that dampeners "always work". And i already shown you that dampeners do not always work outside of 45km (maxskilled optimal) range. 3. I clearly mentioned i was talking about inside damp range, learn how to read. Originally by: Deva Blackfire Also if you want to bring "random useless knowledge" go to other threads. Plus i already shown you that falcons DO permajam depending on what their target is. I also never specified certain ships, so falcons cannot perma jam every ship type. Originally by: Deva Blackfire Oh yes i can overheat them too long enough for the fight to actually finish before i need to bother with module damage. Wrong, a fight lasts as long as it lasts. You cannot overheat indefinitely so in longer fights you will need to turn off over heat or burn out your mods. Stop lying. Originally by: Deva Blackfire So either you post on topic or **** off, troll. I am on topic you just a emo troll who did not read my posts properly.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.24 11:30:00 - [6] Edited by: maralt on 24/12/2008 11:30:21 Learn how to read.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.24 11:33:00 - [7] Edited by: maralt on 24/12/2008 11:36:07 Originally by: Deva Blackfire angry illiterate rant Calm down read from the start or gtfo fool, your emo is clouding your judgment and your ability to read.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.24 11:44:00 - [8] Originally by: Deva Blackfire more emo ranting I made a few very useful and clear posts earlier but your emo rage for some reason made you misread them and start ranting and even making stupid claims that i am asking for 60km blasters on another thread. Now as far as your questions are concerned i do not think its a good idea to encourage your emo rage, although i do think that a small gang without ecm that engages another small gang that not only has ecm but has it setup at long range SHOULD lose.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.24 11:51:00 - [9] Edited by: maralt on 24/12/2008 11:52:31 Originally by: Deva Blackfire Quote: i do think that a small gang without ecm that engages another small gang that not only has ecm but has it setup at long range SHOULD lose. More emo range and deliberate misinterpretation Fixed. See i told you it was a waste of time talking to you and replying to your questions, your emo is too strong and it clouds your reason.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.24 12:12:00 - [10] Edited by: maralt on 24/12/2008 12:14:12 Originally by: Deva Blackfire "small gang" - gang of 5-10 people "without ecm" - not bringing falcon/rook/other ECM boats "another small gang" - another gang of 5-10 people " not only has ecm but has it setup at long range" - thus falcon or rook (or maybe scorp) sitting at 200km Ok kiddies mr emo did ok up to here. Now as things are the gang without ewar has to be considered rather out of position (maybe just jumped into a setup camp) and rather poorly setup as a gang considering the available options in eve. Now if the non ecm gang is sniper fitted the falcon not only must jam all 5-10 (its imposable to jam 10 with 1 falcon and even jamming 5 would require the exactly correct racials) or either die/warp off. While also its true that if the falcon/ecm gang is jumping into the camp that the ewar ship must cloak (if a falcon) and spend a lot of time repositioning (by witch time a 5-10 man gang fight would be close to over tbh), or be called instantly primary and melted. The moral of the story is that its always better to be in a versatile gang and also to dictate the terms and range of the engagement to suit you, these are called basic tactics. Bombers with damps make okish scouts and are very effective at neutering falcons.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.24 12:52:00 - [11] Originally by: Deva Blackfire But we can assume both sides are equally-well-fit. Id say that a gang without ewar is badly setup tbh but ok. Originally by: Deva Blackfire We are still talking about small gangs. And in small gangs the ONLY 200km "snipers" are eagle, cerb and falcon. You will rarely see battleships inside 5-10 man gangs and especially sniper battleships. Even if you include them this only adds up: rokh, raven and apocalypse (mega/hyperion is just on edge of range, ill ignore em this time). And scorp. Small gangs does not necessarily mean small (non BS) ships. Originally by: Deva Blackfire It is quite possible (and often used) to jump in falcons 1st and let them prepare around gate. With new larger gates its very hard to catch them before they warp off. That applies to the bombers i mention, as well as the fact that both sides should be allowed prepared bookmarks if your giving your falcon them... Originally by: Deva Blackfire Which still doesnt say anything about why falcons are used around 80% of the time in gangs instead of other ships. Falcons are used in gangs cos they are a good and useful gang ship when flown correctly, but other ecm ships are better in certain circumstances, as well as other recons are better in certain circumstances as well. Originally by: Deva Blackfire Falcons being too good compared to other ECM boats. Horses for courses tbh, if i was in a situation against a gang that could hit at range or if i was in a RR gang id prefer a scorp as fitted correctly it could engage immediately on jumpin (instead of needing to reposition) and stay/tank and jam a lot longer in combat than the falcon.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.24 13:18:00 - [12] Edited by: maralt on 24/12/2008 13:24:24 Originally by: Deva Blackfire So when is rook better than falcon? When is Lachesis better than a arazu?. Originally by: Deva Blackfire Which is back to start: falcon is way better than other EWar ships. At jamming yes..but at webbing, or putting a point on summat or nueting or just general solo pvp?. It can be considered good at its jamming, even great at jamming but it also can be considered utterly useless at everything apart from jamming.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.24 13:54:00 - [13] Edited by: maralt on 24/12/2008 13:56:08 Edited by: maralt on 24/12/2008 13:55:37 Originally by: Deva Blackfire Quote: Which is back to start: falcon is way better than other EWar ships. At jamming yes..but at webbing, or putting a point on summat or nueting or just general solo pvp?. Yes i am talking about ECM boats and not comparing them to all EW boats. My mistake, but you perfectly knew what i meant. Playing with words doesnt make you look smart, you know? Actually if you look at the bottom of post 81 you actually use the phrase "ECM ships" as the referance for them so i thought you were referring to all ewar ships when you used the term "ewar ships" and not "ECM ships" tbh. Originally by: Deva Blackfire Falcons being too good compared to other ECM boats. See... You should really be less emo, i believe i mentioned that before...
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.24 14:13:00 - [14] Edited by: maralt on 24/12/2008 14:13:44 Originally by: Deva Blackfire If you were following what i said in this thread (i sure do hope you read everything instead of jumping straight to last page) you would know i was talking only about ECM ships. Thus use of EWar boats was as a synonym to ECM ship in this particular case. Its obvious to someone who reads and understands what he is reading isnt it? Maybe you should stick to one terminology when referring to ECM ships pal, as for me personally a ewar ship is a much broader reference than just falcons and ecm bonused ships. Originally by: Deva Blackfire As for emo part - i have no clue what you are talking about. Googling for "emo" gives me pictures of some gay/homosexual looking people. Really when i google "emo" it gives me this: http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=%22emo%22&sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1B3DVFA_enGB240GB243&aq=t Maybe its your past use of the search engine and personal preferences that are swaying the results towards a personal inclination of yours?.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.24 14:32:00 - [15] Originally by: Deva Blackfire And like i said earlier (actually the post you quoted): in this particular case (this thread!) im referring to ECM as EW because this is what we were discussing here. If you can not understand this there is not much i can do to help you. Does that mean that arazus are "damp ships" and are also "ewar ships" (although not ECM/ewar ships???)as they did get a mention in a post of mine earlier?. I would suggest you stick to "ECM ships" in regards to blackbirds, falcons, ect ect......and use "ewar ships" as a generalization when referring to any ship of any race with a bonus to ewar systems/modules, it will be considerably less confusing.

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.