EVE Search - Why is the Falcon so much better the Arazu?

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Why is the Falcon so much better the Arazu?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Lady Rhayne	Posted - 2008.12.23 18:36:00 - [1] Subject says it all. Is it the one extra midslot or is there something else?
flashspletta	Posted - 2008.12.23 18:43:00 - [2] Something else. Okay.. i can't do it.. I was just gunna leave you hanging, but falcon > arazu becuase the falcon is a missle boat. Raaa.. i can't do that either.. ummm.. It's becuase of it's bonuses. Falcon get's a bonus to ECM which is > Damps (which is the bonus that Arazu's get). ----------------------------------- Have a Public Channel? Add it to the list: Channel List WARNING: Explicit Material = Ban
Lady Rhayne	Posted - 2008.12.23 18:51:00 - [3] Thank you, that makes sense. No need to leave me hanging on that one. The game is very complex in many ways and that makes it great and frustrating all at the same time if you've not played for years anyway. I'm kind of thinking even then.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.23 18:52:00 - [4] Originally by: Lady Rhayne Subject says it all. Is it the one extra midslot or is there something else? The arazu is 10000000% a better tackler than the falcon....
the rainingdeath The humble Crew	Posted - 2008.12.23 18:54:00 - [5] Well since the sensor damp nerf ECM > Damps. On top of that the falcon gets around 2x the effective range as the arazu. --------
Captain Vampire	Posted - 2008.12.23 19:08:00 - [6] Originally by: the rainingdeath Well since the sensor damp nerf ECM > Damps. On top of that the falcon gets around 2x the effective range as the arazu. Not to mention 4x higher EWAR bonus. ECMs on bonused ships was boosted at the same time scripts were introduced to damps, while Arazu's bonus stayed the same, effectively nerfing it beyond imagination. I can't really understand why CCP decided to hit damps so hard, while leaving jammers alone.
Merin Ryskin Peregrine Industries	Posted - 2008.12.23 19:27:00 - [7] Originally by: Captain Vampire Originally by: the rainingdeath Well since the sensor damp nerf ECM > Damps. On top of that the falcon gets around 2x the effective range as the arazu. Not to mention 4x higher EWAR bonus. ECMs on bonused ships was boosted at the same time scripts were introduced to damps, while Arazu's bonus stayed the same, effectively nerfing it beyond imagination. I can't really understand why CCP decided to hit damps so hard, while leaving jammers alone. Time for a history lesson. Let's go back to around 2006: ECM is massively overpowered on everything, every ship with a spare midslot is fitting a multispectral, and the best ECM ship is the Dominix. Obviously this is a bad thing, but how do you nerf it without nerfing the dedicated ECM ships? Simple: cut base ECM strength by 50% or more, then to compensate, increase ECM strength bonuses massively and add SDAs. The result is ECM on dedicated ECM ships remains the same, but everyone else is nerfed. While the number listed next to "Caldari Cruiser skill" got bigger, this was a nerf, not a boost. The damp nerf was for the same reasons (though at a different time), damps were overpowered and every ship was using them. The only difference is CCP kind of forgot to fix damps on the dedicated damp ships. -----------
the rainingdeath The humble Crew	Posted - 2008.12.23 19:45:00 - [8] Originally by: Merin Ryskin Originally by: Captain Vampire Originally by: the rainingdeath stuff stuff Time for a history lesson. Let's go back to around 2006: ECM is massively overpowered on everything, every ship with a spare midslot is fitting a multispectral, and the best ECM ship is the Dominix. Obviously this is a bad thing, but how do you nerf it without nerfing the dedicated ECM ships? Simple: cut base ECM strength by 50% or more, then to compensate, increase ECM strength bonuses massively and add SDAs. The result is ECM on dedicated ECM ships remains the same, but everyone else is nerfed. While the number listed next to "Caldari Cruiser skill" got bigger, this was a nerf, not a boost. The damp nerf was for the same reasons (though at a different time), damps were overpowered and every ship was using them. The only difference is CCP kind of forgot to fix damps on the dedicated damp ships. Yeah I remember this, it was flat out silly, ravens with 2x multis,tp and rages owned... and as you said, the Dominix was king. ECM is in fact much more balanced now. --------
Elise Randolph Slacker Industries	Posted - 2008.12.23 20:03:00 - [9] Falcon can fit a 720mm Howitzer II ----------
RedSplat Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2008.12.23 20:21:00 - [10] I am waiting for the the whine crowd to focus on TD's, hopefully they are too focussed on Cloaks at the moment to notice. There was even talk of French toast But there was none to be had
Beau x	Posted - 2008.12.23 21:17:00 - [11] Falcon has a niche that is fleet support. It can't be used as viable means of tackling / solo. Falcon also has a lot greater range and can infinitely put a target out of a fight whereas an arazu can only limit a victims targets to close range things. Together, an arazu and falcon are effective as the falcon jams the victim, and if they miss a jam the arazu dampens them so it takes them ages to lock again, which gives the falcon pilot more time to jam the victim again. The falcon is to jam things, nothing else. The arazu can be used as extra DPS, a great tackler and can also fly solo.
NoNah	Posted - 2008.12.23 21:38:00 - [12] Originally by: RedSplat I am waiting for the the whine crowd to focus on TD's, hopefully they are too focussed on Cloaks at the moment to notice. The reason this won't happen very soon is not only twofold but... hm.. polyfold. They are narrowed by only affecting turrets. They are narrowed by only affecting turrets crippled by range OR tracking. They are narrowed by their short range. The Falcon can affect all other ships, in a defensive manner. It won't cause any damage, but nor will several opponents. It is the best defensive EW-ship. There is no competition. The Rapier can affect close range high speed small hostile ships offensively. It's arguably the best offensive ship however the Pilgrim and Arazu can at very rare moments have offensive uses that are more suited than the Rapier. Rapier, Arazu and Pilgrim can all be eliminated by (FoF) missiles, drones or even smartbombs(sort of). The Falcon can be countered by a few minutes offense from a very specialized ship in a defensive role. Cloaks are part of the issue. The falcon wouldn't be nearly as powerful if it wasn't for cloaks. Even so the best way to balance the Falcon is not to nerf it, but to aid especially Damps and to some extent Target Painters. Parrots, commence! Postcount: 622644
Captain Vampire	Posted - 2008.12.23 21:47:00 - [13] Originally by: Merin Ryskin Originally by: Captain Vampire Originally by: the rainingdeath Well since the sensor damp nerf ECM > Damps. On top of that the falcon gets around 2x the effective range as the arazu. Not to mention 4x higher EWAR bonus. ECMs on bonused ships was boosted at the same time scripts were introduced to damps, while Arazu's bonus stayed the same, effectively nerfing it beyond imagination. I can't really understand why CCP decided to hit damps so hard, while leaving jammers alone. Time for a history lesson. Let's go back to around 2006: ECM is massively overpowered on everything, every ship with a spare midslot is fitting a multispectral, and the best ECM ship is the Dominix. Obviously this is a bad thing, but how do you nerf it without nerfing the dedicated ECM ships? Simple: cut base ECM strength by 50% or more, then to compensate, increase ECM strength bonuses massively and add SDAs. The result is ECM on dedicated ECM ships remains the same, but everyone else is nerfed. While the number listed next to "Caldari Cruiser skill" got bigger, this was a nerf, not a boost. The damp nerf was for the same reasons (though at a different time), damps were overpowered and every ship was using them. The only difference is CCP kind of forgot to fix damps on the dedicated damp ships. I know why damps and jammers were nerf, heck, I've done every FOTM since multispecs of doom. However, you forget signal distortion amps, and jamming rigs. The overall effectiveness of jammers was increased for dedicated ships over time. Add a speed nerf, which leads to range = win, and you get status quo of the Falcon. And apparently, damps on dedicated ships are "fine" according to CCP. Kinda makes you think..don't it?
