EVE Search - Nerf Falcon Range

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Nerf Falcon Range

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
MicroWarpdrive II Disorder.	Posted - 2008.12.26 21:04:00 - [61] ECM should reduce the number of ships you can target at one time, not completely remove your ability to lock.
Elora Danzik Caldari Ward-Tech Industries	Posted - 2008.12.26 21:06:00 - [62] http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=957226 this.
Malcanis R.E.C.O.N. The Firm.	Posted - 2008.12.26 21:09:00 - [63] Originally by: Xori Ruscuv Originally by: FlameGlow * Give damps racial divisions OK, as long as 1 or 2 bonused damps can be worth a damn. Quote: * Weaken damps to be unable to do jack when not on specialised ship Already the case. Quote: * Remove damage bonus, drone bay and disruptor bonus on arazu Make damps useful, and I don't have a problem with that. So in other words, you basically want arazus to be falcons but you train gallante cruiser instead?
Wannabehero Absolutely No Retreat	Posted - 2008.12.26 21:15:00 - [64] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Xori Ruscuv -Wanting to make Arazu's like Falcons- So in other words, you basically want arazus to be falcons but you train gallante cruiser instead? What a marvelous idea, I mean come on, who needs a specialist covert tackling ship anyway? Sounds like a totally useless ship to me... -- Don't harsh my mellow
Elora Danzik Caldari Ward-Tech Industries	Posted - 2008.12.26 21:16:00 - [65] Originally by: Malcanis So in other words, you basically want arazus to be falcons but you train gallante cruiser instead? Yes. It would make a Race specific counter to the Falcon. A falcon losing 35% or more of its range would force it closer to actually work. Either that or the standard warp off tactic. my thought anyway.
Myrfrost	Posted - 2008.12.26 21:33:00 - [66] I think these ships are adding to the game. There might be some changes needed, perhaps not to the Falcon but the other ships in her class. Battle should not be entirely determined by Battleships and Capital ships. Having Small ships on the peripheral means there needs to also be a field of counters for them as well. Along with the Capitals and Battleships and Falcons there are room for all sorts of other ships that are needed to counter the Falcon threat. I mean think about it. A Falcon and her sisters if they all work require a decent amount of time to learn to properly use them. On the other hand less experienced players in Frigates, Destroyers ext. have the ability to play a role in countering these harrassers because it doesn't take as many Skill points to be able to face down a Falcon. Just my thoughts anyway. If you don't like Falcons and your in gang and fleet battles bring along some ships designed to counter them.
Xori Ruscuv Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2008.12.26 21:37:00 - [67] Edited by: Xori Ruscuv on 26/12/2008 21:45:03 Originally by: Wannabehero hat a marvelous idea, I mean come on, who needs a specialist covert tackling ship anyway? Sounds like a totally useless ship to me... Oh my... you really have NO clue, do you? 1. Recalibration time. Look it up. 2. Since QR came along and royally **ed agility, a cruiser can hardly lock anything before it gets into warp. No, I'm serious here. So, if the Arazu isn't sensor boosted out its arse, it isn't catching jack . 3. Sensor boosting an Arazu out its arse means fewer damps. 4. Fewer than 3 damps makes the Arazu damn near useless. Rotating damps through a couple targets used to work before the script damp nerf. Well, it doesn't work anymore because damps don't kill lock times anymore. 5. Even if you do sensor boost the Arazu, the only way to keep alive, then, is to plate it. This means it has hideous agility and align time. This means that while it could perform as a gate tackler, it's now a poor roaming tackler. 6. Tackle ceptors (Raptor, Ares, Malediction, I mix the Minmatar ones up) are better for this job anyway. So are HICs. Sensor boosted HICs are even better in low sec, AND they can take punishment from gate guns! The supposed "stealth Arazu/Lach buff" amounts to crap because of this new **ed up agility thing. Anyway, is this a "nerf falcon" thread, or a "buff Arazu" thread?
loldongs III loldongs industries	Posted - 2008.12.26 22:01:00 - [68] Edited by: loldongs III on 26/12/2008 22:03:17 Give the falcon a heavy missile damage bonus instead of an ecm range bonus. Also, people replying with "no falcons are fine lrn2counter" are PROBABLY falcon alts. The posting is as lazy as dual boxing a falcon is. Or make ecm a directional area of effect weapon like it is in reality.