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.23 21:48:00 - [14] I suppose ECM range is a slight issue although TD'd are a "1 mod disrupts all" against turrets (3 RACES) while you need racial jammers to be fully effective with ecm and obviously missiles are unaffected by TD's but they also have FOF.
Rennion	Posted - 2008.12.23 21:53:00 - [15] Edited by: Rennion on 23/12/2008 21:54:57 The "fix" is to sort out the arazu with longer range damps meaning it can work effectively as a kind of anti-support ewar ship where the falcon is, well, I was going to say anti dps ewar ship but it's really a kind of anti everything ewar ship. Curse can kind of do it as it stands if you survive a cycle of jams you can cap him but meh. Edit: Oh and fof spamming cerb can certainly chase them off grid and force a benny hill themed situation lol.
Venomae Federal Defence Union	Posted - 2008.12.23 21:57:00 - [16] Originally by: Lady Rhayne Subject says it all. Is it the one extra midslot or is there something else? Basically because ECM can't have scripts. And nerfing ECM is really hard.. It's easy to nerf ECM to useless. But all fleets should have falcon and arazu IMHO. Arazu is good too. It can easily disrupt snipers range to nothing usefull. Or make damage dealers scan res something terrible. Combined fleets are the best thing.
NoNah	Posted - 2008.12.23 22:21:00 - [17] Edited by: NoNah on 23/12/2008 22:22:09 Originally by: maralt I suppose ECM range is a slight issue although TD'd are a "1 mod disrupts all" against turrets (3 RACES) while you need racial jammers to be fully effective with ecm and obviously missiles are unaffected by TD's but they also have FOF. In short: ECM affects: Guns, guided missiles, unguided missiles, drones, ecm, damps, tracking disruptors, target painters, remote armor and shield repairing, nos, neuts etc. ECM does not affect: FoF missiles Tracking disruptors affects: Guns(In most situations it even eliminates damage from them) Tracking disruptors does not affect: Guided missiles, unguided missiles, drones, ecm, damps, tracking disruptors, target painters, remote armor and shield repairing, nos, neuts etc. To compensate the shift in the two lists above three major changes has been done lately. ECM got longer range. Tracking disruptors got scripted. Range got more important. Oh, and TD's now affect falloff. Once again, they're both fine, they have different uses on differnt ships - however there needs to be a counter for ECM, that counter should be damps by increasing damp range. EDIT: Oh, and I forgot, ECM-cycles should be broken when cloaked. Parrots, commence! Postcount: 564275
GTC seller72	Posted - 2008.12.23 22:37:00 - [18] Originally by: NoNah In short: ECM affects: Guns, guided missiles, unguided missiles, drones, ecm, damps, tracking disruptors, target painters, remote armor and shield repairing, nos, neuts etc. ECM does not affect: FoF missiles ECM does not effect drones,... and damps also effect most if not all of that list depending on the engagement range.
NoNah	Posted - 2008.12.24 00:40:00 - [19] Originally by: GTC seller72 Originally by: NoNah In short: ECM affects: Guns, guided missiles, unguided missiles, drones, ecm, damps, tracking disruptors, target painters, remote armor and shield repairing, nos, neuts etc. ECM does not affect: FoF missiles ECM does not effect drones,... and damps also effect most if not all of that list depending on the engagement range. And damps were not mentioned in that entire post. Funny, huh? ECM affects drones, not only can you jam them(however poor and pointless it may be) but you range prevents any drones from being effective from the range. And even if you get close they won't react as the aggression is already achieved. If the defensive falcon pilot indeed screws up and does gain drone aggro - in which case he¦s done numerous mistakes even before the fight begun, he will warp off to one of his safes and the drones are once again pointless. As for damps, no, they won¦t remove any of the above threats from the field. They can cripple(lower range) and delay it - but no way of preventing them. Parrots, commence! Postcount: 516457
Caius Severus	Posted - 2008.12.24 14:24:00 - [20] The question is a stupid one unless you qualify it. If you use them to their strengths then both are useful. People who moan that the Arazu is rubbish are probably those who are expecting it to do the same job as a falcon, which it quite clearly isn't intended to do, or want I win damps as fitted to everything pre nerf. Falcons are good at sitting 200km away and jamming stuff. That also means they can do no damage and can't tackle. Arazus can takle from 50km away with good skills and up to 100km in ideal circumstances (mindlinked claymore in gang and overheated faction disruptor). If you are 50km away from something with 2 or 3 damps on it, chances are it won't be able to lock you. Scan res scripted damps also annoy the hell out of carrier pilots (eg 1 minute lock time on a battleship), and in conjunction with a falcon he won't be locking anyone even with the odd missed cycle. The point is not which is better or worse, but which is the correct tool for the job at hand.
Xiaodown coracao ardente Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.12.24 17:07:00 - [21] Originally by: Merin Ryskin Originally by: Captain Vampire Originally by: the rainingdeath Well since the sensor damp nerf ECM > Damps. On top of that the falcon gets around 2x the effective range as the arazu. Not to mention 4x higher EWAR bonus. ECMs on bonused ships was boosted at the same time scripts were introduced to damps, while Arazu's bonus stayed the same, effectively nerfing it beyond imagination. I can't really understand why CCP decided to hit damps so hard, while leaving jammers alone. Time for a history lesson. Let's go back to around 2006: ECM is massively overpowered on everything, every ship with a spare midslot is fitting a multispectral, and the best ECM ship is the Dominix. Obviously this is a bad thing, but how do you nerf it without nerfing the dedicated ECM ships? Simple: cut base ECM strength by 50% or more, then to compensate, increase ECM strength bonuses massively and add SDAs. The result is ECM on dedicated ECM ships remains the same, but everyone else is nerfed. While the number listed next to "Caldari Cruiser skill" got bigger, this was a nerf, not a boost. The damp nerf was for the same reasons (though at a different time), damps were overpowered and every ship was using them. The only difference is CCP kind of forgot to fix damps on the dedicated damp ships. Yeah, but it used to be the rook that was the end all be all of jamming, not the falcon. Then they upped the bonus on the falcon to 20% per level, and it became overpowered. The falcon used to just be a blackbird that could fly cloaked. Now, it's probably the one ship in the game that a gang can't do without, and the only ship that there's no effective counter to, other than "bring your own falcon". 100km+ range, ship-crippling ability, can fly cloaked: Pick 2 out of 3, pl0x. ~X -- Sig under construction.
Knawt Ongrid	Posted - 2008.12.24 17:38:00 - [22] Edited by: Knawt Ongrid on 24/12/2008 17:40:14 Edited by: Knawt Ongrid on 24/12/2008 17:40:04 But it's not. It's all very simple really. ECM was overpowered and used on every ship. CCP nerfs ECM. But, then came back a couple months later with a re-buff to ECM boats. You see, the ability to prevent an enemy from locking anything whatsoever is a rather weak EW type. Thus necessitating for ECM the commonly seen 20% bonuses on effectiveness and range for a mod. So many ships get 20% bonuses, I'd so like to see 5% bonuses commonly used instead. So then everybody was putting damps (and nos, but that's a different story) on their ships. CCP nerfs damps, and also scripts damps. However, the ability to delay an enemies locking time, or reduce his range to that where he can still remote rep a friend or if up close still warp scramble and melt your face, is incredibly powerful as far as EW goes. How often do you see ships do those things? And wait, what, the Celestis class ships get a 5% bonus to damp effectiveness!! Preventing all locking ability just pales in comparison to what damps do. So what does CCP think of this present state of affairs? Well, Zulupark (a Caldari toon btw) has intelligently stated that ecm and damps are well balanced at this time. Regardless, the game is suffering from a lack of Caldari toons. It is not enough that the highest percentage amongst toons are Caldari. We need an absolute majority of toons to be Caldari. Maybe CCP could also reduce the base Achura charisma to 1 and throw more points on intel and perception. Or, maybe make the Civire toon look more manly. Could you imagine a Civire toon with a tough jawline and body armor, swoon. My e-peen would go through the roof. So there you have it. You will probably train Arazu, but please consider the poor Falcon. Fleets are always filled with 10-20 Arazu, and small gangs always have at least one Arazu. Falcons just suck. I really can't think of when I last saw one. Go counter to the fotm, train Falcon.
Gark32 SniggWaffe	Posted - 2008.12.24 17:45:00 - [23] Originally by: Knawt Ongrid stuff. are we a little bitter, Alty McAlterson? ________________________________________________ Please resize signature to the maximum allowed filesize of 400 x 120 pixels. Navigator /ProcketsInvTNAsmall.jpg[/IMG]
Knawt Ongrid	Posted - 2008.12.24 17:51:00 - [24] Originally by: Gark32 Originally by: Knawt Ongrid stuff. are we a little bitter, Alty McAlterson? Was my post not filled with truth and hope? And what do you have against alts? Aren't I not perty to you?
Faife Federation of Freedom Fighters	Posted - 2008.12.24 20:44:00 - [25] Originally by: Elise Randolph Falcon can fit a 720mm Howitzer II nowadays i fly mine with either a 720 or a 3 small smartbombs -- i am a humble and inefficient ammo to dps converter
Aleus Stygian Failed Diplomacy Collidable Objects	Posted - 2008.12.25 00:28:00 - [26] NoNah is right. Except he's not. The issue with the Falcon right now is hardly its cloak; that one just compounds the problem with the ability to being immune to pre-emptive strikes with probe launchers, and the ability to apply its huge advantage precisely at the appropriate time. The main problem right now though, is its range. As I have said myself before, there are several, though certainly not numerous or varied, counters for the Falcon, and they are almost all based on scare tactics and semi-effectual long-range weaponry. There is -one- based on long-range drone usage. They are almost all slow and inefficient to the point of being silly, and not one of them is able to deliver a killing blow, or even half of one, to a Falcon. Which is why, since we can't kill the damn ship, disabling it with another Falcon is a far superior strategy. Thus making the Falcon the only ship that really can't be killed by a single other ship in all of EvE. The reason that the Falcon isn't getting blasted away in two volleys from certain ships, can't be reached, webbed or scrammed by any vessels that might actually be able to hold it, and generally finds itself far less harassed than any other Recon despite being far more loathed and prioritized than any other ship, is because of its range, which puts it horribly far beyond the action range of any vessel that might counter it well, and more significantly hold it in place so that it might be killed. The Falcon should not have its range bonus; operating at 80-100 km like a TD ship would allow it to retain its combat role when flown well, but allow ships designed to counter it to actually kill it. Provided a different, useful bonus, buffs to hardpoints and stats, and some actual thought, it might even gain an actual combat role equivalent to that of the other ships in its class. Which would promote fitting at least some tank modules to negate the possibility of fitting all ECM jammers and signature amplifiers, like now. And why is it that only ECM gets a boosting low-slot module, by the way? _________________________________________________________
Jita Mita	Posted - 2008.12.25 00:47:00 - [27] well since the QR expand arazu is not so good tackler but falcon is good in any fleet and i may it is a more good that it has to be.WHY?Well becose of the range week ago our alliance was in battle(we lost)the hostile has 6 falcons( we was 68 BS againsts 108 hacs,recons(falcons) and dozen commands)my point is that 6 falcons got 12-14 BS out of battle and from a 203 km whitch is hard distance to cover even for a sniper BS,so why for example my Arazu or Pilgrim can't operate at same distance? I think falcon is a bit uber and need to be change.Or something in jamer strenth becose i try it BS Abaddon whit 22 str base+1 eccm modul tech2 got 43 str and those falcon jam me again this is rediculous. I will say no more before to hear some other opinions.
NoNah	Posted - 2008.12.25 00:49:00 - [28] Originally by: Aleus Stygian NoNah is right. Except he's not. ... And why is it that only ECM gets a boosting low-slot module, by the way? I'm not sure where what you said contradicted what I said, but... =) Anyway, I used to be like you and suggest a reduction of range on ECM. Actually, it took me a good couple of months to stop preaching for a switch between ECM and Damp optimal range. Switching ranges would mean that Damps had a higher chance of hitting at most ranges but obviously less effectiveness. Both EW's practical ranges would be similar. There is one drawback to that however, and that is the lack of use for a falcon. It hurts to say, but if Falcons were forced inside the 80-100km spectrum they'd be prime targets for ALL snipers, and would be nothing but a few second delay for most larger fleets, especially so if they don't have sufficient numbers and extreme precision. You want to have Falcons outside the prime range of guns. So if ECM range won't approach damp range, damp range should approach ECM-range. It should be possible to keep a falcon damped at the very time most of the time. This would turn specialized damp boats into specialized anti-falcon and to a certain degree anti-snipe boats. When no falcons and snipers are present they can still jam nearby ships. They won't turn overpowered since they never eliminate targets, barely cripple them and even IF they would turn out to popular, it's quite a bit easier to balance than ECM. Eliminating targeting range sensor boosting stacking penalty would be a very efficient way of providing good counters. The reason a cloak is the major reason falcons are obscenely good right now, is that they can uncloak, lock up a fair number of targets, jam them, cloak. Reevaluate the situation, perhaps warp to a new safe, decloak jam your primaries, cloak rince and repeat. Since you normally have a good 22-25 seconds before you need to get the next cycle on cloaking between jams doesn't hurt very badly. As mentioned preventing jams from contiuing post-cloak and warp and add damp range, I'd say they're pretty much balanced. The fact that they have a lowslot module to improve their efficiency is really a nerf. They were stronger then had their values reduced and a booster implemented. It's a nice way of saying Hey, we nerfed you, but you can pick wether to keep your strength or lowslots yourself. Parrots, commence! Postcount: 816022
Atazep	Posted - 2008.12.25 01:07:00 - [29] well you said that the falcons will be primery target,so as well any reconis primery target why not my arazu(this ship sux i dont fly anymore whit it since i lost 2 becose someone come near me and my admpner are useless) or pilrgim very efective ship (whitch is not usefull in fleet becose of the range and now the speed change) do the same stay at safe distance and do their job?!Aren't we that we all want?So let me say something about falcon,why you have to stay when you get tackled by someone?You just get him jamed and lfy away you can come back easyly you are stealth warp ship.And you can jam 2-3-4(hard) at the same time did your Arazu can neutralize 3 ships,NO i can't!Becose it will reduce your locking range for 1-2 ships but other will get him fast from distance easy covered from a snipe hac. What can i say i've never see any fleet to use arazu.For now gallente recons are little usefull in fleet (exept capital fleet)
Aleus Stygian Failed Diplomacy Collidable Objects	Posted - 2008.12.25 02:42:00 - [30] Originally by: NoNah It hurts to say, but if Falcons were forced inside the 80-100km spectrum they'd be prime targets for ALL snipers, and would be nothing but a few second delay for most larger fleets, especially so if they don't have sufficient numbers and extreme precision. You want to have Falcons outside the prime range of guns. So if ECM range won't approach damp range, damp range should approach ECM-range. It should be possible to keep a falcon damped at the very time most of the time. And how is this different from the way I get called in my Pilgrim or Rapier? Given the ability and incentive to actually tank, the Falcon can survive from 100 km, the ship's jammers contributing even more to survivability. Far more than a couple of TDs against multiple ships, and cerainly more than TPs and webs, that is. Falcon pilots will simply start having to think and react the same knife-edge way the rest of us regular, game-balanced Recon pilots do. As it is, Dampener ships with sensor boosters or other Falcons, or sniper battleships, are all you really need to screw with the Falcon's cloaking ability. And since it's a Force Recon, it should have a bloody cloak. So no way JosT should it be removed. _________________________________________________________
Xori Ruscuv Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2008.12.25 03:40:00 - [31] Because the Arazu can only lock down one ship. Because damps pretty much suck.