Wannabehero Absolutely No Retreat	Posted - 2008.12.26 22:24:00 - [69] Originally by: Xori Ruscuv Edited by: Xori Ruscuv on 26/12/2008 21:39:37 Originally by: Wannabehero hat a marvelous idea, I mean come on, who needs a specialist covert tackling ship anyway? Sounds like a totally useless ship to me... Oh my... you really have NO clue, do you? 1. Recalibration time. Look it up. 2. Since QR came along and royally **ed agility, a cruiser can hardly lock anything before it gets into warp. No, I'm serious here. So, if the Arazu isn't sensor boosted out its arse, it isn't catching jack . 3. Sensor boosting an Arazu out its arse means no damps. 4. Tackle ceptors (Raptor, Ares, Malediction, I mix the Minmatar ones up) are better for this job anyway) Baseless supposition and situationally irrelevant examples. Recal time is 5 seconds once you are skilled up. This is the trade-off for getting to use the cloak, with the exception of Stealth bombers. Somehow pilots managed before and they still manage now. The agility arguement is misleading, even interceptors can't catch some ships. Make use of a bubble or complain about the right problems (such as scan resolutions/agility of certain ships) Sensor Boosting does not need to be local, especially in the case of gatecamps, where the target's agility concern is greatest. For low-sec gatecamps remote sensor boosting your tacklers has always been the best way to achieve the resolution needed to catch agility fit ships and the pods afterwards. Still, yes, interceptors or destroyers are far superior to the arazu for this purpose, because the Arazu is not meant to be a gatecamp vessel. I would love to meet the ceptor that can tackle a target with impunity from 72 km away and disable MWD's from 20+ km away. When it comes to catching ratters/mission runners/plexers the arazu >>> any interceptor. The Arazu is not and should not be designed to disable multiple enemy ships during a battle, it is designed to stealthy seek-out and catch targets for your gang. The fact that it can still be useful once combat begins is a huge plus. Originally by:** Xori Ruscuv The supposed "stealth Arazu/Lach buff" amounts to crap because of this new ****ed up agility thing. Shutting down MWD's from up to 26+ km away is not crap. I'm not quite sure why I am debating with you as you have admitted to just trying to troll. -- Don't harsh my mellow
Wannabehero Absolutely No Retreat	Posted - 2008.12.26 22:27:00 - [70] Originally by: Xori Ruscuv Edited by: Xori Ruscuv on 26/12/2008 22:05:12 Originally by: Wannabehero hat a marvelous idea, I mean come on, who needs a specialist covert tackling ship anyway? Sounds like a totally useless ship to me... Oh my... you really have NO clue, do you? As a roaming tackler, the Arazu sucks. A combination of plate (the only way to keep the Arazu alive if it's sensor boosted), recalibration time, and general crap agility makes it very poor compared to a dedicated tackling inty (which has very fast warp speed, large disruptor range, etc.) While the Arazu/Lach looks neat as a gate tackler, it's actually quite poor compared to, say, a hictor. Even in low sec, a sensor boosted hictor is better since it can take punishment from gate guns. And since agility got hosed up in QR, things get away really easily. That means you HAVE to sensor boost if you want the Arazu to act as a dedicated tackler. Well, that kinda makes it so you can't use damps, eh? Pretty crap tackler. The only time it's tackling ability comes in super useful is when someone is getting away from your small gang, your inty is dead, and nobody else (lol?) has a point. It's a great killmail ***** though. I rarely ever get shot at! And you technically can solo someone who can't tank your pitiful DPS or catch up to you (fit a scram), and doesn't have support within 10 jumps. I guess you're so dazzled by this... Very nice rewrite, I like it. -- Don't harsh my mellow

Niko Takahashi	Posted - 2008.12.26 23:54:00 - [71] Originally by: maralt Falcons are fine. Teach ppl to fit their ships better and be more fluid in the way they approach combat in eve..... That is same lame answer all the nano fanboys were giving all this time until finally ccp saw the problem and nerfed it. Falcon need some kind of nerf even eccmed bships get jammed easily. Range nerf and adjutment that all jamming cycles gets broken when jamming ship cloaks are in order and its only question of time till it happens.
Zarnak Wulf	Posted - 2008.12.27 00:16:00 - [72] My two cents: If you are jammed and the offending Falcon gets jammed/killed - your jamming should stop immediately. If the offending falcon cloaks - your jamming should stop immediately. I think that's just common sense.