Kessiaan Minmatar Army of One	Posted - 2008.12.25 05:01:00 - [32] Originally by: RedSplat I am waiting for the the whine crowd to focus on TD's, hopefully they are too focussed on Cloaks at the moment to notice. Depends. As the above posters said, they have a lot of drawbacks. They really only give you super ninja powers if you put them on something that's already pretty hard to hit - frigs, basically. I'll agree that certain AFs that got boosted with this patch (Ishkur, Harpy) are even better if you drop a web for a TD though.
DEATHsyphon Gallente 8lack Wing Vanguard.	Posted - 2008.12.25 07:20:00 - [33] My Arazu eats Falcons For breakfast nom nom nom nom
techzer0 IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2008.12.25 07:28:00 - [34] Originally by: DEATHsyphon My Arazu eats Falcons For breakfast nom nom nom nom Well, drones on the arazu make it a whole lot better for damage and nearly a solo-able ship. Falcon needs backup. But if you're in warp scram range with an Arazu on Falcon, chances are the Arazu will get jammed and the falcon will warp out, since Damps will not drop the range on the falcon down below 50 or so KM ------------ Originally by: Nexus Kinnon I could outgay you even without my pink tutu. >.>
Kirtan Loor Divine Retribution Sons of Tangra	Posted - 2008.12.25 09:28:00 - [35] Edited by: Kirtan Loor on 25/12/2008 09:28:14 Dampeners are stacking penalized. 3+ dampeners on a ship won't change anything TD's are stacking penalized. 3+ TD's on a ship won't further reduce optimal/falloff/tracking. Webs, TP's...almost all EW is stacking nerfed. A falcon can assign 6 modules to a single target and still gets good results from those beyond 3rd. Please remove stacking penalty from other forms of ewar too.
Leeluvv Federation of Freedom Fighters Executive Outcomes	Posted - 2008.12.25 16:13:00 - [36] Originally by: Kirtan Loor A falcon can assign 6 modules to a single target and still gets good results from those beyond 3rd. Err, each ECM module is treated as a totally separate effect, so they don't stack AT ALL. Lee == Sig to follow
Atazep	Posted - 2008.12.25 16:31:00 - [37] Originally by: Kirtan Loor Edited by: Kirtan Loor on 25/12/2008 09:28:14 Dampeners are stacking penalized. 3+ dampeners on a ship won't change anything TD's are stacking penalized. 3+ TD's on a ship won't further reduce optimal/falloff/tracking. Webs, TP's...almost all EW is stacking nerfed. A falcon can assign 6 modules to a single target and still gets good results from those beyond 3rd. Please remove stacking penalty from other forms of ewar too. i agree whit you but if they remove stack penalty the combat recons will be prety strong,they can give penalty for Falcon or just to give range for other force recons ships it may improve a little arazu and pilgrim.But other point is what will be diference when arazu is at 150-200km from battlefiled and damp ships lets say whit range skrips and the battle is close range?I don't think that it will be in much help!
Wardeneo DEATHFUNK Doctrine.	Posted - 2008.12.25 16:39:00 - [38] /me sighs depends on what angle u look at it, as some ppl have stated arazu has better tanks/dps in many cases, its a 1000000000000% better takler adn if u look closly falcon is better for ecm and razu for damps and scram range :) wardeneo
Corrock Minmatar SUBLIME L.L.C. SUBLIME CREATIONS ALLIANCE	Posted - 2008.12.25 16:46:00 - [39] "Nerf everything! Nerf it all till the only viable option is to stand there and shoot and tank, like Real Men used to!" I think in their heart of hearts a lot of people really don't want to have think or plan or develop actual tactics.
Atazep	Posted - 2008.12.25 16:46:00 - [40] Originally by: Wardeneo /me sighs depends on what angle u look at it, as some ppl have stated arazu has better tanks/dps in many cases, its a 1000000000000% better takler adn if u look closly falcon is better for ecm and razu for damps and scram range :) wardeneo well i doubt that idea in recons is to be tank,but all clever player play falcon whit 1600 plate so taht way falcon has a little better tank.If you say that Arazu has a better dps well go in fleet battle and i wish to see your dps :)if you survive long enough.
Gunner Chick	Posted - 2008.12.25 17:44:00 - [41] i dunno, maybe cause one ship can knock multiple ships out of combat(typically indefinately until their death) while itself being 200+ kms away with the ability to warp cloaked?
Gunner Chick	Posted - 2008.12.25 17:47:00 - [42] Quote: "Nerf everything! Nerf it all till the only viable option is to stand there and shoot and tank, like Real Men used to!" I think in their heart of hearts a lot of people really don't want to have think or plan or develop actual tactics. Anti-whiner stance is fail. Tbh, as an old schooler amarr pilot that likes big tank and gank i kinda like your idea hahahaha
Atazep	Posted - 2008.12.25 17:54:00 - [43] i was thinking that if they just remove this delay after being jamed(20sec i think)it will be a little better,so if falcon turn off his jamer you will be abble to lock instant(or how long you need)and to be immune(sound awfull for caldary recon pilot) for some time.But there is problem whit falcon huge range and none of this for other force recon ship.
UD549	Posted - 2008.12.25 18:23:00 - [44] Falcons can't solo and falcons can't tackle. The only 2 recons ships that are the worst for solo pvp are the rook and the falcon, frigate dps and no drone bay is laughable for solo work. Also your forgetting the Arazu extra scram bonus which makes it one of the best tacklers in the game and also damps work %100. Your augument: Yea but ecm works almost %100. My response: Then bring a falcon u dope. Also Merry Christmas, Happy Birthday JESUS.
UD549	Posted - 2008.12.25 18:26:00 - [45] Originally by: Gunner Chick i dunno, maybe cause one ship can knock multiple ships out of combat(typically indefinately until their death) while itself being 200+ kms away with the ability to warp cloaked? Only in gang. Falcon does 0 dps from 200km u dope. If your solo and your fighting a blob with or without a falcon your dead. Also would you bring intercepters to your gang to tackle or would you leave that for a bs, no you would bring the proper ships now stop whining and bring a falcon.
Gunner Chick	Posted - 2008.12.25 18:27:00 - [46] Quote: Falcons can't solo and falcons can't tackle. The only 2 recons ships that are the worst for solo pvp are the rook and the falcon, frigate dps and no drone bay is laughable for solo work. Also your forgetting the Arazu extra scram bonus which makes it one of the best tacklers in the game and also damps work %100. Your augument: Yea but ecm works almost %100. My response: Then bring a falcon u dope. Also Merry Christmas, Happy Birthday JESUS. What you just said is like saying my 2009 corvett has small trunk space, no back seat and is too low to the ground. Because of that, it so obviously sucks at what it does.
Gunner Chick	Posted - 2008.12.25 18:28:00 - [47] Quote: Only in gang. Falcon does 0 dps from 200km u dope. If your solo and your fighting a blob with or without a falcon your dead. Also would you bring intercepters to your gang to tackle or would you leave that for a bs, no you would bring the proper ships now stop whining and bring a falcon. Im gonna cut are arguement short by telling you they will be nerfed. They will be nerfed because they are a constant and ccp hates that. They will be nerfed because they contain all the aspects of ships that have been nerfed in the past. now argue on
Vrikshaka 0ff-Peak Esoteric Cutthroats	Posted - 2008.12.25 18:43:00 - [48] Originally by: Gunner Chick Quote: Falcons can't solo and falcons can't tackle. The only 2 recons ships that are the worst for solo pvp are the rook and the falcon, frigate dps and no drone bay is laughable for solo work. Also your forgetting the Arazu extra scram bonus which makes it one of the best tacklers in the game and also damps work %100. Your augument: Yea but ecm works almost %100. My response: Then bring a falcon u dope. Also Merry Christmas, Happy Birthday JESUS. What you just said is like saying my 2009 corvett has small trunk space, no back seat and is too low to the ground. Because of that, it so obviously sucks at what it does. This. Best response I've seen yet to the "But omg omg look at all the stuff the falcon CAN'T do!!!1!" argument.
Atazep	Posted - 2008.12.25 18:44:00 - [49] Originally by: UD549 Originally by: Gunner Chick i dunno, maybe cause one ship can knock multiple ships out of combat(typically indefinately until their death) while itself being 200+ kms away with the ability to warp cloaked? Only in gang. Falcon does 0 dps from 200km u dope. If your solo and your fighting a blob with or without a falcon your dead. Also would you bring intercepters to your gang to tackle or would you leave that for a bs, no you would bring the proper ships now stop whining and bring a falcon. well lets all play falcons then,probably that is CCP idea?Or wait it is not,nobody whining we just discuse advantage of falcon compare whit other force recons,and i my sugest to keep prober language,none of player in this game is a stupid kid(i don't say that there are none idiots but as i see few i forums)
Atazep	Posted - 2008.12.25 18:46:00 - [50] Originally by: Vrikshaka Originally by: Gunner Chick Quote: Falcons can't solo and falcons can't tackle. The only 2 recons ships that are the worst for solo pvp are the rook and the falcon, frigate dps and no drone bay is laughable for solo work. Also your forgetting the Arazu extra scram bonus which makes it one of the best tacklers in the game and also damps work %100. Your augument: Yea but ecm works almost %100. My response: Then bring a falcon u dope. Also Merry Christmas, Happy Birthday JESUS. What you just said is like saying my 2009 corvett has small trunk space, no back seat and is too low to the ground. Because of that, it so obviously sucks at what it does. neither falcon,heither arazu are solo ships,if you fly solo whit them you are,well i prefer not to say..... This. Best response I've seen yet to the "But omg omg look at all the stuff the falcon CAN'T do!!!1!" argument.
UD549	Posted - 2008.12.25 19:00:00 - [51] Originally by: Gunner Chick Quote: Falcons can't solo and falcons can't tackle. The only 2 recons ships that are the worst for solo pvp are the rook and the falcon, frigate dps and no drone bay is laughable for solo work. Also your forgetting the Arazu extra scram bonus which makes it one of the best tacklers in the game and also damps work %100. Your augument: Yea but ecm works almost %100. My response: Then bring a falcon u dope. Also Merry Christmas, Happy Birthday JESUS. What you just said is like saying my 2009 corvett has small trunk space, no back seat and is too low to the ground. Because of that, it so obviously sucks at what it does. Comparing internet spaceships to real life automobiles...you already lose that argument. Oh and corvette has an "e" at the end.
UD549	Posted - 2008.12.25 19:04:00 - [52] Originally by: Gunner Chick Quote: Only in gang. Falcon does 0 dps from 200km u dope. If your solo and your fighting a blob with or without a falcon your dead. Also would you bring intercepters to your gang to tackle or would you leave that for a bs, no you would bring the proper ships now stop whining and bring a falcon. Im gonna cut are arguement short by telling you they will be nerfed. They will be nerfed because they are a constant and ccp hates that. They will be nerfed because they contain all the aspects of ships that have been nerfed in the past. now argue on Yea they probably will, but the next month they'll nerf the ship(s) your flying and you'll be whining even more. You must have gotten owned by a falcon so now your on a nerf the falcon crusade...lol falcons permajam and you permawhine I'm not even gonna read your response because I know your type,,all you do is whine.
Atazep	Posted - 2008.12.25 19:15:00 - [53] well i don't fly whit gallente recons anymore becose they sux(exept as i sad capital fleet) but i can fly whit amar and have max skills whit both races,so i no need to whininh at all,if they nerv something just go to other race,but i doubth that is the point and what will do the new player? What even falcon need reduse range jamers range and as i see 85% here are agree whit me!!!
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.25 20:00:00 - [54] The problem is that the falcon is a good ship to have in a med sized gang combat, but that makes it very powerful in smaller gang combat, while also being rather useless in fleet fights or actually in high numbers due to the inability to assign a high amount of targets during combat. The hate for ecm comes from ppl who got jammed due to pure frustration. Oh and there is only such a thing as perma jamming against ships with low sig str.