Dors Venabily	Posted - 2008.12.27 01:40:00 - [73] Originally by: Zarnak Wulf My two cents: If you are jammed and the offending Falcon gets jammed/killed - your jamming should stop immediately. If the offending falcon cloaks - your jamming should stop immediately. I think that's just common sense. Yeah It just really doesn's make sense. I would also replace the range bonus with something else too (missile bonus perhaps)so you have to fight in ranges of the other racial recons as well.
Trader20	Posted - 2008.12.27 01:59:00 - [74] If you nerf falcon range then you have to nerf sniper bs too. You know falcons do 0 dps from 160+km and sniper bs do about 400+dps from that range. Range is good because I like watching the gal pilots cry about their blaster, their tears taste like candy. Will you ppl stop saying nerf and just bring your own falcon or sniper.
Trader20	Posted - 2008.12.27 02:11:00 - [75] Originally by: Dors Venabily Originally by: Zarnak Wulf My two cents: If you are jammed and the offending Falcon gets jammed/killed - your jamming should stop immediately. If the offending falcon cloaks - your jamming should stop immediately. I think that's just common sense. Yeah It just really doesn's make sense. I would also replace the range bonus with something else too (missile bonus perhaps)so you have to fight in ranges of the other racial recons as well. Now a falcon with a damage bonus would be op. That would turn it into a solopwnmobile. Taking away the falcons ecm bonus will be taking away any reason for a caldari ship (except sniper rohk) to be in a fleet/gang and will destroy caldari pvp. Most gangs RR armor rep and caldari bs ships aren't compatible with gangs/fleets anyway.
Zarnak Wulf	Posted - 2008.12.27 02:44:00 - [76] Originally by: Trader20 If you nerf falcon range then you have to nerf sniper bs too. You know falcons do 0 dps from 160+km and sniper bs do about 400+dps from that range. Range is good because I like watching the gal pilots cry about their blaster, their tears taste like candy. Will you ppl stop saying nerf and just bring your own falcon or sniper. They got "nerfed" when locus rigs started to nerf stack after QR.
loldongs III loldongs industries	Posted - 2008.12.27 05:20:00 - [77] Edited by: loldongs III on 27/12/2008 05:21:19 Originally by: Trader20 Originally by: Dors Venabily Originally by: Zarnak Wulf My two cents: If you are jammed and the offending Falcon gets jammed/killed - your jamming should stop immediately. If the offending falcon cloaks - your jamming should stop immediately. I think that's just common sense. Yeah It just really doesn's make sense. I would also replace the range bonus with something else too (missile bonus perhaps)so you have to fight in ranges of the other racial recons as well. Now a falcon with a damage bonus would be op. That would turn it into a solopwnmobile. Taking away the falcons ecm bonus will be taking away any reason for a caldari ship (except sniper rohk) to be in a fleet/gang and will destroy caldari pvp. Most gangs RR armor rep and caldari bs ships aren't compatible with gangs/fleets anyway. Quote: If you nerf falcon range then you have to nerf sniper bs too. You know falcons do 0 dps from 160+km and sniper bs do about 400+dps from that range. Range is good because I like watching the gal pilots cry about their blaster, their tears taste like candy. Will you ppl stop saying nerf and just bring your own falcon or sniper. There is a ship called a rook. There is also a ship called a scorpion.