Diomidis Amarr Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.12.26 01:43:00 - [55] All other recons have to dedicate almost ALL their ewar to a single target to cripple it. The falcon can single handily cripple multiple ships, and that CAN be done (and it's done regularly) even without racial jammers...a falcon that dedicates a comparable amount of cap, ewar modules and whatever short of micromanagement all other force or field recons require in order to make a difference in a gang is sure to perma jam nearly ANYTHING jammable...dual heated-ECCMed Logistics, carriers, BSs, other recons, u name it. And it's all done way further than any other form of ewar, unlike other recons that can be touched and be vulnerable against other recons and non specialized anti-falcon setups. In fact I've never seen a "omg, I need and anti Arazu setup" or I need an anti-Rapier / Curse / Pilgrim etc setup for years now...it's not my or other ppls frustration due to ignorance that makes the falcon overpowered, especially when you will rarely see a gang willing to fight without it's 20-25% of ships being falcons! It's nearly impossible to fight against falcons unless you blob heavily - and that's what's the frustration about: falcons ruin the fun - hell, even most falcon pilots I know are tired of flying falcons, and I believe that's because of the silly amount of challenge it provides...even nosing nano-domis required more effort - at least u got locked by something more than other nosing-nano-domies, you managed drones etc...If that was described as an I-win-Button, the falcon wouldn't make it for quoter that. Join the Biggest Greek Corp! www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game!
NoNah	Posted - 2008.12.26 02:31:00 - [56] Originally by: Aleus Stygian And how is this different from the way I get called in my Pilgrim or Rapier? Given the ability and incentive to actually tank, the Falcon can survive from 100 km, the ship's jammers contributing even more to survivability. Far more than a couple of TDs against multiple ships, and cerainly more than TPs and webs, that is. Falcon pilots will simply start having to think and react the same knife-edge way the rest of us regular, game-balanced Recon pilots do. That means having to risk it, plan, not overextend oneself and generally think. As it is, Dampener ships with sensor boosters or other Falcons, or sniper battleships, are all you really need to screw with the Falcon's cloaking ability. And since it's a Force Recon, it should have a bloody cloak. So no way JosT should it be removed. Also, if Falcons get primaried after having their range removed, it will be less because of game imbalance and more because a): they engaged in a fight where they couldn't jam all ships or jam them at once, not an uncommon problem for a pilot using some other type of EWAR, even in a gang, or b): peple know full well how effective ECM is now and overall bear a grudge toward Falcons and their proponents in general for flying - exploiting - these things like bloody cowards.[/quote First off, I think you're misinterpreting me - greatly. I'm not saying falcons shouldn't have cloaks, I'm saying their jams should not work while cloaked. Pilgrims and Rapiers can't be judged in the same manner as Arazus and Falcons, simply because both of those can quite well sneak into a system and pick of ratters, haulers and most other unaware soloers on their own. Pilgrim have no place in a fleet fight, but it is also one of the most potent soloships. If falcons range are reduced, they will be made into overly expensive blackbirds. The value of warping cloaked is only worth that much. If they are supposed to be inline with everyone else range they should also have similar options for tanking and dealing damage. If cycles were shorter and/or broken by cloaking, the extended damps would even if just tickling percentagewise bring them quite a bit closer. If three damps removes 75% locking range and that means the falcons now have to be 75km away that's enough to get more than very specialized ships hitting them - but you still have to fit specially for it. Right now the ranges are Falcon: 0-249km(give or take) Pilgrim: 0-15km Rapier: 15-60km Arazu: Well... diffuse. (I would've wanted to put something like 60-249km here.) At 0km range an Arazus both bonuses are completely wasted. At some 9-18km the scrambler bonus is _awesome_. At 25km range the disruptor bonus starts taking effect, however there are very few ships engaging at 25km that is affected by damps. You start getting use for it at some 50-60km out, at which range the disruptor bonus ends. So far so good, it's an excellent ship with a few greys - as it should be. However you're already in falloff, so you're soon better off in a falcon, where your ECM's ALWAYS are useful, not only chancebased effects on a select handful of ships with certain setups. The Arazu is kind of built to be less effective at short range and then increasingly effective over range, but then they decided to give it an optimal of 30-45km. Short and simple answer is that Rapier and Pilgrim are offensive and mobile ships. Falcon and Arazu are defensive(arazu less defensive with a tad more offensive capabilities). If you could be effectively offensive at 150km range solo, something is terribly wrong. Tracking disruptors and target painters range is not necessarily perfect, but a minor issue that has nothing to do with this thread. They won't counter falcons and that bonus itself won't compete with it. Most of their use is at short range and extreme range would make them horribly overpowered from a single module perspective. I basically doubt any Rapier Pilot would want to switch their web rangebonus for TP. Parrots, commence! Postcount: 707284
Kirtan Loor Divine Retribution Sons of Tangra	Posted - 2008.12.26 08:28:00 - [57] Edited by: Kirtan Loor on 26/12/2008 08:29:17 Originally by: Leeluvv Originally by: Kirtan Loor A falcon can assign 6 modules to a single target and still gets good results from those beyond 3rd. Err, each ECM module is treated as a totally separate effect, so they don't stack AT ALL. Lee Lets assume a falcon vs battleship case. With 14 jamming str vs 22 sensor str...and lets assume falcon has only 1 suitable racial, other 5 are jammers for other races(4.67 str). 14/22 = %63.63 chance => %36 Not to get jammed x1 4.67/22 = %21.21 chance => %78 not to get jammed x5 So you get a total chance of 0.360.78^5 = %11 to not to get jammed Now let's introduce the stacking. In this case the first jammer (14) is not affected. The other jammer's powers are reduced by stacking penalty. Thats: 14/22 = 63.63% chance => 36% chance Not to get jammed 0.874.67/22 = 18.55% chance => 81.5% chance Not to get jammed 0.574.67/22 = 12.1% chance => 88% chance Not to get jammed 0.284.67/22 = 6% chance => 94% chance Not to get jammed 0.114.67/22 = 2.1% chance => 98% chance Not to get jammed 0.034.67/22 = 0.6% chance => 99.4% chance Not to get jammed So as result the chance to survive a cycle gets to => 25%. Like all the ewar modules in the game using more than 3 ecm modules on a single target should get a diminishing effect. It doesn't....so either CCP forgot to add stacking penalty to this particular module, or that stacking penalty shouldn't be there at all for ewar modules. I prefer the second choice Edit: Why are the fonts small suddenly
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.26 09:14:00 - [58] Originally by: Kirtan Loor Like all the ewar modules in the game using more than 3 ecm modules on a single target should get a diminishing effect. It doesn't....so either CCP forgot to add stacking penalty to this particular module, or that stacking penalty shouldn't be there at all for ewar modules. Unless they are way out of range all the other ewar systems always have a effect when activated on a target, that is why they have a stacking penalty. ECM works or does not work on a chance based system per module relative to the targets sig str.