Karlemgne Tides Of War	Posted - 2008.12.27 10:11:00 - [78] Edited by: Karlemgne on 27/12/2008 10:15:51 Edited by: Karlemgne on 27/12/2008 10:15:02 Originally by: maralt Falcons are fine. Falcons are not fine. They're broken. When one Falcon can effectively take out 3 or 4 ships from a fight, EVEN when these ships fit TWO ECCM you know there is a problem. Falcons have been broken a long time. The moment we began to see 200 falcons for every 1 rook should have been an indicator. The failure of ECCM to actually counter Falcons should have been an indicator. The thing is, this problem only became apparent after they nerfed speed. When nanowhoring was the broken game mechanic fow Falcons were moderately less effective. Why? Because nanoships could be on the Falcon in seconds and chase him away or kill him. Add to that, when the speed balance finally hit tranq, you had a bunch of people gravitate from the nano easy button to the Falcon easy button--essentially there are MORE Falcon pilots out flying Falcons than ever before. Quote: Teach ppl to fit their ships better and be more fluid in the way they approach combat in eve..... This was essentially the pro-nano argument. The thing is, just as it wasn't the case for nanos, this isn't actually a worthwhile suggestion. First ECCM doesn't work versus a Falcon. A Falcon pilot with just okay skills can jam a person with 1 ECCM for 6 out of 7 cycles. Even with 2 ECCMs fit the falcon pilot is scoring jams in over half his cycles. And to achieve this wonderful "the Falcon won't jam me 50% of the time" a ship has to sacrifice two mid slots. Otherwise, the only counter to a falcon really is a VERY specialized ship (like the FoF Cerb) or another Falcon. And lets face it, when we're talking about most of eve who flies around in small gangs, getting one of these specialized pilots in your gang, just so you can actually shoot back when you get jumped by a gang with a Falcon is an absurd solution to the problem. Cheers, -Karlemgne
Aleus Stygian Failed Diplomacy Collidable Objects	Posted - 2008.12.27 10:12:00 - [79] Edited by: Aleus Stygian on 27/12/2008 10:13:42 Originally by: maralt Falcons are fine. Teach ppl to fit their ships better and be more fluid in the way they approach combat in eve..... Oh, wow. One; learn to be original. Two; be specific. Originally by: loldongs III There is a ship called a rook. There is also a ship called a scorpion. They are commonly referred to as 'bullet magnets'. In fleet, the former might work as a counter, if it is in the right place, whereas the latter goes down fairly quickly and doesn't have the general jamming strength that the Falcon has. Neither of them can hold a Falcon in place as they damage it. _________________________________________________________
Lilith Velkor Minmatar DEATH'S LEGION Red Box.	Posted - 2008.12.27 10:36:00 - [80] Originally by: Niko Takahashi Originally by: maralt Falcons are fine. Teach ppl to fit their ships better and be more fluid in the way they approach combat in eve..... That is same lame answer all the nano fanboys were giving all this time until finally ccp saw the problem and nerfed it. Falcon need some kind of nerf even eccmed bships get jammed easily. Range nerf and adjutment that all jamming cycles gets broken when jamming ship cloaks are in order and its only question of time till it happens. The real funny thing is they nerfed nanos in a way that made it even easier to pick your fights in nanoships and disengage whenever you like. Be careful what you wish for, you might just get it and then some, like all the poor caldari fw people that cried for their nano-nerf and have to cry their little hearts out over their missiles now

Malcanis R.E.C.O.N. The Firm.	Posted - 2008.12.27 10:41:00 - [81] Edited by: Malcanis on 27/12/2008 10:42:49 People who ask for nerfs are idiots. Pure and simple. As the poster above me very correctly said: Be careful what you wish for. People who whine for nerfs are rarely pleased with the actual outcome. If you think the counters to a ship aren't working, don't break the ship that is working, fix the god damb counters. If the Arazu is crappy, breaking the Falcon might seem, to a childish mind, in some way "fair", but it won't make your Arazu one bit less broken. It's just kindegarten thinking: My toy is broken but Billy's isn't. That' not fair! I will break Billy's toy. Now it's fair! Instead of whining like lazy little kids with a broken toy, make constructive proposals like adults with a job to do. There's an almost universal consensus that Gallante Recons and Stealthbombers both desperately need fixing, for instance. Both of these ships should be very effective as Falcon-counters. Double or triple the Gallante EW ships damp bonuses, introduce EW falloff rigs, introduce faction damps, painters and TDs, give stealthbombers a missile velocity bonus and some more CPU so they can actually have a worthwhile fit, increase the optimal of target painters, etc etc. So instead of having broken Arazus, broken 'bombers and adding a broken Falcon to the pile, we could have working Arazus and working 'bombers joining the Falcon as "overpowered" - which is a forum word meaning "effective in it's role".
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.27 11:13:00 - [82] Edited by: maralt on 27/12/2008 11:15:01 Originally by: Karlemgne This was essentially the pro-nano argument. The thing is, just as it wasn't the case for nanos, this isn't actually a worthwhile suggestion. First ECCM doesn't work versus a Falcon. A Falcon pilot with just okay skills can jam a person with 1 ECCM for 6 out of 7 cycles. Even with 2 ECCMs fit the falcon pilot is scoring jams in over half his cycles. And to achieve this wonderful "the Falcon won't jam me 50% of the time" a ship has to sacrifice two mid slots. Otherwise, the only counter to a falcon really is a VERY specialized ship (like the FoF Cerb) or another Falcon. And lets face it, when we're talking about most of eve who flies around in small gangs, getting one of these specialized pilots in your gang, just so you can actually shoot back when you get jumped by a gang with a Falcon is an absurd solution to the problem. Cheers, -Karlemgne BLAH BLAH BLAH....we know how jammers work pal its not them that's the problem its your crappy tactics and inability to adapt or maneuver. I never fit a eccm and the gangs i fly in never worry about falcons or ecm because we work together as a team and understand that a engagmentr starts as soon as you know hostile ships are about and not just when you start firing. We also have no problem either disengaging or not engaging in the first place and repositioning if we are in a unfavorable position, a thing that a considerable amount of gangs seem to not bother doing for some reason and they then lose a bunch of ships and run off instead of showing a bit of patience. A falcon is a good tool but it is less important by far that a gangs ability to dictate the time, place and range of a engagement, as well as using hit and run tactics when up against a more numerous or just ewar heavy gang.
FlameGlow Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance	Posted - 2008.12.27 11:20:00 - [83] Originally by: Karlemgne one Falcon can effectively take out 3 or 4 ships from a fight, EVEN when these ships fit TWO ECCM you know there is a problem. Quote proves you have no clue or the ships taken out of fight in quote are frigates _____________ I don't care what is nerfed, as long as it's not my "undock" button.
Lilith Velkor Minmatar DEATH'S LEGION Red Box.	Posted - 2008.12.27 11:28:00 - [84] Originally by: maralt I never fit a eccm and the gangs i fly in never worry about falcons or ecm because we work together as a team and understand that a engagement starts as soon as you know hostile ships are about and not just when you start firing. In fact if your smart you can use ppls reliance on falcons against them. QFT. Tell the support pilots to engage falcons on their own (yes without order, a good support pilot knows what threats he has to engage without being told by the FC).
Aleus Stygian Failed Diplomacy Collidable Objects	Posted - 2008.12.27 11:37:00 - [85] Originally by: Malcanis Abrasive, unoriginal and defensive idiocy. I sigh and rub my temple. You just target whatever easy point you can find some idiot spewing out and ignore the people who have an actual argument, don't you? Firstly, far from all the people who decry the Falcon as overpowered are vouching for a boost for the Arazu. Great surprise there, seeing as how the Arazu is such a great ship, Gallente is such an awesome race, and Recon is always so fun to fly. Secondly, Stealth Bombers never were the primary counter to Falcons, and should not be. They can deliver volley damage, and fire from range, yes. But they are also highly jammable, unreliable and frail, and currently both their fitting options and their missiles are terribly sub-par. This needs fixing, but even when balanced out it is not a strong counter against Falcons. Not nearly. And that's why you will not see any sensible people saying 'just fix Bombers and Falcons won't be a problem any more!'. The issue at hand is that the Falcon is out of line. With the Force Recon role, in relation to its Combat Recon relative, in usefulness for certain tasks and in avoiding counters. It is a) inherently excessively focused on ECM because of the lack of any other Caldari EWAR, b) lacking in any sort of alternatives for offense or defense that might give it incentive to deploy anything else than ECM and that might un-break it, were it forced to approach and commit to an engagement, c) features a cloak, which allows it to hide from preliminary scanning and intelligence-gathering, and to place itself optimally under an ongoing battle as it enters or returns to the field, and d) extremely long-range, which magnifies the ECM element in effectiveness up to the point where it becomes directly stupid not to exploit the defensive advantage of going past 150 kms from one's target (which is between 1.5 and 3 times the maximum lock range for the ships that would be the optimal counters; long-range Battleships and long-range ECCM'd HACs). Now, point a is not something that can change, or, indeed, should be changed. ECM is part of the Caldari formula, and the double ECM strength bonuses is equivalent to the equal vamp strength between the Pilgrim and the Curse, for example, or the equal Web strength between the Rapier and the Huginn. If the Rook proves to be too tough to defeat at range even after counters to long-range ECM are 'fixed', then maybe a tune-down is in order. It doesn't seem like that would be the case though. Time will tell. Point b is easily fixed, through adding two launcher slots and editing the ship's stats. Point c is, again, something that cannot be changed. Without a cloak, the Falcon isn't a Force Recon anymore. Point d is the breaker. Because not only are the other Force Recons generally not able to operate from as far a distance as Combat Recons, but with a removal of the Falcon's range bonus, you would bring it down to working between 80 and 120 km - a range at which sniper ships can actually bring the bastard down. Heck, even placing it at 'merely' 120-150 km would be good enough an improvement to let the ships that should work against it actually work against it. It would force the Falcon to mount perhaps a few actual defenses, which would take up slots, which would tone down the whole ECM aspect until it would be manageable by a well-rounded gang. Oh, and lastly, Malcanis... The rest of us are trying to enjoy ourselves and to improve the game. That requires change, and at least a readiness, if not willingness, to compromise. So far I haven't seen a single one of you Falcon apologists willing to give so much as an inch, or to suggest a counter that you thought might make an actual threat to your ECM-lovebirds. So don't try and lecture the rest of us on 'kindergarten thinking'... _________________________________________________________
baltec1 R.U.S.T. Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2008.12.27 16:43:00 - [86] Originally by: loldongs III Edited by: loldongs III on 26/12/2008 22:03:17 Give the falcon a heavy missile damage bonus instead of an ecm range bonus. Also, people replying with "no falcons are fine lrn2counter" are PROBABLY falcon alts. The posting is as lazy as dual boxing a falcon is. Or make ecm a directional area of effect weapon like it is in reality. Far from it. Not only do I not have the skills to fly a falcon I never intend to get one. The reason why I say falcons are fine is bececause I know how to counter them in a ship which costs over 6 times less isk.