Aleus Stygian Failed Diplomacy Collidable Objects	Posted - 2008.12.26 19:22:00 - [59] Originally by: NoNah Pilgrims and Rapiers can't be judged in the same manner as Arazus and Falcons, simply because both of those can quite well sneak into a system and pick of ratters, haulers and most other unaware soloers on their own. Pilgrim have no place in a fleet fight, but it is also one of the most potent soloships. Oh, but they can. A Pilgrim has no place in a fleet fight, you say? What about when traveling with roaming gangs of five to seven ships as a heavy tackler or simply a damage-mitigating and tank-breaking 'safety measure'? In a rare few cases, the Pilgrim performs just as well in this role as the Curse, and if you want to surprise a wary battleship or battlecruiser pilot and hold him still it does even better than its sibling. Furthermore, if the Falcon were changed so that it were more like the other Recons, meaning that it had an extra two missile or turret slots and a weapon-related bonus instead of its current insane range, and employed two ECM modules in its cookie-cutter setup instead of five or six... it might actually make an awesome solo ship. Ever think about that? Originally by: NoNah If falcons range are reduced, they will be made into overly expensive blackbirds. The value of warping cloaked is only worth that much. If they are supposed to be inline with everyone else range they should also have similar options for tanking and dealing damage. If cycles were shorter and/or broken by cloaking, the extended damps would even if just tickling percentagewise bring them quite a bit closer. If three damps removes 75% locking range and that means the falcons now have to be 75km away that's enough to get more than very specialized ships hitting them - but you still have to fit specially for it. Didn't I already mention shifting their stats to make them good for that? Not that it takes that much; with the right skills, you can get a good deal of mid-range survivability out of a Falcon even now. More than you can out of a Rapier. It's just that there is no reason to, because staying at 'look-at-me-I-can-shift-the-outcome-of-this-whole-battle-and-you-can't-even-lock-me'-ranges ensures a far greater chance of survival. And because the ship's capability for dealing damage approaches nonexistence (this is really the breaker, as I suspect that some people would actually be ballsy enough to use the Falcon close-in, were it capable of doing anything but jamming. And this is how you see that CCP really didn't think ahead when they changed ECM and didn't change the Falcon; the ship is naturally configured to be broken). Also, if you want my opinion on sensor dampeners, I think that all these 5% bonuses should be upped to 10% or 15%, so that using just two damps is quite viable, freeing up a midslot, and then we'll see if it's necessary to change anything from there. _________________________________________________________
Death Merchant InterGalactic Corp. Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2008.12.26 19:31:00 - [60] Is there a nerf group that gets together weekly/monthly? It seems like someone says this ship/module is overpowered then they start a thread. Then someone else agrees..then they start one. Then people who have never even flown/fought against ship get on eft and start a thread. Then they whine for about 7 months straight until it gets nerfed. Then months/months down the road they all usually say... hmm well I didn't mean for it to get nerfed that much..
Mouji AlMefel	Posted - 2008.12.26 21:43:00 - [61] Players in most MMOs think of themselves as Pocket Devs rather than just players, most of which don't know the math, the big picture or even the true breadth of the topics they discuss. I hate to see nerfs, especially when they usually are caused by devs responding to cry posts instead of a true design imperitive. BTW should we also nerf the sniper builds? They have extreem range and way more utility. If Falcons should be nerfed then so should Sniper Battleship builds. Being able to stay at range and have an impact on the battle in Falcons or in Snipers are both fun and should both be options available to players who want to play that way. I think Arazu range should be increased and Damps should be buffed. But thats just me. If this were done then races could counter each other and provide more dynamics in the game. Bring some Stealth Bombers to the playground and maybe Falcons would be a little less effective? The EW abilities take allot to get and they should have a real and meaningfull effect on battles in Eve just like they do in RL.
Tenox Teros Club Bear	Posted - 2008.12.27 07:43:00 - [62] Originally by: Mouji AlMefel Players in most MMOs think of themselves as Pocket Devs rather than just players, most of which don't know the math, the big picture or even the true breadth of the topics they discuss. ... uhm... I just want to get one thing clear: did you really just suggest stealth bombers as a viable counter to falcons? It's obvious you don't know the math, or big picture of the topic YOU discuss. Also, way to not read any of the previous posts. The majority of what you said has either been discussed, or is just plain incorrect.
Kessiaan Minmatar Army of One	Posted - 2008.12.27 07:49:00 - [63] The solution isn't to nerf Falcons, but to buff damps, at least on dedicated damp ships - give them range and cap bonuses like what the Falcon has and all will be well agian.
Aleus Stygian Failed Diplomacy Collidable Objects	Posted - 2008.12.27 10:29:00 - [64] Originally by: Kessiaan The solution isn't to nerf Falcons, but to buff damps, at least on dedicated damp ships - give them range and cap bonuses like what the Falcon has and all will be well agian. And that is going to balance them out against the other races how...? Even if there aren't ships capable of standing up against long-range ECM in all classes - in fact, most ships besides Recons and ECCM-fitted battleships are naturally screwed - there should be at least some in the whole ship lineups of every race. _________________________________________________________
Rajere No Trademark Notoriety Alliance	Posted - 2008.12.27 13:43:00 - [65] Quote: The arazu is 10000000% a better tackler than the falcon.... Sadly, I disagree. -------------------------- NOTR nsfw
Cohkka Celestial Apocalypse	Posted - 2008.12.27 14:45:00 - [66] Originally by: Mouji AlMefel Players in most MMOs think of themselves as Pocket Devs rather than just players, most of which don't know the math, the big picture or even the true breadth of the topics they discuss. Quite a "few" players know how the gamemechanics work, and they know how this translates into the metagame. And I'm quite sure there are more people around who understand the game better than any of the devs. Thousands of people spend an enormous amount of time to learn the game and share their thoughts. The Devs can see a bigger picture for the future of their game, we can't because we're not involved into developing. But everything that enters the game is subject to change. Don't speak english, just F5, F5, F5...
Xori Ruscuv Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2008.12.27 14:51:00 - [67] Edited by: Xori Ruscuv on 27/12/2008 14:54:07 Originally by: Cohkka Originally by: Mouji AlMefel Players in most MMOs think of themselves as Pocket Devs rather than just players, most of which don't know the math, the big picture or even the true breadth of the topics they discuss. Quite a "few" players know how the gamemechanics work, and they know how this translates into the metagame. And I'm quite sure there are more people around who understand the game better than any of the devs. Thousands of people spend an enormous amount of time to learn the game and share their thoughts. The Devs can see a bigger picture for the future of their game, we can't because we're not involved into developing. But everything that enters the game is subject to change. What Cohkka said. Also, the devs have said that the most influence on the future of the game comes from player feed back. So, to all of you sit-back-and-let-it-happen-to-you simpletons: shut it! That's what you're accustomed to, isn't it? Oh I see, except when someone puts forth an opinion that you can't handle...
Cautet Cold Blooded Killers	Posted - 2008.12.27 23:43:00 - [68] Originally by: Rajere Quote: The arazu is 10000000% a better tackler than the falcon.... Sadly, I disagree. You don't like the 48km disrupter or the 18km scram much then? Or the ability to survive most drone ships? I have seen you tanked tackle (bait?) falcons on your killboard with cyno and covert-cyno and i'm sure it works well when suprise is on your side, but that doesn't make the Arazu a worse tackler. In fact with large gates they are pretty usefull. Although cloaking delay followed by targets warping before tackling is a pain in all the cloaking recons. Not sure why people insist on comparing Arazu to falcon. They are completely different ships with different roles and different purposes. Arazu makes a great small gang ship but for very different reasons than a falcon.