Grarr Dexx Amarr Paxton Industries Paxton Federation	Posted - 2008.12.27 16:58:00 - [87] Quote: If you nerf falcon range then you have to nerf sniper bs too. You know falcons do 0 dps from 160+km and sniper bs do about 400+dps from that range. Range is good because I like watching the gal pilots cry about their blaster, their tears taste like candy. Will you ppl stop saying nerf and just bring your own falcon or sniper. How appropriate: 'bring your own, or bring a ship specifically designed to kill falcons, but is otherwise useless in close range combat or completely useless if the enemy somehow didn't bring falcons'. This was their entire gang, and me deagressing. Three falcons for a 14 man gang, what the ****? ----- Nexus stamps of approvalÖ count: 1
baltec1 R.U.S.T. Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2008.12.27 17:15:00 - [88] Edited by: baltec1 on 27/12/2008 17:20:01 Originally by: Grarr Dexx Quote: If you nerf falcon range then you have to nerf sniper bs too. You know falcons do 0 dps from 160+km and sniper bs do about 400+dps from that range. Range is good because I like watching the gal pilots cry about their blaster, their tears taste like candy. Will you ppl stop saying nerf and just bring your own falcon or sniper. How appropriate: 'bring your own, or bring a ship specifically designed to kill falcons, but is otherwise useless in close range combat or completely useless if the enemy somehow didn't bring falcons'. This was their entire gang, and me deagressing. Three falcons for a 14 man gang, what the ****? Make up your mind. Either falcons are powerfull and you MUST have a fleet adapted to counter them or they are not powerfull enough to justify setting up your fleet to counter them. It cannot be both.
Centra Spike Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2008.12.27 17:20:00 - [89] I CAN'T JAM MOTHERSHIPS OR TITANS THIS GAME IS ****ING BROKEN! Seriously, fly a Mom or a Titan and stop complaining ffs. ------
Malcanis R.E.C.O.N. The Firm.	Posted - 2008.12.27 17:27:00 - [90] Originally by: Aleus Stygian bull**** You haven't seen... I have made numerous suggestions to improve counters. If I am abrasive it's because I'm sick to **ing DEATH of people telling outright lies about ECM ships. Oh and I never said stealthbombers should be "the primary" counter to Falcons. I said that they should be an effective counter. To name but one of your strawmen. And for the trillionth time: YES FALCONS OPERATE AT MUCH GREATER RANGE THAN OTHER RECONS, NO , SHERLOCK. In other news, Apocs and Rokhs operate at ranges greater than other battleships. If an ECM ship is uncloaked within normal weapon ranges it will immediately die*. That's why Blackbirds are recommended as "throwaway" ships in every T1 cruiser thread right here in this forum. But a 100M (uninsurable) ISK T2 cruiser should not be a throwaway ship. Yes the Falcon is "out of line". You're perfectly correct. You know what else is out of line? All the other recons. They all have powerful, unique abilities - as they bloody well should. Lots of ships in EvE are "out of line". Eg: the Dominix: the only battleship that can do the majority of it's DPS with no high slot weapons fitted (and even while jammed, topically enough). Eg: The Scorpion, the only EW battleship. Etc. I don't understand why you cannot accept the simple principle of: make sure all of an "overpowered" ship's counters are fixed before* you ask for a nerf. Now pray excuse me: I have to go "permajam" 7 dual-ECCM battleships...



Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.