NoNah	Posted - 2008.12.27 23:46:00 - [69] Originally by: Cautet Originally by: Rajere Quote: The arazu is 10000000% a better tackler than the falcon.... Sadly, I disagree. You don't like the 48km disrupter or the 18km scram much then? Or the ability to survive most drone ships? I have seen you tanked tackle (bait?) falcons on your killboard with cyno and covert-cyno and i'm sure it works well when suprise is on your side, but that doesn't make the Arazu a worse tackler. In fact with large gates they are pretty usefull. Although cloaking delay followed by targets warping before tackling is a pain in all the cloaking recons. Not sure why people insist on comparing Arazu to falcon. They are completely different ships with different roles and different purposes. Arazu makes a great small gang ship but for very different reasons than a falcon. Interesting interpretation of "I disagree", he could be saying It's a 10000000.6% better tackler or that they're about as good as eachother. Parrots, commence! Postcount: 350470
Cautet Cold Blooded Killers	Posted - 2008.12.28 12:44:00 - [70] Originally by: NoNah Originally by: Cautet Originally by: Rajere Quote: The arazu is 10000000% a better tackler than the falcon.... Sadly, I disagree. You don't like the 48km disrupter or the 18km scram much then? Or the ability to survive most drone ships? I have seen you tanked tackle (bait?) falcons on your killboard with cyno and covert-cyno and i'm sure it works well when suprise is on your side, but that doesn't make the Arazu a worse tackler. In fact with large gates they are pretty usefull. Although cloaking delay followed by targets warping before tackling is a pain in all the cloaking recons. Not sure why people insist on comparing Arazu to falcon. They are completely different ships with different roles and different purposes. Arazu makes a great small gang ship but for very different reasons than a falcon. Interesting interpretation of "I disagree", he could be saying It's a 10000000.6% better tackler or that they're about as good as eachother. His use of "SADLY, I disagree" (missing part highlighted) lead me to believe he was suggesting that Arazu is not a better tackler rather than a disagreement over the exact %. His use of Falcons to tackle (as per various killboards) rather than Arazu suggested the conclusion I made as to the meaning of his phrase in the context it was made. Anyway, despite from my belief that you cannot properly compare falcons and arazu due to their extremely different roles, I agree that Arazu needs a small/medium boost in the damp strength area, and that damps need to take less cap. Without such the arazu really suffers in fitting due to cap problems and having to use 3 sensor damps on a single (recon or t3 BS with normal fittings) target.
Corrock Minmatar SUBLIME L.L.C. SUBLIME CREATIONS ALLIANCE	Posted - 2009.02.12 12:06:00 - [71] Edited by: Corrock on 12/02/2009 12:08:04 Originally by: Gunner Chick Quote: "Nerf everything! Nerf it all till the only viable option is to stand there and shoot and tank, like Real Men used to!" I think in their heart of hearts a lot of people really don't want to have think or plan or develop actual tactics. Anti-whiner stance is fail. Tbh, as an old schooler amarr pilot that likes big tank and gank i kinda like your idea hahahaha Lol. I'm currently training everything possible to improve a ship (not tellin' which:P) that can't move fast, tanks well, and can be simultaneously gank(-ish) fitted, so perhaps I'm not so far from you. Actually, I'm not anti-whine, since if I weren't too lazy to make a profile or a bio, I'd list "B itching and Moaning" as a hobby, just that this sort of whine in general annoys me. There's rarely any conception of variety or balance in the whines, just something along the lines of "Please take this thing I'm too lazy to do and don't really understand out of the game so I can train some skills to level 5 once, and then WTFPWN forever, Amen." I think it's agreed that CCP tends to make things a little overpowered when first introduced, and then gets a little heavy-handed with the nerfbat sometimes, so that you never really know where you stand, and have to constantly be on your toes, and adapt, and- heyyyyy! It's all a plot! They're trying to manipulate us so we don't get bored and leave. Sneaky bast- err, fine young ladies and gentlemen. Nice devvie!
Coronae Borealis	Posted - 2009.02.12 12:59:00 - [72] Originally by: maralt Originally by: Lady Rhayne Subject says it all. Is it the one extra midslot or is there something else? The arazu is 10000000% a better tackler than the falcon.... Yeah. Arazu is better tackler. Arazu is also far more better fleet scout and beats other recons on scanning hostile ships from safespots and then tackling them. Arazu can also fit armor buffer tank wich is far more better. Arazu can make falcons useless with range damps, just make sure that you have sensorboosters and let the falcons uncloak first in the battle. I really don't see that Falcon is that good. It just need to be countered correctly.
Garia666 Amarr T.H.U.G L.I.F.E White Core	Posted - 2009.02.12 13:08:00 - [73] being perma jammed over 195km while dampner sux big time.. www.garia.net
lecrotta Minmatar lecrotta Corp	Posted - 2009.02.12 13:18:00 - [74] Originally by: Garia666 being perma jammed over 195km while dampner sux big time.. Damps are great in 2-3 man gangs due to the fully predictable effect just like the extended point and all the other ewar systems....,apart from ecm. Damps, TD's and other effects always work while a failed jam could lose you a ship. In larger gangs the falcon is more effective than the other systems and none of the systems are particularly good in large fleets.
TimMc Gallente Extradition	Posted - 2009.02.12 13:35:00 - [75] Simply range. If arazu had a huge range bonus to damps it could compete, perhaps as dedicated damp platform rather than mix of tackle and damps.
H Lecter Gallente The Black Rabbits The Gurlstas Associates	Posted - 2009.02.12 14:18:00 - [76] I would hate to see the Falcon nerfed although I do not fly it myself and have been jammed to hell and back already (mostly when I did not fit any ECCM on my battleship). A buff to the Arazu's dampening range (maybe as a tradeoff taking away the dampener effectiveness bonus) would make things much more interesting and encourage more strategic thinking. My opinion may or may not be shared by my alliance
Gen Eisenhower Amarr	Posted - 2009.02.12 14:50:00 - [77] The topic name sounds like "Why is the guardian better than the scimitar". No it isn't . It's different. And many different things is good.
Endless Subversion The Accursed	Posted - 2009.02.12 17:25:00 - [78] Originally by: Gen Eisenhower The topic name sounds like "Why is the guardian better than the scimitar". No it isn't . It's different. And many different things is good. So your argument can be summarized as "Seperate but Equal"?
Pac SubCom A.W.M	Posted - 2009.02.12 18:32:00 - [79] Considering that the Arazu is one of the premier anti-falcon ships. --------------- ∞ TQFE
echohead	Posted - 2009.02.12 22:18:00 - [80] I just want to point something out here. Falcons are great for fleets. But Arazu's are awesome for small gangs, and they are great for killing or disabling falcons.
Joss Sparq Caldari ANZAC ALLIANCE Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2009.02.12 22:47:00 - [81] Originally by: Merin Ryskin The damp nerf was for the same reasons (though at a different time), damps were overpowered and every ship was using them. The only difference is CCP kind of forgot to fix damps on the dedicated damp ships. This. I've always wondered why, too. As a Falcon pilot myself, I didn't (and still don't) think it was fair.
Nicholas DW Infusion.	Posted - 2009.02.13 01:56:00 - [82] Who cares, just fly the Falcon.
Amelie y Gallente	Posted - 2009.02.13 01:58:00 - [83] **** YEH FALCON
DJ Tim Chin Chinnery	Posted - 2009.02.13 01:59:00 - [84] WTF, GO FALCON! --~-- Don't Worry Baby, You Can Touch My Chin Anytime.
Sh'iva Warp Asylum.	Posted - 2009.03.15 17:01:00 - [85] its the extra mid slot dude
marakor Gallente Anti Lag Forum Smackers	Posted - 2009.03.15 17:03:00 - [86] Originally by: Sh'iva its the extra mid slot dude Ok i was wrong in the other thread, THIS is the most pathetic excuse for a bump ever.

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [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.